Talk:RGB color model

nm

I was wondering what the exact wavelengths were that are produced by LCD displays, assuming that they align with our eyeballs. the article says:

The normal three kinds of light-sensitive photoreceptor cells in the human eye (cone cells) respond most to yellow (long wavelength or L), green (medium or M), and violet (short or S) light (peak wavelengths near 570 nm, 540 nm and 440 nm, respectively[3])

But Colors and materials seems to indicate 570nm is on the green end of yellow. Should it read 670nm (red)? I don't have the book to check and found no other data sources today. Raskalnickoff (talk) 09:52, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

First, I’m not sure what you mean by “assuming they align with our eyeballs”. Light sources (like, say, the backlight behind an LCD) produces light of many different wavelengths (there are some spectral power distribution charts for various light sources floating around the internet). Colors and wavelengths of light are not directly relatable, and the color of an object or light depends on not only the distribution of wavelengths emitted or reflected by it, but also on the human observer's eyes’ current state of adaptation, and on the colors of surrounding objects. It’s misleading to directly label L, M, and S cones with “yellow”, “green”, and “violet”. Second, I’m not sure what common LED colors have to do with the light emitted by generic LCDs. –jacobolus (t) 03:00, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

bad external link.

I did a check using Google Safe Search and the website listed in external links is quite full of Malware. Should it be removed and replaced with an alternative for user Security? Tnu1138 (talk) 16:46, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, immediately, and the site should be WP:Spam blacklisted if that's the case. Dicklyon (talk) 19:33, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Which site are we talking about? http://www.cs.rit.edu/~ncs/color/a_spaces.html is not “full of malware” as far as I can tell, but it does include a Java applet. There’s nothing inherently suspicious about that. –jacobolus (t) 01:02, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Primary colours

Are not the primary colours red, blue and yellow rather than red, blue and green? Yellow cannot be created by any mixture of red, blue and green as yellow is a primary colour, like red and blue. Green on the other hand are created by mixing blue and yellow. --Oddeivind (talk) 21:15, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Not in an RGB device. I believe primary color has some discussion of this point. –jacobolus (t) 21:54, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Red, blue, and yellow are the primary reflective colours - when you are viewing an object that is lit by light reflecting on it from another source (such as a lamp or the sun). This applies to almost everything, such as a photo, painting, landscape, contents of the room you're in, a person) because almost everything is not a light source itself. Red, blue, and yellow are the primary emitted colours - where the light source itself is generating the colour, such as a CRT or LED screen. -- hulmem (talk) 22:51, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Are there any article explaining this in more detail? I am not sure if I understood that very well. When I see the colours i can clearly see that green has both blue and yellow in it, but as far as I can tell you cannot create yellow by combining any colours. --Oddeivind (talk) 09:56, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

I just took at look at the article about primary colours andit says:"Any choice of primary colors is essentially arbitrary". Arbitrary? I thought red, blue and yellow were primary colours because they cannot be made by combining any other colour. For instance you cannot create blue by combining e.g. green with red or yellow. --Oddeivind (talk) 10:12, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

I just noticed in my paint programme that it is possible to make yellow by combining an eual amount of red and green. How can this be explained? I thought yellow was a pure colour that could not be made by combining any other colour. Is my understanding of primary colours wrong? --Oddeivind (talk) 13:48, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, your understanding is wrong. Additive color and subtractive color might be helpful. For a longer explanation, see Handprint.com’s “do primary colors exist?” One key sentence there: ‘There is no historical source prior to the 18th century that starts with three "primary" or "primitive" colors and explains how to mix all other colors from them.’ Basically, the red-yellow-blue-primary-color idea is one that arose in the 18th century, stuck around through the 19th century, and was shown to be inadequate by late-19th-/early-20th-century scientists and researchers. If you want to mix the broadest possible set of colors from three paint pigments or dyes, your best bet is to choose CMY: “cyan” (greenish blue), “magenta” (purple–red), and yellow. If you want to mix the broadest set of colors from three lights, your best bet is to choose RGB: “red” (orangish red), “green” (yellowish green), and “blue” (blue–violet). But if you’re painting, you’re really better off starting with at least 6 or so “primary” pigments, or depending on your subject and style, maybe more like 8 or 10 or more. –jacobolus (t) 21:19, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

