FOTD 22-11-02 (Forever Amber [6])
FOTD -- November 22, 2002 (Rating 6) Fractal visionaries and enthusiasts: I've seen the topic of the nature of color being tossed around on the Fractint list lately. One of the questions being discussed is whether the sensation one person experiences when he observes red is identical to the sensation someone else experiences when he observes the same bundle of wave lengths. When I ponder this question, the topic of artistic painting (and fractals) comes immediately to mind. Different people always have different opinions of the same work of art (or the same fractal). Could this be because they actually experience the colors differently? The sensation that is red to one person might appear as blue to another person, (though he would consider it red), while to a third person, the first person's sensation of red might be totally unknown. Perhaps different people actually experience the same work of visual art in different ways, and what is pleasing to one person is truly disgusting to another. There is an old saying that goes, "beauty is in the eye of the beholder". This might be more true than we realize. And could the same thing also be true of the non-visual arts such as music and literature? Another question also comes to mind, this one also of a philo- sophical nature. Since the sensation of colors we see in the world around us does not appear until the information from without reaches the mind, what do the actual external objects actually look like? We cannot say they look like a black-and- white photograph, since shades of gray are also color sensations that arise in the mind. We can only dismiss the question as a meaningless waste of energy, saying that the actual shades and colors of the outer world is an abstract something that we can never know, and try to be satisfied with the non-answer. It is far more convenient to project the inner sensation of color onto the outer world and consider color to be an objective reality. But I can never forget that by doing this we are merely fooling ourselves. Today's fractal rates a 6, and that's in my opinion. I enjoy the color amber. Someone who does not enjoy amber might experience amber as puce, and rate the image at only a 3. The scene is located once again in the giant claw fractal, this time just beyond the shoreline of the largest bud in the nascent Mandeloid near the hinge of the claw. I have named the image "Forever Amber", not after a naughty novel that appeared about a half-century ago, but because of the intensely amber network of intertwined filaments surrounding the central midget. With a render time of a little under 6 minutes, the parameter file is a bit slow. The more efficient way of viewing the image is to download it from the web site of Paul at: <http://home.att.net/~Paul.N.Lee/FotD/FotD.html> or from Scott's site at: <http://sdboyd.dyndns.org/~sdboyd/fotd/index.html> Heavy clouds and occasional light sprinkles of rain kept things too wet for the dynamic cat duo Thursday. The temperature of 45F 7C failed to help things. As a result, the duo became sulky, and needed several treats to restore their spirits. Today is starting foggy and wet, promising to be little better. I have a bit of work to accomplish before I can think of what kind of treat to give the duo. Until tomorrow, take care, and make a fractal an every-day event. Jim Muth jamth@mindspring.com jimmuth@aol.com START 20.0 PAR-FORMULA FILE================================ Forever_Amber { ; time=0:05:45.97--SF5 on a P200 reset=2002 type=formula formulafile=allinone.frm formulaname=MandelbrotMix4 function=recip passes=1 center-mag=-1.646005109183255/-1.024109885037379/2\ 00315.8/1/-115/-1.27002054012281818e-009 params=0.\ 18/-1.5/-0.93/1.8/0/0 float=y maxiter=1200 inside=0 logmap=105 periodicity=10 colors=0001mP9fQI`SPTTTOTTGVT9XP3aR0_Q0_R0XP0TK0SK\ 0PK0MJ0LA1I33G96ID9IIAIMDJQGJVIJ_LJdOLiPLmTLsWLxZM\ zaMzeMzhMzfJzdIzbFz_DyZAxX9vV7sT4rS3oS0mQ0jP0iO0gO\ 0cS1_X9X`ISdPOiYLmdOl_QlTSjPVjJXjF`fCccAf`9iY7lT4o\ Q3rO1uL0xI0zD0zA0z70z40z10z61p9CfCMXFXLJgAMr0Pz0Sz\ 0Pz0Oz0Lz0Jz0Gz0Fz0Cz0Az07z06z03z01z00u00m00g00`00\ V01_03c06g37j69o9CsCDxDFzALx7Pv4Tu1Ys0cp0go0lm0pl0\ rj0sj0uj0vj0xj0yi0zi0zi0zi0zi0zg0zg0zg0zg0zg0zg0zc\ 1z_7zVDzQIyOOxJTuF_sAdp6io3ol0uj0zg0zf0zg0vg0rg0mg\ 0jg1fg4ag7YiATiDQiGMiJIiMDiPAiS9jV7jY7j`6lc6lf4li4\ ml3mo3mr1ou1ox0oz0oz4mx7muAmrDmoGmlLlgOldQlaTl_XlX\ _lTVg_QddMajI_pDXv9Tz4Qz0Oz6QzATzGXzLYzQ`zVcz`fzdg\ zjjyomxupvyruvuxsvypxzmyzjzzgzzdzzazz_zzXzzTzzazzj\ zzrzzzzzzzzszyfziSzVFzF1z04z46z79zAAzDCzGFzJGzMJzP\ LzSMzVPzYQz`SzcYzVczMizDmz4jzFgzOfzYczfazoYzgTzaPz\ VLzPGzJFzOAzO6zO1zO0zO0zO } frm:MandelbrotMix4 {; Jim Muth a=real(p1), b=imag(p1), d=real(p2), f=imag(p2), g=1/f, h=1/d, j=1/(f-b), z=(-a*b*g*h)^j, k=real(p3)+1, l=imag(p3)+100, c=fn1(pixel): z=k*((a*(z^b))+(d*(z^f)))+c, |z| < l } END 20.0 PAR-FORMULA FILE==================================
----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Muth" <jamth@mindspring.com> Cc: <philofractal@lists.fractalus.com> Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 6:25 AM Subject: [Fractint] FOTD 22-11-02 (Forever Amber [6])
I've seen the topic of the nature of colour being tossed around on the Fractint list lately. One of the questions being discussed is whether the sensation one person experiences when he observes red is identical to the sensation someone else experiences when he observes the same bundle of wave lengths.
