5 ms·

Well, it is not natural. In almost any literal situation you're not surrounded by black, but various shades of dark. As a concept it's foreign and thus, not na

Well, it is not natural. In almost any literal situation you're not surrounded by black, but various shades of dark. As a concept it's foreign and thus, not natural.

crazygringo 6y ago
Right, but the author is confusing the "pure black" you're describing with #000. That's the error. #000 is perfectly natural. It's my unlit laptop screen, which is basically the same color as my black chair, my black printer, etc. So using the idea that "pure black" is unnatural is zero justification for avoiding #000 on screen.
- dorkwood 6y ago
  It seems like you're making the argument that no color palettes are any more natural than any other color palettes, since all colors exist in nature, but I don't think that's the point of the article. You may be right that #000 is not actually pure black, because of the light reflecting off the laptop screen and other such reasons, but when looking at an image, our brain tends to compensate for these things. It interprets colors based on the surrounding colors in the image. Introducing pure black into a color palette without being thoughtful can throw off the balance and create a color combination that feels "unnatural", since it would be rare to see colors with that sort of contrast side-by-side in nature.
  - crazygringo 6y ago
    > Introducing pure black into a color palette without being thoughtful can throw off the balance But my point is precisely that this is incorrect, that there is nothing special about #000. In reality, let's say your other #888 color is giving off 54 units of luminence according to some measure. And maybe your #111 gives off 8 units of luminence and your #000 appears to have 6 units of luminence because of ambient reflection and diffusion. There is nothing special about those 6 units of luminence. You're still far away from 0 units of luminence. > it would be rare to see colors with that sort of contrast side-by-side in nature. This is also not correct. Our eyes interpret a gigantic range of contrast. What any screen can produce is a tiny fraction of that. We see far, far, far more contrast side-by-side in nature than we can on any computer screen.
    - dorkwood 6y ago
      We're discussing different things, I think. As someone with painting experience, I'm focusing on palettes and value ranges, and what colors and values when put next to each other feel the most pleasing and 'natural'. You seem to be focusing on the objective experience of color, how 'pure black' on a screen is not truly pure black, and how nature contains all the colors we experience on an LCD screen, and more. I don't disagree with your points, these are just two separate discussions.
- mlyle 6y ago
  #000 is your unlit laptop screen. But the designer doesn't know what color that is. By having a very dark grey with saturation, like they advocate, they can (get close to) a saturated dark color that works with their design scheme, instead of something that is arbitrary based on your environment and that you're actively training your eyes to subtract from the image.
pbhjpbhj 6y ago
In modern times it's hard sometimes to find darkness, but go on a cave out our in a woodland on a dark night: pitch black. I'm in a city and walked down a side lane at night (new moon) and it was so dark I couldn't see my feet. It's the contrast (seeing black next to light colours) that's not natural - but, I'm not sure how relevant that is.
- fiddlerwoaroof 6y ago
  But, if you’re out there in the country on a clear night with a full moon, the moon/background sky contrast is pretty close to #000/#fff

Well, it is not natural. In almost any literal situation you're not surrounded by black, but various shades of dark. As a concept it's foreign and thus, not natural.

crazygringo 6y ago

Right, but the author is confusing the "pure black" you're describing with #000. That's the error. #000 is perfectly natural. It's my unlit laptop screen, which is basically the same color as my black chair, my black printer, etc. So using the idea that "pure black" is unnatural is zero justification for avoiding #000 on screen.

dorkwood 6y ago
It seems like you're making the argument that no color palettes are any more natural than any other color palettes, since all colors exist in nature, but I don't think that's the point of the article. You may be right that #000 is not actually pure black, because of the light reflecting off the laptop screen and other such reasons, but when looking at an image, our brain tends to compensate for these things. It interprets colors based on the surrounding colors in the image. Introducing pure black into a color palette without being thoughtful can throw off the balance and create a color combination that feels "unnatural", since it would be rare to see colors with that sort of contrast side-by-side in nature.
- crazygringo 6y ago
  > Introducing pure black into a color palette without being thoughtful can throw off the balance But my point is precisely that this is incorrect, that there is nothing special about #000. In reality, let's say your other #888 color is giving off 54 units of luminence according to some measure. And maybe your #111 gives off 8 units of luminence and your #000 appears to have 6 units of luminence because of ambient reflection and diffusion. There is nothing special about those 6 units of luminence. You're still far away from 0 units of luminence. > it would be rare to see colors with that sort of contrast side-by-side in nature. This is also not correct. Our eyes interpret a gigantic range of contrast. What any screen can produce is a tiny fraction of that. We see far, far, far more contrast side-by-side in nature than we can on any computer screen.
  - dorkwood 6y ago
    We're discussing different things, I think. As someone with painting experience, I'm focusing on palettes and value ranges, and what colors and values when put next to each other feel the most pleasing and 'natural'. You seem to be focusing on the objective experience of color, how 'pure black' on a screen is not truly pure black, and how nature contains all the colors we experience on an LCD screen, and more. I don't disagree with your points, these are just two separate discussions.
mlyle 6y ago
#000 is your unlit laptop screen. But the designer doesn't know what color that is. By having a very dark grey with saturation, like they advocate, they can (get close to) a saturated dark color that works with their design scheme, instead of something that is arbitrary based on your environment and that you're actively training your eyes to subtract from the image.

pbhjpbhj 6y ago

In modern times it's hard sometimes to find darkness, but go on a cave out our in a woodland on a dark night: pitch black. I'm in a city and walked down a side lane at night (new moon) and it was so dark I couldn't see my feet. It's the contrast (seeing black next to light colours) that's not natural - but, I'm not sure how relevant that is.

fiddlerwoaroof 6y ago
But, if you’re out there in the country on a clear night with a full moon, the moon/background sky contrast is pretty close to #000/#fff