My high school's stage lights were incandescent, with glass filters giving essentially red, yellow, and blue! (along with incandescent white, perhaps). Ignorance actually made this happen! Trying to create green light by mixing yellow and blue simply did not work. (The lighting was installed probably about 1947 or so; dimmers were Autrastats, if that gives a clue.) At the time, we lived in a cultural backwater.

Art teachers are probably still telling their students that red, yellow, and blue are the primary colors. I dream of showing up at an art class with cyan, magenta, and yellow paints...

Nevertheless, mixing blue and yellow watercolors as a child gave a decent green. I suspect that spectral reflectance curves of those pigments, allowing for the illuminant spectrum, metamerism (maybe), and human eye colorimetry would explain why that happened. I've read that centuries ago, these were the best-available pigment colors.

I spent quite a bit of time trying to select felt-tip pens and liquid watercolors (dropper bottles), attempting to purchase yellow, magenta, and cyan. Laying down yellow on paper and overlaying with magenta (for me) creates a lovely red; yellow followed by cyan creates a nice green. (I'm having lots of trouble convincing myself that cyan is not a "light" variety of blue!) The pens I chose were Marvy 1500 series, No. 22, lemon yellow; No. 9, pink; and No 74, aquamarine. liquids were Dr. Ph. Martin's No. 1, lemon yellow; No.7A, moss rose; and 51D, ice blue. These make nice refills for the pens; vehicles seem quite compatible. Hope I'm not veering too far off-topic! Nikevich 19:06, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

The definitions of all of these terms are fuzzy. In a computer monitor, what get called “red”, “green”, and “blue” are really more like “orangish red”, “yellowish green”, and “blue–violet”. The cyan used in a 4-color printing process could be called “greenish blue” – it’s much more blue than green. –jacobolus (t) 20:55, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

@Nikevich, Jacobolus, and Hulmem: See #Additive vs. subtractive models, or, How techie can we get?. (Nice explanation there, Hulmem, maybe some of it should be added into mine?) --Thnidu (talk) 08:25, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Request for expansion in section "History of RGB color model theory and usage"

Would it be possible to include a category about Art & Design in the section "History of RGB color model theory and usage"? There is the RGB project by Milan based art design duo Carnovsky that works on the interaction between additive colors (RGB color changing lights) and subtractive colors (printed CMYK or hand dyed fibers). The pieces are made up by the superimposition of images in subtractive colors. Under normal/white light, all the layers are visible at the same time giving life to unexpected and disorienting worlds where the colors mix up and the lines and shapes entwine becoming oneiric and not completely clear. When viewed through a Red, Green or Blue colored light the individual layers can be shown or hidden revealing the elements of the composition. With this technique they have done RGB wallpapers, RGB limited editions (prints, foulards, furniture) and installations around the world (Milan 2010/2011/2013 http://www.yatzer.com/RGB-Wallpapers-by-Carnovsky-for-Jannelli-e-Volpi , Berlin 2010 http://www.designboom.com/design/carnovsky-rgb-exhibition-at-johanssen-gallery/ , London 2011/2012 http://www.dezeen.com/2011/08/28/rgb-by-carnovsky-at-dreambags-jaguarshoes/ winning the wallpaper magazine design awards 2011, Tokyo 2011, Toronto 2011, Paris 2012/2013, Melbourne 2012, Portland (ME) 2012, Lille 2012, Amsterdam 2013 and Helsinki 2013 between others)

Reliable sources:

Arizona state University School of Art Core Program http://artcore.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/55762430/Additive%20and%20Subtractive%20Color%20Michaelsen.pdf Artist to reference Carnovsky, Olafur Eliasson, Bruce Munro, Dan Flavin

