On 10/9/13, Simon Budig <simon@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > Another (slightly philosophical) issue for me is, that you never explain > what you mean by color. I added a one-paragraph summary of color: http://ninedegreesbelow.com/photography/xyz-rgb.html What do you think? Will my one-paragraph summary work? > It might be worth noting, that this is different from looking at color > as "a specific intensity-distribution of wavelengths". There are > different intensity-distributions that map to the same XYZ coordinate. > While a person with normal eye-sight perceives these two > "intensity-distributions" as the same color (and for these purposes XYZ > is perfectly OK) a person with a color vision deficiency might be able > to keep them apart - > see e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorblindness#cite_note-5 > > I am not sure if mentioning this helps or if it confuses stuff... :) Based on your input I rewrote the explanation of imaginary colors, hopefully clarified what a "real" color really is, and touched on the subject of nonstandard color perception. Metamerism, though very important, might be more distracting than helpful? (I'm working on the other issue you mentioned.) Elle _______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list List address: gimp-developer-list@xxxxxxxxx List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
