2 ms·
I'm a little confused about the approach to the frequencies here. Most light that we see (apart from laser light or the result of separating or filtering light
by schoen 9y ago
I'm a little confused about the approach to the frequencies here. Most light that we see (apart from laser light or the result of separating or filtering light with optical equipment) is not pure monochromatic light at a single frequency. This is clearly true for many colors in this chart which are given as combinations of additive primary colors. So, it is misleading to say that these colors have a single frequency or wavelength. Is the frequency given in the chart just the pure color that would be closest to the indicated color in some color space metric?
- ArashPartow 9y ago@schoen You do make some very good points, the wave lengths in this list are based on the assumption of pure colour forms using Dan Bruton's Spectra approximation. http://www.physics.sfasu.edu/astro/color.html http://www.physics.sfasu.edu/astro/color.html Furthermore as you can see in the list composite colours such as white, gray and black have undefined values.
- hilbert42 9y ago"<...> pure colour forms using Dan Bruton's Spectra approximation<...>" Approximation or not, you cannot assign a unique wavelength or frequency to perceptual (extra-spectral) colors if for no other reason than that the given λ(f) is factually incorrect. Moreover, even an approximation doesn't make much sense, as simply human vision perceives magenta as a very different color to say various shades of pink (white + red) or any other color near red [orange. orange-red, etc.]. Basically, there is no single λ(f) - spectral - color that looks even vaguely like magenta (similarly for cyan, 'fuchsia' etc.).