Q: Two Japanese color terms

Main Page | Report this Page

Science Forum Index » Languages Forum » Q: Two Japanese color terms

Page 27 of 27 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 25, 26, 27

Author

Message

LEE Sau Dan

Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2004 10:09 am

Guest

Quote:

"Javier" == Javier BF <uaxuctum@hotmail.com> writes:

The fire of charcoal is very dim. I can't tell if it's red or
blue. (It also depends on ventilation. A well prepared fire
using charcoal has bluer flames. Of course, the burning
charcoal itself glows with a orange colour, like "red-hot"
iron.)

Javier> Use wood.

Charcoal is prepared by heating wood at high temperatures for a long
time (without making it burn).

And sorry, in HK, we don't do BBQ with wood. We use charcoal, which
is much nicer.

--
Lee Sau Dan +Z05biGVm-(Big5) ~{@nJX6X~}(HZ)

E-mail: danlee@informatik.uni-freiburg.de
Home page: http://www.informatik.uni-freiburg.de/~danlee

LEE Sau Dan

Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2004 10:12 am

Guest

Quote:

"Nathan" == Nathan Sanders <nathansanders@verizon.net> writes:

Nathan> Just peer through a red filter sometime, like you
Nathan> have in 3D glasses. You don't see huge swaths of black
Nathan> encompassing numerous indistinguishable objects. Instead,
Nathan> you see pretty much everything, with a red hue.

I see a black-and-red picture through such filters. Much like a
black-and-white picture, except you have red instead of white.
i.e. there is black there.

--
Lee Sau Dan +Z05biGVm-(Big5) ~{@nJX6X~}(HZ)

E-mail: danlee@informatik.uni-freiburg.de
Home page: http://www.informatik.uni-freiburg.de/~danlee

LEE Sau Dan

Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2004 10:13 am

Guest

Quote:

"GEO" == GEO <Me@home.here> writes:

I know some people from (actually, emigrates form HK to)
Calgary and they never mentioned that "surprising" thing to me.
Smile

GEO> They might be too busy staying warm in winter, away from
GEO> mosquitos in summer, and out of the way of crazy cows all
GEO> year round. Of course, if they have children, parents are
GEO> kept busy driving between hockey games and piano lessons.
GEO> Lately they would have been busy with all the preparations
GEO> for the celebrations.

Sounds like they have a life as busy as they did in HK. Not relaxing
at all. No wonder many came back for better job opportunities.

GEO> Happy new year.

Thanks! :)

--
Lee Sau Dan +Z05biGVm-(Big5) ~{@nJX6X~}(HZ)

E-mail: danlee@informatik.uni-freiburg.de
Home page: http://www.informatik.uni-freiburg.de/~danlee

Nath Rao

Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2004 10:48 am

Guest

Tak To wrote:

Quote:

I had to go the library to look these up as my xeroxes are boxed up. so
the delay.

Anyway, the graphs I remember are from
Mollon ``Seeing Colour'', in ``Colour: Art and Science'', edited by
Lamb and Bourriau. The graphs are on p.129.

The same proceedings also has Baylor, ``Color mechanisms in the Eye'',
by Baylor who did direct measurements in macaque monkeys. This is
harder to read as the response axis spans a much greater range than
the graph mentioned above. Baylor's graph shows much more wiggles
near the violet end, and it is hard to tell how many crossings are
there.

I also found out that old graphs of the response curves (from 1897!)
also show the same crossing phenomenon. However, the hypothesis I
advanced is not mentioned in any book or article I have seen. Nobody
seems to be as bothered as me as how red+blue makes violet.

OTOH, I also found Lennie, ``Physiology of color vision'' in ``Science
of Color'' edited by Shevell (2nd ed) who quotes Baylor et al, Journal
of Physiology 390(1987), 145--160 for the response curve giving a
simpler graph than Baylor's quoted above and which shows no crossing.

BTW, I must retract my statement that the response curves are
bell-shaped. They are single-peaked, but asymmetric. The large
wavelength side of the peak looks like half-bell, but the other side is
much less steep.

