> Color is the same as food. Totally subjective!
Gosh, will this thread never die?
Well, it's been interesting if overlong.
> And paints also derive effects -- often NOT subtle --
> depending on their depth, literally -- thickness; partially
Properly administered paint doesn't allow transmission
to the layer beneath it.
. . .
A conclusion seems to be that color perception (human or
machine) is not mathematically rigorous with respect to a true
chromatograph of a thing, and this spins out to complexity.
Meanwhile somebody in, say, L.A. wants the color of someone's
PDP-5 in Indiana.
I think unscrewing panels and taking them to Lowe's is better than
nothing, but that gets involved with some pretty uncalibrated machinery
and untrained individuals. And what if Guy#2 doesn't have a Lowes, etc.
Guess I'm just partial to what NASA does. Throw down a few reference
colors next to the thing, take a color photograph, and postprocess the
reference colors to what they should be. Although now I see that that is
like the problem of describing right and left to an alien. Where do you
get the reference colors in the first place? Guess one of us has to find
a vendor for the three swatches to mail to requesting parties.
John A.
Received on Fri Nov 19 2004 - 11:15:23 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:37:17 BST