5 ms·

> there is no gamma compression for red in the eye What does this mean? Do you have a citation to a source explaining whatever this is trying to say using prec

> there is no gamma compression for red in the eye What does this mean? Do you have a citation to a source explaining whatever this is trying to say using precise standard color science terminology?

airstrike 7y ago
Don't you know every HN thread needs its standard armchair top comment rebuttal on how TFA is actually wrong and the author is naive and doesn't really understand the problem with all its intricacies?
- muizelaar 7y ago
  The top comment rebuttal is written by the author of the WebP lossless, https://github.com/google/butteraugli https://github.com/google/butteraugli and https://github.com/google/pik https://github.com/google/pik so calling it armchairing doesn't really seem appropriate.
  - coolspot 7y ago
    Ouch
- ivalm 7y ago
  This is the guy: https://ai.google/research/people/105344 https://ai.google/research/people/105344 https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=SnJNeR4AAAAJ&hl=en https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=SnJNeR4AAAAJ&hl=en Literally a world expert on the topic.
- ci5er 7y ago
  I know you are being a little tongue-in-cheek here, but I remember there was an Alvy-Ray Smith paper submitted about sampling scenes in time-and-space (and then filtering semi-super-sampled inputs), and it wasn't just the top comment. EVERYBODY knew better than ARS. Without having any DSP background. It was both amusing and sad.
dang 7y ago
Please don't cross-examine people like this on HN. Threads here should be thoughtful conversations, not boxing matches. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- jacobolus 7y ago
  I am not “cross-examining” anyone. I am curious what this referred to, because I have never heard such a thing, and it doesn’t match my understanding of human color vision, a subject which I have studied fairly extensively. It was stated authoritatively, without any elaboration or evidence. I am asking for a citation so I can understand in more careful technical terms what claim is being made. (P.S. Having site moderators step in to discourage basic good-faith questions is a bad show.)
  - dang 7y ago
    Well, moderation is guesswork and sometimes we guess wrong. Since you say your intent was to simply ask, I believe you. But it didn't read that way to me, which means it probably didn't to some others too. FWIW, the part that tipped me into thinking you were being aggressive was "whatever this is trying to say". That is the kind of thing people put into questions as a snarky swipe about someone being incoherent. Also, "do you have a citation to a source using precise standard science terminology" has a tinge of the same thing, since asking so bluntly and immediately for a citation is a way of not asking the commenter to explain what they meant themselves. Again, this is the sort of thing people do in internet comments when they're being haughty and dismissing the other person as ignorant. Especially a certain kind of technical haughtiness gets expressed this way. There's nothing wrong with asking for a citation, of course, but since it has become a sort of putdown trope, one's question should include enough information to convey intent. And in normal conversation one would typically ask the other person to explain what they were saying first.
    - jacobolus 7y ago
      How would you express the sentiment: “This statement seems incoherent based on what I know about the subject. To be charitable, this implies that it means something different than my interpretation, but was rendered confusing when simplified or expressed using terms pitched at laypeople. Could you please explain it using expert-targeted terminology or provide a citation to someone who does, so I can evaluate the claim on its merits instead of dismissing it as nonsense?” In a concise but friendly/productive way?
TD-Linux 7y ago
I'm pretty sure that's not literally true. For example, take a CRT, with its built in power law voltage-to-intensity response (the original gamma correction). If the eye didn't compress red, you'd see large shifts in the color of a white color ramp.

> there is no gamma compression for red in the eye What does this mean? Do you have a citation to a source explaining whatever this is trying to say using precise standard color science terminology?

airstrike 7y ago

Don't you know every HN thread needs its standard armchair top comment rebuttal on how TFA is actually wrong and the author is naive and doesn't really understand the problem with all its intricacies?

muizelaar 7y ago
The top comment rebuttal is written by the author of the WebP lossless, https://github.com/google/butteraugli https://github.com/google/butteraugli and https://github.com/google/pik https://github.com/google/pik so calling it armchairing doesn't really seem appropriate.
- coolspot 7y ago
  Ouch
ivalm 7y ago
This is the guy: https://ai.google/research/people/105344 https://ai.google/research/people/105344 https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=SnJNeR4AAAAJ&hl=en https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=SnJNeR4AAAAJ&hl=en Literally a world expert on the topic.
ci5er 7y ago
I know you are being a little tongue-in-cheek here, but I remember there was an Alvy-Ray Smith paper submitted about sampling scenes in time-and-space (and then filtering semi-super-sampled inputs), and it wasn't just the top comment. EVERYBODY knew better than ARS. Without having any DSP background. It was both amusing and sad.

dang 7y ago

Please don't cross-examine people like this on HN. Threads here should be thoughtful conversations, not boxing matches. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

jacobolus 7y ago
I am not “cross-examining” anyone. I am curious what this referred to, because I have never heard such a thing, and it doesn’t match my understanding of human color vision, a subject which I have studied fairly extensively. It was stated authoritatively, without any elaboration or evidence. I am asking for a citation so I can understand in more careful technical terms what claim is being made. (P.S. Having site moderators step in to discourage basic good-faith questions is a bad show.)
- dang 7y ago
  Well, moderation is guesswork and sometimes we guess wrong. Since you say your intent was to simply ask, I believe you. But it didn't read that way to me, which means it probably didn't to some others too. FWIW, the part that tipped me into thinking you were being aggressive was "whatever this is trying to say". That is the kind of thing people put into questions as a snarky swipe about someone being incoherent. Also, "do you have a citation to a source using precise standard science terminology" has a tinge of the same thing, since asking so bluntly and immediately for a citation is a way of not asking the commenter to explain what they meant themselves. Again, this is the sort of thing people do in internet comments when they're being haughty and dismissing the other person as ignorant. Especially a certain kind of technical haughtiness gets expressed this way. There's nothing wrong with asking for a citation, of course, but since it has become a sort of putdown trope, one's question should include enough information to convey intent. And in normal conversation one would typically ask the other person to explain what they were saying first.
  - jacobolus 7y ago
    How would you express the sentiment: “This statement seems incoherent based on what I know about the subject. To be charitable, this implies that it means something different than my interpretation, but was rendered confusing when simplified or expressed using terms pitched at laypeople. Could you please explain it using expert-targeted terminology or provide a citation to someone who does, so I can evaluate the claim on its merits instead of dismissing it as nonsense?” In a concise but friendly/productive way?

TD-Linux 7y ago

I'm pretty sure that's not literally true. For example, take a CRT, with its built in power law voltage-to-intensity response (the original gamma correction). If the eye didn't compress red, you'd see large shifts in the color of a white color ramp.