Every essay — page 29
What light is What the eye does Matching and measuring Difference and uniformity What the brain does What a scene does What a camera does Where the model breaks What it takes to deliver it
SeriesObserversNamed objectsRefutationsSearch
Where the model breaks
Seventeen observers in 1931, an error in the blue that was never fully repaired, colour vision deficiency, and the display this page is being read on.
A fourth emitter spends the gap it fills
A three-emitter LED lets a pigment that takes forty nanometres to switch reach most of its ideal solid, because the lamp is dark where the pigment is slow. Adding a fourth emitter to render better takes that darkness back — but only if it is put in the middle of a gap. At 490 nanometres it costs 172 of the solid's 312 directions against the three-emitter lamp's 62, and renders two points worse. At 540 it costs three directions and renders two and a half points better.
The gap has to be dark, not the line narrow
A lamp whose light sits in three narrow emitters lets a blunt pigment reach most of its ideal solid, and the reason was given as the spacing of the lines. Broadening those emitters without moving them says otherwise. At 1.3 times their nominal width the lamp still looks like a line spectrum, its closest spacing has not changed at all, and half the rescue is gone — because the darkest point of the narrow gap has risen from one per cent of the lamp's peak to seven.
A sharp edge is bought with depth
A slope limit on reflectance was introduced as the weakest honest statement of a pigment's bluntness, with a band-shape limit named as the stronger version to be written later. Written, it is not stronger. Three absorption bands none narrower than forty nanometres reach further than a forty-nanometre slope limit in 94 of 154 directions of the object-colour solid, because a band's width and the width of the reflectance edge it draws are different quantities — and what converts one into the other is how much colorant is in the film.
A lopsided band does not break the trade
A fourth emitter added to a three-emitter LED renders colours better and costs a slow pigment its reach, and the position that renders best and the position that costs least were thirty-five nanometres apart. The obvious suspect was the shape: every emitter searched was a symmetric bump, and a band with its skirt on one side might fill a gap without splitting it. Freed to be lopsided, it saves between one and seven of the solid's three hundred directions. No band renders like the amber emitter and costs like the green one, the lopsided bands that help lean the other way from the proposal, and what the fourth band renders was never the lamp's white.
The pigment decides the trade, not the band
A four-emitter lamp that renders well costs a slow pigment part of its reach, and reshaping the fourth band barely changes that. Changing the pigment changes it a great deal. Modelled as three absorption bands none narrower than forty nanometres, rather than as a forty-nanometre slope limit, a slow pigment loses a third fewer of the solid's directions under the best-rendering lamp, and the price of going from the three-emitter lamp to a fidelity of 88 halves. The lopsided band that helped a slope-limited pigment does nothing at all for this one. And at 590 nanometres a fourth band renders at 86 almost for free.
Written in energy, the bands spare the green
A slow pigment modelled as absorption bands pays half what a slope limit pays for a four-emitter lamp's rendering, and a fourth band at 590 nanometres costs it almost nothing. That result assumed every band is at least forty nanometres wide, and a real absorption band has a width in energy, not in nanometres. Written that way it is narrower in the blue and wider in the red, and the fear was that the red would take back the amber. It does not. The band limit written in energy loses fewer directions under every lamp, the fourth band at 590 still costs six, and the price of rendering at 88 falls from ten directions to six — because the directions it wins back are green, not amber.
The lamp outweighs the pigment model
Three models of what a real colorant can do — a slope limit, absorption bands forty nanometres wide, and bands whose width is fixed in energy — were ranked under lamps of narrow emitters, slope dearest and energy cheapest. Under daylight, tungsten and a white LED the ranking holds, every time. What changes is everything else: each model loses two and a half to three and a half times as many directions of the object-colour solid under a broadband lamp as under three narrow emitters, and the difference between the models is smaller than the difference between the lamps. Under tungsten, whose power rises smoothly to the red, the three models are nearly one.