Nath Rao

Tak To

Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2004 2:09 pm

Guest

Nath Rao wrote:
NR> The response curve for S is
NR> the typical, roughly bell-shaped curve, center near blue.
NR> L and M are roughly bell-shaped, but with a slight up tick
NR> at the short wavelength part, beyond blue.

Tak To wrote:
TT> [...] Any reference?

NR> I had to go the library to look these up as my xeroxes are
NR> boxed up. so the delay.

Thanks! I was hoping for some on-line references though.

NR> Anyway, the graphs I remember are from
NR> Mollon ``Seeing Colour'', in ``Colour: Art and Science'',
NR> edited by Lamb and Bourriau. The graphs are on p.129.
NR>
NR> The same proceedings also has Baylor, ``Color mechanisms in
NR> the Eye'', by Baylor who did direct measurements in macaque
NR> monkeys. This is harder to read as the response axis spans
NR> a much greater range than the graph mentioned above.
NR> Baylor's graph shows much more wiggles near the violet end,
NR> and it is hard to tell how many crossings are there.

So the L receptors sensitive to separate bands of violet light?
Interesting. How high are these violet peaks relative to the L
peak?

NR> I also found out that old graphs of the response curves (from
NR> 1897!) also show the same crossing phenomenon.
NR>
NR> However, the hypothesis I advanced is not mentioned in any
NR> book or article I have seen. Nobody seems to be as bothered
NR> as me as how red+blue makes violet.

Yup.

NR> OTOH, I also found Lennie, ``Physiology of color vision'' in
NR> ``Science of Color'' edited by Shevell (2nd ed) who quotes
NR> Baylor et al, Journal of Physiology 390(1987), 145--160 for
NR> the response curve giving a simpler graph than Baylor's quoted
NR> above and which shows no crossing.

I cannot find any on-line graph showing violet sensitivity of the
L receptors either. (Just a quick search; not a thorough one.)

NR> BTW, I must retract my statement that the response curves are
NR> bell-shaped. They are single-peaked, but asymmetric. The large
NR> wavelength side of the peak looks like half-bell, but the other
NR> side is much less steep.

Just wondering, would it be more or less symmetrical if they plot sensitivity
against frequency instead of wavelength?

Tak

Nath Rao

Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2004 6:10 pm

Guest

Tak To wrote:

Quote:

There isn't a real peak at the violet end. More to the point, both
L and M are sensitive to violet light: In log scale, taking the peak
sensitivity to be 0 [that is how the graphs are drawn], the sensitivity
at the violet end is between -1 and -2. At the other end, it drops off
to -5 (I can't remember if it was at red or near infrared.) There must
be some kind of normalization going on in the brain.

Quote:

NR> I also found out that old graphs of the response curves (from
NR> 1897!) also show the same crossing phenomenon.
NR
NR> However, the hypothesis I advanced is not mentioned in any
NR> book or article I have seen. Nobody seems to be as bothered
NR> as me as how red+blue makes violet.

Yup.

NR> OTOH, I also found Lennie, ``Physiology of color vision'' in
NR> ``Science of Color'' edited by Shevell (2nd ed) who quotes
NR> Baylor et al, Journal of Physiology 390(1987), 145--160 for
NR> the response curve giving a simpler graph than Baylor's quoted
NR> above and which shows no crossing.

I cannot find any on-line graph showing violet sensitivity of the
L receptors either. (Just a quick search; not a thorough one.)

NR> BTW, I must retract my statement that the response curves are
NR> bell-shaped. They are single-peaked, but asymmetric. The large
NR> wavelength side of the peak looks like half-bell, but the other
NR> side is much less steep.

Just wondering, would it be more or less symmetrical if they plot
sensitivity
against frequency instead of wavelength?

Tak

I am not sure, but I would say no because the levels at the two ends are
so different.

Page 27 of 27 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 25, 26, 27 All times are GMT - 5 Hours The time now is Fri Sep 05, 2008 12:06 am Science Forum Index