Simon Fraser University of Canada, paper on Human color perception by Neuroscience Dr. Kathleen A. Akins http://www.sfu.ca/~kathleea/Colour%20Project.html http://www.sfu.ca/~kathleea/docs/B&W&C.FINAL.pdf Carnovsky’s RGB work is used to explain Luminance vision and Chromatic processing (from page 11)

Smithsonian Magazine September 2013 Color Issue http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/the-art-that-is-hidden-in-plain-sight-750047/?no-ist This is the online preview, complete article in the printed magazine or http://www.scribd.com/doc/172066759/Smithsonian-September-2013-k page 14

Washington Post Article http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/post/carnovsky-paper-wallpaper-that-changes-with-the-light/2011/08/28/gIQAdgQ8lJ_blog.html

Forbes Article http://www.forbes.com/sites/haydnshaughnessy/2011/08/28/bringing-design-thinking-home-a-must-see-innovation/

Article in The Creators project from Vice magazine http://thecreatorsproject.vice.com/blog/carnovskys-rgb-landscapes-add-color-to-milan-design-week connects it to digichromatography (Prokudin-Gorsky photopgraphic work)

Color Association research RGB http://causnow.colorassociation.com/topic/profile/rgb/ Changing Landscapes

http://id-beta.fh-mainz.de/rgb-filtered-wallpaper/

Most read article on creative review http://www.creativereview.co.uk/cr-blog/2010/november/carnovsky-rgb-wallpaper-new-show

http://bldgblog.blogspot.it/2010/11/stationary-cinema.html

Articles in printed media http://www.carnovsky.com/press.htm

Lots of articles in online magazines and blogs just by clicking Carnovsky RGB on google or any search engine

Books

Graphics Alive 2 (2010) http://www.victionary.com/book/ga2.html ISBN 978-988-17327-0-5

Basics Interior Architecture 05: Texture + Materials (2011) http://my.safaribooksonline.com/book/design/9782940411535 ISBN 978-2-940411-53-5

Palette 02: Multicolour (2012) http://www.victionary.com/frameset%20multicolour.html ISBN 978-988-19439-0-3

Colour in the Making (2013) http://blackdogonline.com/all-books/colour-in-the-making.html ISBN13: 978 1 907317 95 8

New Graphic Design: The 100 Best Contemporary Graphic Designers (2013) http://www.amazon.com/New-Graphic-Design-Contemporary-Designers/dp/1847960448 ISBN-13: 978-1847960443

Installation Art Now (2013) http://www.sandupublishing.com/design360en/publicationshow_en.php?id=102 ISBN-13: 978-1584235149

Carnovsky is a Milan based art/design duo formed by Silvia Quintanilla and Francesco Rugi

Carnovsky's official RGB page http://www.carnovsky.com/RGB.htm

JackieB Capsaicin (talk) 16:23, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Additive vs. subtractive models, or, How techie can we get?

See #Questions and #Question and #Primary colours. I cannot believe that in the nearly seventeen-year history of this article NOBODY seems to have mentioned the distinction between additive and subtractive models of color except the barely-relevant (to most readers of an encyclopedia) mention in the lede. --Thnidu (talk) 07:48, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

references on talk page

@Ricardo Cancho Niemietz and Dicklyon

After adding the above section, I of course looked at the page to check my edit, and found a whole bunch of references under it— twelve, to be exact. (Diff) So I tracked them down and inserted {{talkref}} at the end of the two sections that had them: mostly #Removed section (unsigned, though at the time it would've been clear enough), plus one in #Ricardo's massive edits. Sheesh! --Thnidu (talk) 08:15, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