A tube spares a pigment through its phosphors
Three models of a real pigment lose two and a half to three and a half times as many directions of the object-colour solid under daylight as under three narrow emitters. A fluorescent tube is both kinds of lamp — narrow mercury lines on phosphor bands — and the prediction was that its bands would light the gaps between its lines and put it two thirds of the way to daylight. A triphosphor tube sits with the emitters instead: 26 directions lost to forty-nanometre bands, against the emitters' 23 and daylight's 73. The credit is its phosphors'. Its coating alone, lines taken out, loses fewer still; its mercury lines cost directions whose edges sit in the gaps between the phosphors, and doubled they cost more. A halophosphate tube, the same lines on two broad bands, costs what daylight costs at the same rendering index.
A mercury lamp's few losses are deep
Every census of what a slow pigment can reach has counted the directions of the object-colour solid it misses by more than one per cent, and by that count a clear mercury lamp — four visible lines and nothing else — spares a pigment as well as three narrow emitters do. Read for depth, it is the one lamp of nine whose losses do not fall away: half of what a slope-limited pigment loses under it, it loses by more than five per cent, and its mean shortfall is half as large again as under the emitters or a triphosphor tube. Every one of those losses is the same kind of colour: one that reflects the mercury's green line at 546 nm and absorbs its yellow line at 578, or the reverse, 32 nm apart. The dark-share rule that ordered the counts orders the depths less well.
A pair of lines asks for a cliff, not a gap
Under a clear mercury lamp, every direction of colour a slow pigment loses by more than five per cent asks it to reflect one of the lamp's green and yellow lines, 32 nanometres apart, and absorb the other. The prediction was that a pigment of two absorption bands with a narrow gap between them — a peak no single transition can make — would recover those deep losses. No direction asks for a peak. The lamp's four lines leave only one transition within a hundred nanometres of another, so what a splitting direction needs is a cliff: one flank falling from reflecting to absorbing in the twenty-five nanometres between the green line's last strong sample and the yellow's first. One band at the census's depth takes 27.8 to fall that far; two stacked at one centre take 24.9. Searched from 680 starts, the census's own band model does exactly that — stacks its bands on one side of the pair — and reaches further than the census found in seventeen directions of twenty-five. What stays deep spends a band on the blue.
A harder search pulls the band pigments away from the slope limit
Every count in the pigment-limit censuses — how many directions of the object-colour solid a slow pigment cannot reach within one per cent of the ideal — compares a slope limit solved exactly with two band models searched from a few structured starts. Under the mercury lamp a search from 680 starts had already found the band model reaching further in seventeen of twenty-five directions. Searched from 594 starts under all nine lamps, both band models reach further in between three fifths and nineteen twentieths of the directions they lost, and their counts fall by a sixth: 395 to 335 for bands in nanometres, 370 to 311 for bands in energy, while the slope limit stays at 463. The rankings the censuses reported hold where they were stated. What moves is everything measured against the slope limit: its lead over the band models grows from a sixth to more than a third, the coating's odd ranking — bands losing more than the slope limit — disappears, the triphosphor tube passes the three emitters for bands in nanometres, and under the mercury lamp the band models' deep losses halve.
The slope limit was exact all along
Every count of what a slow pigment cannot reach compares a slope limit, solved exactly on 161 levels of reflectance, with two band models found by searching. Searched harder, the band models lost a sixth of their losses, and the open question was whether the slope limit was being flattered by its own grid — whether 321 or 641 levels would lower its counts too. The prediction was a fall of under a twentieth. There is no fall at all: on every finer grid, under all nine lamps, every direction reaches exactly what it reached, and 463 directions are lost as before. The reason is the shape of the answer. The best reflectance that may change by at most an eighth per five-nanometre band is a staircase whose every step is a whole eighth, because a weighted sum is maximised at a corner of the allowed set and every corner is built from full steps off nought or one. A grid of only the nine eighths gives every answer to the last digit. The census's count is therefore not an estimate on a grid but an exact statement about every pigment that slow, and the slope limit's 1.38-fold lead over the searched band model is a floor that further search can only raise.