| ▲ | rekabis 2 days ago |
| > The magic number to remember is the "Just Noticeable Difference" (JND). For dE00, JND is around 2.0. Below that, people struggle to tell two colours apart. Below 1.0, basically no one can. Except for a tetrachromat. Specifically, a strong tetrachromat that has both four colour channels in the brain and a different frequency on the fourth cone. Who are, admittedly, hella rare. Apparently there are less than a few dozen confirmed world-wide. But they do exist. |
|
| ▲ | lucideer 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| > admittedly, hella rare. Apparently there are less than a few dozen confirmed world-wide What's actually hella rare is tests for tetrachromacy. Given the total number of people who have ever taken such a test, I think it's reasonable to assume there are significantly more than a few dozen actual tetrachromats out there. |
|
| ▲ | snarkconjecture 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Computer screens have three-dimensional color spaces. Tetrachromacy doesn't change that. |
| |
| ▲ | tgv 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Is that so? Our color perception is weird. It's one dimension split in three overlapping sectors. Adding a fourth sector may add information that makes it easier to distinguish colors. | | |
| ▲ | Jensson 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | We do have four sectors, 3 color perception and then the brightness perception that is used in the dark. In mid darkness you get a mix of all of those, although the fourth is not really perceived as a color so it can be a bit hard to use. | |
| ▲ | giraffe_lady an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | Something I think about often is an oliver sacks book about an ethnic group that has a particularly high rate of true monochromacy. And the people with no color perception at all are particularly adept at spotting certain plants based on some characteristic of their leaves that is obscured by color. So even removing information can change perception in surprising ways. OTOH sacks seems to have fabricated a lot of shit over the years so who knows if this is even real. Another thing I think about a lot now. |
| |
| ▲ | Zardoz84 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | And the eye cones not are sharp filter, they overlap ranges with mid-low sensibility. That must be nought to someone with Tetrachromacy to percibe something different on a RGB screen. > More precisely, she had an additional cone type L′, intermediate between M and L in its responsivity, and showed 3 dimensional (M, L′, and L components) color discrimination for wavelengths 546–670 nm (to which the fourth type, S, is insensitive).
Source: Wikipedia |
|
|
| ▲ | xyzsparetimexyz 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| > But they do exist Do they? |
| |
