POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.advanced-users : Why assumed_gamma 1.0 should be used (and the drawbacks) : Re: Why assumed_gamma 1.0 should be used (and the drawbacks) Server Time
29 Jun 2024 03:06:49 EDT (-0400)
  Re: Why assumed_gamma 1.0 should be used (and the drawbacks)  
From: Alain
Date: 19 Sep 2011 16:11:11
Message: <4e77a1df@news.povray.org>

> On 9/18/2011 9:24 AM, Warp wrote:
>> It becomes even more complicated when you consider that combinations of
>> different wavelengths may look the same to the human eye, yet may have
>> different physical properties (eg. when reflecting from surfaces).
>>
> Can get really weird in some cases. Last night I was fiddling with a new
> saber I finally got wired, with mostly only light from my computer
> display in the room. When I passed this "blue" light over a cutter I had
> the thing looked almost florescence orange (its actually high visibility
> green), an old, actually orange, gatoraid container, which I use for
> storing parts, looked dark red. Now, the later I can grasp... But the
> former seems to deny common sense about how color reflection works.
> Note, the area the two items where in got barely enough light from the
> computer to "see" them, weakly, so, how the hell do you get bright
> orange out of yellow-green, when using a blue light? o.O


...the thing looked almost florescence orange... probably because it is 
actualy fluorescent orange when lighted with blue to violet and UV light.
Blue light is actualy energitic enough to cause fluorescence in several 
pigments.

That high visibility green probably absorbs a fair amount of blue. The 
blue probably is not energitic enough to cause green fluorescence, but 
enough to cause the orange one.


Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.