The whole idea of colour and light frequency is fascinating.

These are just frequencies of light, but the subjective experience of them is so much more.

And the whole thing of my perception of "red" or what I call "red" could be very different to someone else's subjective perception. But we would both call it red and associate it with the same thing, fire, love, heat, danger etc.

▲

sgc an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> what I call "red" could be very different to someone else's subjective perception

It's worth noting that is true of virtually everything we know. >>This is a very simple sentence.<< Anybody who understands English, 'understands' it. But what it means to understand it is perhaps completely different for each person. As long as they fit into the same place in their worldview (Lewis Caroll's Carrollian syllogisms come to mind), practically it often doesn't matter beyond recognizing the wonderful uniqueness of each human being. Likewise, unless somebody is color blind or perceives more colors than others (tetrachromats), it doesn't matter since the relationships between the different concepts or colors will be analogous amongst most people - so a common understanding within the differences is possible. Or perhaps it is more precise to say that there are so many data points in color perception or anything we know, that despite the minor differences in relationships, we understand each other because the differences must be minimal given the practically unlimited data points constraining our perceptions. In fact, when people's perceptions of things vary too much, they can be classified as mentally ill even if they understand many things perfectly well.

▲

da_chicken 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think it's important to remember that we're not perceiving some fundamental aspect of light. We're perceiving how the photosensitive portions of our retina convert light to stimulus, and how our brains construct a meaningful image from that stimulus in our mind.

Like film photography doesn't happen in the lens or the world. It happens in that photosensitive chemical reaction, and the decision of the photographer.

▲

TomatoCo 2 hours ago | parent [-]

It reminds me of how vinyl records are fairly lossy, but they provide a superior experience in some cases because those limitations have been accounted for during the mastering process.

It's an entire pipeline from photomultiplier to recording medium to the inverse process and everything is optimized not for any particular mathematical truth but for the subjective experience.

	▲	com2kid 41 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Vinyls are sometimes preferred because people like white noise, same as tube amps. Granted some CDs are mastered like garbage, and that led to some bad press for awhile. But you can master a CD so that it sounds exactly, as in mathematically exactly, as a vinyl record, if so desired. It is also possible to make a digital amplifier that sounds exactly identical to vacuum tubes. Humans have well and mastered the art of shaping sound waveforms however we want.
	▲	hank808 an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Most records these days use CDs as masters, sadly.

▲

awesome_dude 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

But also - colours don't exist without a name

eg. Before Orange, there was only shades of yellow or reds

▲

travisjungroth 9 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

The name for the color doesn’t exist before the name. But, you can distinguish all sorts of colors you don’t know the name for. Look at a smooth color wheel or a wall of paint swatches.

▲

jjk166 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The colors most certainly exist without the name. You may have described the fruit as being a weird shade of red, but if someone held up something red and said "so it was this color" you'd say no. Conversely if someone held up something that was actually orange colored, you'd say "yeah it was that color."

Similarly, you may have no idea what the name is for the color of a Tangerine, but you know what that color is. You might describe it as a dark orange. If I say the name for it is coquelicot, you can look up coquelicot and see if it matches the color you picture in your mind.

	▲	davidmurdoch an hour ago \| parent [-]
		I don't think so. Just becoming fluent in multiple languages can result in the perception of more distinct colors. And those fluent in languages that have additional distinct color names can differentiate subtle differences in the shades of colors that non-speakers cannot even differentiate. Color is less about seeing what is actually out there and more about how our brain interprets colors to create "meaning".

▲

huflungdung 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]