Digital Speed Challenge #589 - Primary Colors

Congratulations to Tom and Don and to all participants.
Great challenge, Jason.

.
Levina,

Thanks for the reminder that this is a fun, lighthearted series of challenges. . You suggested that I "lighten up". . That is tough for me!

By nature, I am a very rigid person and I thrive when there are strict, absolute guidelines that must be conformed to. . And it is always the letter of the rule that matters to me, not the spirit of the rule, because we can only be absolutely sure of things that are objective. . But I suppose that letting go of my very nature is something that would be beneficial at times ... not only for myself, but for those with whom I interact. . I don't know if lightening up is even possible for someone like myself, but I will give it an effort.

Oh yeah ..... the new challenge is now up:

https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1512505


.

Tom, I know you like to stick to the rules. I am somewhat the same. I think because it gives us a sense of security, knowing what to expect, without any surprises. But it's good to realise the relaxed nature of the challenges here so just say to yourself: "Enough. Enough now"...

Did you all watch the movie again this Christmas?

I've come to hate the flick and still watch it. Every year...

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18988370
.By nature, I am a very rigid person and I thrive when there are strict, absolute guidelines that must be conformed to. . And it is always the letter of the rule that matters to me, not the spirit of the rule, because we can only be absolutely sure of things that are objective.

There's too much play within "reality" for such confidence in objectivity. We can't get absolute assurance of objectivity unless we're dealing with mathematics. Any rule must be understood and interpreted by the person trying to follow it; that's where subjectivity creeps in.

I'd still like someone to explain why RGB is more pure or more real than RYB, so that choosing RGB as "the" primaries is other than arbitrary. True, photographers work with light, but most of what photographers see and photograph, except in astronomy, consists of surfaces that reflect light, not originate it. I hope the answer isn't that LCD screens use RGB and therefore it takes priority because Technology Is Really Important. Does your photo have different primaries depending on whether you display it on an LCD screen or as a print?

Another thing. Wikipedia articles on this subject talk about colors that exist in theory but could never be seen. Then in what sense are they colors at all?

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18988370
.
Levina,

Thanks for the reminder that this is a fun, lighthearted series of challenges. . You suggested that I "lighten up". . That is tough for me!

By nature, I am a very rigid person and I thrive when there are strict, absolute guidelines that must be conformed to. . And it is always the letter of the rule that matters to me, not the spirit of the rule, because we can only be absolutely sure of things that are objective. . But I suppose that letting go of my very nature is something that would be beneficial at times ... not only for myself, but for those with whom I interact. . I don't know if lightening up is even possible for someone like myself, but I will give it an effort.

Oh yeah ..... the new challenge is now up:

https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1512505


.

A glass of wine may help, or two

OhLook wrote in post #18988397
I'd still like someone to explain why RGB is more pure or more real than RYB, so that choosing RGB as "the" primaries is other than arbitrary.

I don't think that anyone asserted that red, green, and blue are more pure or real than red, yellow, and blue, as primary colors. . You may have interpreted what was said as such an assertion, or thought that that was what someone meant, but no one here came out and directly said that.

Both sets of primary colors are true and real. . It is good to learn and realize that there is more than one set of primary colors, and that the medium one is discussing or using is what determines what is "true" or "real" for that particular medium.

Selecting a set of primary colors based on the medium one is discussing is not arbitrary ..... because it is based on something.

I will add that I think the OP must have known that his set of primary colors would raise eyebrows and questions. . Given this, I think he should have explained in the first post about how there are different sets of primaries. . If one foresees a bit of controversy developing, it is proper to head it off and try to prevent it by providing explanations right up front, to keep anyone from challenging what you say and to keep people from being confused. . If I say something that is starkly different from what my audience expects me to say, then I owe them an explanation right up front.

The fact that red and green light combine together to make yellow light is something that I find fascinating! . I was so "stuck" in only seeing colors in terms of pigments. . The problem with that pigment-based view is that as a photographer, I am not mixing pigments together. . I am capturing (actually, recording) reflected light.
.

OhLook wrote in post #18988397
Another thing. Wikipedia articles on this subject talk about colors that exist in theory but could never be seen. Then in what sense are they colors at all?

They are colors in the theoretical sense ... right?


.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18988412
I don't think that anyone asserted that red, green, and blue are more pure or real than red, yellow, and blue, as primary colors. . You may have interpreted what was said as such an assertion, or thought that that was what someone meant, but no one here came out and directly said that.

My interpretation is based on the OP's posts.

I completely agree.

"Red + green = yellow" I just find strange and counterintuitive. You'd never infer it from the way things look, whereas, for instance, "green = blue + yellow" is obvious. The difficulty goes beyond pigments. Green looks like blue + yellow whether you're looking at a printed card (pigments) or a computer screen (light). There's also that yellow isn't equidistant from red and green in the visible spectrum.

They are colors in the theoretical sense ... right?

Could tetrachromats see them? Could any nonhuman animals? Colors aren't "out there." They don't exist without a visual system that processes the light that enters. Maybe the idea is that we lack the retinal cells that would be sensitive to the wavelengths. Wikipedia frustrates me by not saying.

Too hard core for me. Ask any grade school art teacher what the primary colors are. I hold a degree in Fine Art / Art Studio, yellow is a primary in my world, hence my comment. Of course YMMV.

Um, I've always looked at this as a laid back challenge and was just, like the rules encourage, "having some fun with it". Apparently I was mistaken. I had no idea I would get scolded over an internet photo forum challenge that sometimes goes wanting for participants. Sorry, too hard core for me.