Re: Nimrina colors updated
From: | Herman Miller <hmiller@...> |
Date: | Monday, September 4, 2006, 20:23 |
Javier BF wrote:
> My advice: Do not try to define your colors in terms of appearances on some
> computer image, but instead define them verbally in terms of their
> perceptual compositions (how something "should look like" for it to be said
> to be that color). This is actually how colors are defined in natural
> languages: English blue is not defined as the color on some standard sample,
> and neither as some defined light frequency (as some dictionaries try to
> do), but instead each speaker has an internal idea of what the elementary
> percept blue "looks like" (an idea acquired through visual experience, which
> a born-blind person doesn't have access to and so doesn't know what blue
> actually "looks like"), and when some object under some lighting condition
> appears to prompt that elementary color perception in their brains, they say
> that object "is blue" or "looks blue". Given this essentially subjective
> nature of colors, it is not surprising different people may argue about what
> color something "is".
Obviously monitors differ in the way they display colors. On the other
hand, seeing a color is a more direct way of creating a color perception
than describing it in words. In particular, having the main color words
illustrated on a chart, where you can compare one color with another and
see how they differ, is very conveninent.
Technically, you could say that "tavla" is the color that I perceive
when I look at the lowest circle on the Nimrina color chart on my
monitor. I might see a different color on another monitor, depending on
how it is calibrated. The gray background should help to compensate for
variations in color temperature. (If the background doesn't look
perfectly neutral gray, nothing else will look right either.) Someone
else could look at the "tavla" sample on my monitor and think that it
doesn't look "green" to them. I could just say "tavla" = "green" and
leave it at that. Nimrina speakers are close enough to human that they
probably perceive similar colors. But if I want a better definition of
specifically what kind of "green" is considered the most basic or
prototypical "tavla", English words are inadequate.