Timothy Puccetti

Art 110 Color Perception

Andrew Conklin
Feb 26, 2015

Ratio of Color Mixing In Optical Synthesis of Light

Extra Credit Assignment
[Type text]

The question has been posed Why does it appear to require a so much higher ratio of cool hue (such as
blue) to warm hue to obtain neutral gray when optically mixing complementary colors? For example
when doing the Maxwell rotating color disk experiment we required a vastly larger area of the BVB color
compared to the yellow color for the pair to appear optically mixed into a gray color while spinning. We
had thought that it should require a closer to 50/50 mixture of each complementary color to neutralize
each other.
To begin looking into the answer I consulted the book Optical Color and Simultaneity by Ellen Marx.
She appears to have had an interest in this topic. She begins with the assertion that there are three
types of color synthesis: Additive, Subtractive, and Optical synthesis. This distinction helps relieve
confusion arising from past scholars who have attempted to describe all color systems under one or two
organizations. Of course additive synthesis is the combining of direct energy radiations which
successively becomes brighter with each addition. Subtractive synthesis typically utilizes the properties
of pigments to successively remove colors from our sight through absorption. And Optical synthesis is
the process where our brains mix incoming light signals (reflected from pigments or radiated directly)
that are separated by time or space into a new combined visual impression. This new visual impression
is a biological impression and may not reflect what a color meter reads. It is Optical color synthesis
which Marx sees as the singular mixing explanation we should focus upon to find the answers.
Additive synthesis had been the organizing principle with which to study optical color mixing such as
occurs in pointillism and rotating color disk experiments in the past. But, Marx thinks this principle is
inadequate. Marx states that the problem of optical synthesis must be isolated and studied
independently from additive color synthesis because they utilize vastly different mechanisms: additive
synthesis is literally the addition of electromagnetic energy waves combined outside a mental influence,
while optical synthesis is a mental mixing process that occurs inside the mind involving the mental
reformulation of multiple separate color receptions. Once inside the mind the separate color
impressions can be combined in any manner similar to a Photoshop program. So, the two processes
should not be directly compared.
To create a new category of color mixing which helps explain optical illusions we need to examine how
optical illusion phenomenon are different from additive color mixing alone. One way that a rotating
colored disk is different from strictly additive mixing is that a rotating disk involves receiving successive
repeated images for a period of time. Also, pointillism and rotating disks both involve seeing pigments as
compared to additive color mixing of light sources.
To explain the optical mixing anomaly we likely have to study the human body and mind. The
mechanism of how the eyes are sensitive to different colors and more importantly how the mind visually
interprets these color signals could be the starting point for understanding optical illusions of all types.

Timothy Puccetti
Art 110 Color Perception
Andrew Conklin
Feb 26, 2015

Ratio of Color Mixing In Optical Synthesis of Light

Extra Credit Assignment
[Type text]

This allows us to find the answers to optical mixing characteristics by searching for possible physiological
causes such as: how long it takes repeated color stimulations of the retina to be discarded and renewed,
how retinal color negative afterimages work, how sensitive our eyes cones are to each of the various
RGB colors, which colors are we visually most sensitive to after mental interpretation, and what
methods does the mind use to extrapolate color information.
To look into the issue of eye mechanisms Marx has debated (p61) whether it is the ratio of red to green
to blue cones in our eyes of 40/20/1 respectively that is at issue in optical mixing proportions. She
thought that the extra sensitivity of our eyes to warm reds and yellows could be part of the explanation
as to why it requires such a large area of blue or green to neutralize with magenta or blue-violet in a
rotating color disk. Even in a three-color rotating disk composed of cyan/ magenta/ yellow it will take a
53% area of cyan to neutralize with only 20% magenta and 27% yellow.
But, in consulting Wikipedia and other updated sources I discovered that the retinal receptor theories
have been updated. Science has been moving forward since she wrote her book; as a result the theories
about how our eye cones are named and react to differing hues is more complicated. Cones are now
named the S, M, and L types for short medium and long wavelength. And the manner in which we see
color may be determined by the relative balance of opposing colors rather than the strict reading of a
single hue wavelength as had been previously thought. The largest proportion of cones may be most
sensitive to the greenish-yellow spectrum. This seems to contradict Marxs theory. Cones share
sensitivity to a set of hues and the difference between their readings may be what is used by the brain
to interpret colors. If this proves true than previous theories of why we see things as we do will be at
least partially obsolete.
Marx has also observed that the brightest color in an optically complementary neutralized pair on the
color disks is always in the minority proportion. This could suggest that our eye cones are adapting to
the repetitive brighter value images as the disk rotates. But, the opposite seems to be happening our
eyes seem to be desensitized by the cool colors. So, value desensitization must not be the cause just
an affect.
Searching for an explanation I found the book Color Fundamentals by Maitland Graves who describes
a phenomenon named afterimages which are aftersensations produced by successive stimuli to our
color hue receptors. Chromatic negative afterimages are temporarily induced when the eye is
fatigued and the color receptors that are over stimulated become insensitive to those excessive hues. If
that is the case in a rotating color wheel then it could be that the repeated blues could be causing the
set of blue sensitive receptors to shut down which would cause a yellow cast in the wheel. An
afterimage color is always a complementary color to the fatigued color receptors. The theories on the

Timothy Puccetti
Art 110 Color Perception
Andrew Conklin
Feb 26, 2015

Ratio of Color Mixing In Optical Synthesis of Light

Extra Credit Assignment

[Type text]
observations of how we see things can survive mostly intact even as the reasons why we see them are
updated.
In conclusion I see that while the theories of how our eye rods and cones are named and how they react
to different hues is complex and changing with new technological discoveries it is still useful to use the
conceptual model that individual color receptive cones in our eyes can become fatigued. And, we
humans may have an inherent sensitivity to certain hues. A rotating complementary color wheel will
repeatedly stimulate our eyes with opposing colors. If our retinas are indeed highly sensitive to a color
such as blue or green then it would explain the appearance of an excessive complement in a rotating
color disk of equal parts of two complementary hues.
However, newer teaching can lead to new theories. Updated resources emphasize that the color we
perceive as yellow is most commonly transmitted to us as a combination of red and green light
wavelengths that have been interpreted as yellow rather than as an incoming single yellow wavelength
as commonly taught in simplistic explanations based upon older models. What this implies is that the
red component in a blue-violet color disk could be influencing our perception of yellow. If we combine
this thought with the new model of cones that emphasizes color as simply the brains interpretation of
differences in the readings of S, M, and L cones then the observations of the complementary color disk
may be explained by an entirely new model. The colors we see are best described as interpretations
based upon variations in the readings of the three types of receptors than direct readings of
wavelengths. This sounds more like how a digital camera works its just a bunch of numbers collected
together and pieced into an interpreted image using a very complicated algorithm.
In all my reading today I discovered that our modern understanding of how humans perceive color is still
shifting and being updated. Our modern understanding is not agreed upon by all scholars. Books written
in 1983 which attempt to correct previous color descriptive books are already becoming obsolete in
their descriptions of the biology of sight. Only their observations of mixing percentages survive intact.
But, their explanations of why things happen seem to be set on shifting sands. I dont think we agree
upon an answer yet. But, we will learn a lot by observing and trying to explain things.