From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Color (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is supported by WikiProject Color, a project that provides a central approach to color-related subjects on Wikipedia. Help us improve articles to good and 1.0 standards; visit the wikiproject page for more details.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.5 / Core (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

List of colors hatnote[edit]

Out of the 6 newest feedbacks on color 5 were looking for lists of colors and didn't find it. I therefor added a link to list of colors in the about hatnote on the top of the article. Ulflund (talk) 06:00, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Problem with "...people everywhere have been shown to perceive colors in the same way[2]"[edit]

The reference cited in that statement and the associated references to "Linguistic Relativity" only show that a large collection of people (a "culture") COLLECTIVELY seems to perceive colors in the same way. But in no way does it show that there aren't differences between how two individuals perceive colors. In fact, we know that individuals do in fact have differences in color perception, as shown by the various types of mild-to-profound color blindness that occurs. As a more extreme example, how do we know that my internal perception of, say, purple isn't the same as your internal perception of brown? Does it even mean anything to ask that question?

As someone with moderate red-green color blindness, I can assure you that my perception of red is very similar to my perception of green. Therefore, if you do not have red-green color blindness, then it follows that at least one of my red or green perceptions does not match yours.

I'm not an expert in the field of color, but I am an expert in two fields, plasma physics and economics, both of which have situations where collective behaviors exist that contrast fundamentally in nature with individual phenomena.

Are there any studies that address these questions? If so, I think it would be useful if someone familiar with them could discuss and reference them in this article.Tdshepard (talk) 23:25, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Another example of a different perception of colour within a culture is the variation in identification of certain shades of blue and purple. I have noticed that a car standing alone will have some people arguing it is blue while others argue it is purple, when seen with other cars that are obviously blue it becomes either a purplish-blue or a bluish-purple depending on bias. Are we seeing colour differently or were we taught to see them that way? There was a study conducted around two years ago and made into a TV documentary that found that people do not perceive colours in the same way. The study concluded that identification of colours is learned. Wayne (talk) 03:43, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
I've read an article a while back that explains how individuals with normal color vision do perceive colors the same way. It even went on explaining how it is not possible for individuals with normal color vision to not perceive colors the same way. I'm gonna try to find the article now but no promise.--Krystaleen 03:51, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
I just tracked down the notes I wrote down about the study. Experiments indicated that the colour an individual sees for a particular wavelength is not exactly the same colour as that seen by another individual for the same wavelength. It basically found that colour is perceived by the brain based on individual experience and on how usefull it is to that individual knowing of the existance of various colours. Wayne (talk) 03:57, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Color Page Move[edit]


Why do the charts refer to violet also as "purple"? Violet is not purple and purple does not correspond to any part of the spectrum! These articles are supposed to present facts, not common misconceptions. John Alan ElsonWF6I A.P.O.I. 22:31, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

This seems to have been corrected already. I also corrected another misuse of the word purple and think this is now correctly used throughout the article. Ulflund (talk) 00:16, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

A multitude of problems with this article.[edit]

I'm not sure where to begin. This article is HORRIBLY written! Color is NOT "the visual perceptual property corresponding in humans to the categories called red, blue, yellow, etc." It is a visual perception AND a (visual) property. Confusing the two is just wrong, as is confounding the two. Color, as an abstract property (ie unrelated to the things which have it, without context), is not something that non-humans have/use (afaik), so to use "humans" to imply that color is broader than a human experience is misleading. The ENGLISH LANGUAGE categories "called red, blue, yellow, etc." have no more significance than OTHER categorizations used by OTHER cultures, and are NOT in any way fundamental to the definition of color. It is FALSE that "Color derives from the spectrum of light (distribution of light power versus wavelength) interacting in the eye with the spectral sensitivities of the light receptors." ..."with the spectral sensitivities" ????? "interacting with the eye"??? The eye doesn't act ON the emr, the emr acts (one-way) ON the eye, there's no "inter-". Color "derives" from both our eyes' response(s) to light and how the resulting electro-chemical signals are interpreted and processed by our brains. There seems to be zero appreciation of the basic fact that color is a mental construct which we assign as a (static/stable) property of objects. The color of an object depends on how our brains interpret the signals our eyes receive, the physical transformation from emr to electrochemical signals is only a part of the story; in terms of the energy used by our optical system, it is a minor part. Ignoring the major role that our brains play in this process is just wrong. I could write a couple of more pages listing all that is wrong with this, its just so bad. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:18, 21 October 2015 (UTC)