RGB in television

What this article lacks is actual use of RGB in what a TV (not computer!) monitor is able to digest properly upon input, rather than 4:4:4 YUV (note: this is different from Y'UV, color subsampling, and wire crosstalk, none of which have to do with YUV itself). Yes, the display's decoding everything to RGB internally, but that doesn't make it an "RGB TV" as such that it displays it right if you're feeding it raw RGB rather than 4:4:4 YUV. In reality, only very, very few professional broadcast TVs exist that can actually properly read and display an RGB signal fed externally into them as most TVs on earth are actually made to interpret YUV signals, as well as very, very few professional broadcast RGB cameras existed (prior to the advent of HDV) that generated or output RGB rather than 4:4:4 YUV. So basically, what I'd like to see in the article is a reflection of this fact there's hardly any TVs (not computer monitors!) that can properly interpret an RGB signal fed into them, and very few video cameras, (video) disk-based or tape-based media that can generate, store, and output an actual RGB signal, rather than a 4:4:4 YUV signal.

This issue comes up especially with gamers who are so proud of claiming that they're "gaming in RGB" on their consoles particularly via SCART when in fact their TVs are only interpreting a 4:4:4 YUV signal sent via the same connection and pins, TV decoding it into RGB, and they believe that "YUV", other than their fake "RGB", would be identical to color subsampling, wire crosstalk, Y/C, and component, mainly because their TV input sockets are labeled "component", "Y/C aka S-video", and, falsely, "RGB". --79.242.203.134 (talk) 02:12, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Image of spotlights on wall

Old

New

I have rendered a new 3D image of three spotlights shining on a wall. Would the new version be preferable to the old? ➧datumizer  ☎  00:34, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

I think the old one looks better. I actually thought it was a photo, while yours looks more obviously faked. Dicklyon (talk) 03:35, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

One, from the all, finest colors - amber. (Pitch, then rosin.)

Why ? 176.59.210.175 (talk) 18:54, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

RGB color model mixture guide

The RGB color model is an additive color model and, therefore, is used on a  White surface in a dark area.

Primary colors

 Red

 Green

 Blue

Secondary colors/Mixing primary colors

 Cyan

 Magenta

 Yellow

Mixtures:

 Green +  Blue =  Cyan

 Blue +  Red =  Magenta

 Red +  Green =  Yellow

Tertiary colors

Cyan shades

 Spring

 Azure

Mixtures:

 Green +  Cyan =  Spring

 Blue +  Cyan =  Azure

Magenta shades

 Violet

 Rose

Mixtures:

 Blue +  Magenta =  Violet

 Red +  Magenta =  Rose

Yellow shades

 Orange

 Chartreuse

Mixtures:

 Red +  Yellow =  Orange

 Green +  Yellow =  Chartreuse

Mixing secondary colors

Mixtures:

 Magenta +  Yellow =  Light Red

 Yellow +  Cyan =  Light Green

 Cyan +  Magenta =  Light Blue

All hues mixed

 White

Mixtures:

 Red +  Green +  Blue =  White

Color mixture between hues

 Red - 1 red

 Orange-Red - 7 parts red and 1 part green

 Orange - 3 parts red and 1 part green

 Orange-Yellow - 5 parts red and 3 parts green

 Yellow - 1 part red and 1 part green

 Chartreuse-Yellow - 3 parts red and 5 parts green

 Chartreuse - 1 part red and 3 parts green

 Chartreuse-Green - 1 part red and 7 parts green

 Green - 1 part green

 Spring-Green - 7 parts green and 1 part blue

 Spring - 3 parts green and 1 part blue

 Spring-Cyan - 5 parts green and 3 parts blue

 Cyan - 1 part green and 1 part blue

 Azure-Cyan - 3 parts green and 5 parts blue

 Azure - 1 part green and 3 parts blue

 Azure-Blue - 1 part red and 7 parts blue

 Blue - 1 part blue

 Violet-Blue - 7 parts blue and 1 part red

 Violet - 3 parts blue and 1 part red

 Violet-Magenta - 5 parts blue and 3 parts red

 Magenta - 1 part blue and 1 part red

 Rose-Magenta - 3 parts blue and 5 parts red

 Rose - 1 part blue and 3 parts red

 Rose-Red - 1 part blue and 7 parts red

Mixing a primary color with its complementary color

 Very Light Red

 Very Light Green

 Very Light Blue

Red and Cyan

 Red +  Cyan =  Very Light Red

Needs:

