3 ms·
I think it is important to point out that this essay only claims that Hering’s theory and general concepts of color opponency and cone opponency is wrong and n
by weinzierl 3y ago
I think it is important to
point out that this essay only claims that
Hering’s theory and general concepts of color opponency and cone opponency is wrong and not the idea of opponent colors in general.
"Proof of color opponency was established decades before Hering, with the discovery of complementary-color pairs and color afterimages [29.,30.]; color opponency is implemented by retinal cone-opponent neurons [22.]. Trichromacy and complementarity organize colorimetric space [31.], and Hering’s theory can be discarded without threatening these well-established principles."
- parpfish 3y agoTheir first sentence is: > The essay reviews the psychological and physiological evidence for Opponent-Colors Theory and concludes the theory is wrong. Am I supposed to interpret “Opponent-Colors Theory” as something specific and different from the general concept of opponent colors?
- weinzierl 3y agoI think so. They seem to distinguish between "Hering’s Opponent Colors (the unique hues)" and "Hering’s theory (the linking proposition)". They only attack Hering's theory = the linking proposition.
- parpfish 3y agogood to see that the difficulty naming things isn't unique to programming