I rarely visit here but I've had this question haunting me for years now.
What's the physical/biological basis for color theory? Why do we see certain color palettes as good combinations and other as bad ones? Why is the classic triad red-yellow-blue is different from RGB, which I doubt many people see as appealing?
Moreover, why does human eye see good color combinations as pleasant? What's the evolutionary benefit from it, if any?
Finally, is there any mathematical law which defines good color combinations? I understand that in music, chords and octaves are actually natural phenomena—they're defined by very strict mathematical relations. Is there anything similar for color mixing theory?
it depends on both physical factors (wavelengths) and human biology (i am not a biologist) i believe, unlike music where frequencies are universal
try starting here and clicking around
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIE_1931_color_space
>>8257368
>Why is the classic triad red-yellow-blue is different from RGB, which I doubt many people see as appealing?
Red-yellow-blue is almost like magenta-yellow-cyan, which are the basic colors of subtractive mixing (pigments), while red-green-blue are the basic colors of additive mixing (light, or the three types of light receptors). No idea why that makes this triple more appealing, though.
>>8257368
the words "good" "bad" "appealing" "pleasant" complicate your questions. you may want to think harder about the definitions of those words. Is it possible to ask your questions without using those words or their equivalents? many scientist will respond by saying it is not the responsibility of science to explain why something is "good" or "pleasant."
personally, and since this board is anonymous, I dont care if this sounds offensive, I find it irritating when people think evolution has to be the answer to everything. "why does light have frequency?" "why does 2+2=4" This isnt a atheist/theist/evolution/creation argument, I'm a bit of a fedora tipper myself, but dont you think there are other explanations? you people sound like the ancient aliens guy that explains "aliens" are the answer to everything.
>>8257487
if evolution is not the answer then it must be aliens or god, right?
>>8257368
I'm not going to go into it very much because I'm just figuring it out myself but it seems to me that outgoing from triads to the circle of fifths, which are the basis of music theory, those concepts might share all the similarities to color theory.
Meaning that harmonic compositions work with the same system, visually, auditively and imho every other wave dynamics as well..
>>8257368
this thread is on the cusp of being new age pseudo science.
>>8257368
are you going to post that shit over and over now?
>>8258076
>circle of fifths
>basis of music theory
if the twelve-tone scale is fundamental to music then why does the pythagorean comma exist?
checkmate equal temperament fags
>>8258076
Spectral resolution of our vision doesn't even hold a handle to the spectral resolution of our hearing. Pink and purple aren't pure spectral colors. Go be a mememeister somewhere else.
>>8259325
thats why I said I'm just figuring it out myself
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/19_equal_temperament
where four minor thirds will make up an octave.
yet the rules for harmony should stay the same, it's just a matter of categorization isn't it?
>>8259381
resolution does not need to match when talking about intervals...
also I said outgoing from triads, I was thinking about the two complementary color triads CMY and RGB, where the resulting system of latter is actively perceivable
colors are a system of categorization, you'd have to be naive to think that certain wavelenghts have a distinct color by nature.
or do you think color blindness is a hoax as well?
>>8259648
>yet the rules for harmony should stay the same, it's just a matter of categorization isn't it?
colors are a system of categorization, you'd have to be naive to think that certain wavelenghts have a distinct color by nature.
Depends on what you mean by "categorization". Musical harmony is based on mathematical relationships between frequencies (or wavelengths) of sound. Color harmony isn't, or at least you didn't show it by using a diagram which mixes single-wavelength colors (like musical notes) and ones that arise from mixes of wavelengths (like chords).
>>8260022
fug, second line should be quoted obviously
>>8257368
MACHINE.
>>8260022
you are correct that music is defined by intervals rather than single waves, i want you to know tho that soundwaves can be categorized in sine, square, saw and triangle waves. its hardly mentioned in music theory but is very important in sound design
also id like you to think about a color system using only a single Color with only one saturation lvl but different brightnesss, for example Red and all its
brightnesss. no green, no blue and no different saturations. (this is because we automatically percieve the absence of a dominating color eg. a grey spot on a red ground, as the compleme tary color of the dominating one.)
it would be purely achromatic. a color harmony couldnt be established but contrast harmony (aka composition) could be tho, it would however be very limited in its complexity