2×  Red

1×  Green and 1×  Blue to make 2×  Cyan

A total of 4 parts (2×  Red and 2×  Cyan)

Demonstration:

1×  Red + 1×  Green + 1×  Blue = 3×  White

1×  Red (remaining) + 1×  White (from the created mixture) = 2×  Light Red

2×  Light Red + 2×  White (remaining from the created mixture) = 4×  Very Light Red

Green and Magenta

 Green +  Magenta =  Very Light Green

Needs:

2×  Green

1×  Blue and 1×  Red to make 2×  Magenta

A total of 4 parts (2×  Green and 2×  Magenta)

Demonstration:

1×  Green + 1×  Blue + 1×  Red = 3×  White

1×  Green (remaining) + 1×  White (from the created mixture) = 2×  Light Green

2×  Very Light Green + 2×  White (remaining from the created mixture) = 4×  Very Light Green

Blue and Yellow

 Blue +  Yellow =  Very Light Blue

Needs:

2×  Blue

1×  Red and 1×  Green to make 2×  Yellow

A total of 4 parts (2×  Blue and 2×  Yellow)

Demonstration:

1×  Blue + 1×  Red + 1×  Green = 3×  White

1×  Blue (remaining) + 1×  White (from the created mixture) = 2×  Light Blue

2×  Light Blue + 2×  White (remaining from the created mixture) = 4×  Very Light Blue

colour not color

as stated in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:FAQ/Contributing#Should_I_use_American_English_or_British_English?, "The official policy is to use British spelling when writing about British topics, and American for topics relating to the United States." as can be found out with a quick google search, RGB was created in London, England. Therefore we use British English — Preceding unsigned comment added by Germany FranceUK Australia Russia Latvia (talk • contribs) 02:01, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

That is for topics closely associated with one country or the other (we would use British English in the article about the Queen's biography). This article does not meet that standard. For example, Isaac Newton is English, but the article on gravity uses American spelling. See the full guidelines on this at WP:ENGVAR, which supersedes that FAQ you linked. In particular, see MOS:RETAIN. There are no strong national ties here, so the spellings should be left as they are. - MrOllie (talk) 02:09, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Sorry for the late response, but can you please explain why we should use the spelling of one specific country and not the standard version used by every other country. Or is it just you aren't aware that not everyone is american and revert useage of non-american spelling because you can't agknologe other cultures. 11:19, 10 November 2021 (UTC)Germany FranceUK Australia Russia Latvia (talk)

Wikipedia had a large amount of edit warring and argument about this earlier in its history, and the compromise that was reached (defined in MOS:RETAIN) is that whatever spelling style was used when the article was first written would be kept, barring some very limited exceptions. The Americans are getting RGB color model, the Brits are getting Aluminium, etc. - MrOllie (talk) 12:56, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Well I don't entirely think that's fair i think the system is fair where some version of english get each thing but i think that brazil can get football australia can get colour new zealand can get labour america can get eraser etc. i think that is more fair that each country is represented as much as each other and not america gets 90% — Preceding unsigned comment added by Germany FranceUK Australia Russia Latvia (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia is not a nationalistic contest. The goal is making an encyclopedia, not proving whose spelling dialect is superior. Other projects have other criteria for deciding on spelling, but MOS:RETAIN was settled on here as the most effective for writing a global encyclopedia by a pseudonymous/anonymous crew of volunteers. If you have problems with it please start by reading MOS:RETAIN, MOS:ENGVAR, and MOS:SPELL. If you have further concerns please take them up at WT:MOS, not here. –jacobolus (t) 07:15, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

انور

البنات ال ونبقى. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.181.157.103 (talk) 10:12, 2 October 2022 (UTC)