Personally I think that this is probably so, statistically. Imagine that each of us are equipped with colour filters incorporated in our lenses, with individually different transmission properties. If my lenses pass a spectrum centred on "green", I will, unknowingly, experience a different visual world from Joe, whose filter responses are centred on "red". Both of us will see a spectrum of colours in our worlds, but they will differ; what I might call "reddish" Joe would call ***RED*** , and so on. I think that colour perception is yet another of those natural phenomena governed by the probability curve. Mark relates that his mild red/green colour blindness has not impeded any of his colour-dependant activities...I'd bet that he can even resolve a 3-D red/green stereogram.
When I ponder this question, the topic of artistic painting (and fractals) comes immediately to mind. Different people always have different opinions of the same work of art (or the same fractal). Could this be because they actually experience the colours differently? The sensation that is red to one person might appear as blue to another person, (though he would consider it red), while to a third person, the first person's sensation of red might be totally unknown.
Again in my opinion, this is going colourfully overboard. It's unlikely that the sensations of blue and red could be totally reversed in different people. As Mark said:- "Since we are, by the nature of our 98+% shared DNA, wired basically identically, one can argue that our optico-neural wiring, and hence function, is basically the same. In mammals, certain functions such as clear stereographic vision and motion detection require sensory stimulation to train (rewire) the neural net in the visual area of the occipital lobe. But I see no reason to doubt that colour vision is hard-wired from the start". I wonder if the differences are sufficient to cause the world population to split into the two groups, who can and can not perceive those phantom 3-D images lurking in the "magic" dot stereogram.
Perhaps different people actually experience the same work of visual art in different ways, and what is pleasing to one person is truly disgusting to another. There is an old saying that goes, "beauty is in the eye of the beholder". This might be more true than we realize. And could the same thing also be true of the non-visual arts such as music and literature?
Yet again, IMHO...sure! Though I doubt that reactions to art are that extreme.
Another question also comes to mind, this one also of a philo- sophical nature. Since the sensation of colours we see in the world around us does not appear until the information from without reaches the mind, what do the actual external objects actually look like? We cannot say they look like a black-and- white photograph, since shades of grey are also colour sensations that arise in the mind. We can only dismiss the question as a meaningless waste of energy, saying that the actual shades and colours of the outer world is an abstract something that we can never know, and try to be satisfied with the non-answer. It is far more convenient to project the inner sensation of colour onto the outer world and consider colour to be an objective reality. But I can never forget that by doing this we are merely fooling ourselves.
Now hang on a bit! True, the *sensation* of colour cannot exist without a mind...but the colours are out there regardless. When grass is illuminated by white light, it absorbs most of the spectrum, except for a portion centred on "green". This is completely verifiable by electro-optical instrumentation. In fact, some color-processing equipments are dependant upon such processes. You, of all people, should be aware of that! John W.
I think that the argument of suggested color vs. actual color vs. "It's red because you were told it's red" can best be summarized (at least to me) in this example. Now I have not actually done this experiment, but I have had experience with the test subjects. If you were to draw a picture, or preferably a circle, using only a (I hate to say it) RED crayon, and then gave the picture to a child and told him to reproduce it with no other instructions or suggestions, I'd be willing to bet that he would choose the same crayon to draw it as you used to create it. (Unless of course you have one of those 5000 pc. crayon sets.) Now the child's brain may not actually 'see' the color the same as yours does, but if he/she chose the crayon that said "RED" on it to draw the picture then we could argue that he 'sees' the color the same as me. Sometimes we can apply the old "A rose by any other name..." theory and be correct. I concede that there are exceptions for color blindness, Indian colors, and the wearing of filter goggles while looking at stop signs, however I feel that the large, large majority of us see color in the same fashion as everyone else. I have seen people look at aqua and say that it's blue, and others look at aqua and say that it's green. To me that is a matter of slight perception and shading. But I have yet to see someone look at a blue car and call it yellow, or ask me why all of the fire hydrants are painted purple. I think the original topic started off with a discussion of seeing color through waveform, and I still believe that this is true with very few exceptions. Regards, Mark.
participants (3)
-
Jim Muth -
John Wilson -
Mark A. Freeze