Appearance — the series · Colour Science & Perception

Two identical grey patches on different surrounds. Both inner squares are #818181. The one on the dark field looks lighter. The values are checked to be equal before the figure is drawn, so the claim is a fact about the drawing rather than a promise.

These two patches are identical

It is the most repeated and least checkable sentence in visual perception, because the whole point is that it does not look true. Every instance here is computed, and checked before the figure is drawn.

part 1 · brain

Brightness is inferred from edges

The Cornsweet effect makes two identical regions look different by altering nothing except a narrow band at the boundary between them. Cover the boundary and the difference vanishes, which says the visual system is reconstructing surfaces rather than reading off intensities.

part 2 · brain

One reflectance, two illuminants, two colours. A reflectance peaking near 580 nm, and the colours it produces under D65 and A. The object has not changed. The light has, and colour is a property of the pair.

Constancy is the default

A sheet of paper looks white in daylight and white under a tungsten lamp, although the light reaching the eye differs enormously. The visual system is solving one equation with two unknowns, and it solves it by assumption.

part 2 · brain

One stimulus, three rooms, three appearances. The same XYZ in a dark, a dim and an average surround. The stimulus does not change and is drawn identically in all three panels; what changes is what CIECAM16 says it looks like. Predicted lightness runs from 65.6 to 57.5 — a spread of 8.1 — with chroma and colourfulness moving too. Colorimetry returns one answer here because it has nowhere to put the room.

A viewing condition is an argument

An appearance model takes a stimulus and a situation. The second argument is not a refinement of the first — it is the content of the claim, and a model that returns an appearance from a colour alone has assumed a room without saying which.

part 3 · brain

Four adaptation transforms, measured against CAT16 (D65 to D50). Twenty-seven colours moved from D65 to D50 by each transform, compared with the current recommendation. Bars are the worst disagreement in CIELAB, the number beside each is the mean. Plain XYZ scaling — still shipping, still called von Kries by people who have not read von Kries — misses by up to ΔE 13.7, which is many times any tolerance a supplier would be held to.

Four ways to move a white point

Every chromatic adaptation transform is the same three lines with a different matrix. The matrices disagree by more than any tolerance a supplier is held to, and the oldest one — still shipping, still called von Kries — is not a cone basis at all.

part 3 · brain

The four unique hues, and the axes they are said to define. A constant-lightness, constant-chroma ring in CIECAM16, with the four unique hue anchors marked and CIELAB's a and b axes drawn through the same circle. If a* really were the red-green axis the anchors would fall on the crosshairs. Unique red sits 25° off, and the four are not 90° apart in any case. Hatched sectors are hues this display cannot reach at this chroma.

Why there are four unique hues

Observers agree that four hues are elementary and that no colour is reddish green. Nothing in the three receptors predicts either fact, and the axes of every standard colour space miss the four by tens of degrees.

part 3 · brain

One adapting colour, two answers. The left patch is what was stared at. The middle is the afterimage the cone-gain arithmetic predicts at 15 per cent adaptation; the right is the inverted code values. They are 22.1 ΔE00 apart. The gains that produced the middle patch are 0.95, 1.06, 1.69 on the long, medium and short cone classes — the reciprocal of what each class had been receiving, taken 15 per cent of the way.

An afterimage is an adaptation

The demonstration everybody gives is an inverted image, which is a statement about a file format. Running the receptoral arithmetic instead puts the afterimage of a saturated red sixty degrees of hue away from the inverse — and outside what any display can show.

part 3 · brain

Colourfulness rises with light level; apparent contrast does not. Predicted colourfulness M for one stimulus across four decades of adapting luminance, and the exponent of the lightness curve over the same range. M rises by a factor of 2.24 — the Hunt effect, which the model does predict. The lightness exponent changes by -2.2%, and in the wrong direction — the Stevens effect, which it does not.

Brighter looks more colourful

Colourfulness rises with light level and the model predicts it. Apparent contrast is supposed to rise too, and the model does not — which turns out to be right, because the thing that actually carries contrast is the surround.

part 4 · brain

Brightness against chroma, at exactly constant luminance. Seven stimuli of identical luminance and rising chroma at hue 25. The model's brightness moves by 2.2 per cent across the whole sweep, and at some hues it moves the other way. The Helmholtz–Kohlrausch effect — measured repeatedly, by several methods — is that a saturated colour looks as bright as a neutral of 1.3 to 2 times its luminance, shown as the band. The gap is the model's, and nothing here closes it: the term that would is not in CIECAM16 and is not invented for the occasion.

Brightness is not luminance

Photometry is additive because the CIE defined it that way. Brightness is not, and a saturated colour looks as bright as a neutral of one and a half times its luminance — an effect this site's appearance model moves by two per cent, in a direction that depends on the hue.

part 4 · brain

There is no brown light

Brown is dark orange, dark is a ratio to a white, and a light in a dark room has no white to be dark against. The same stimulus, unchanged in XYZ, runs from lightness 152 to lightness 16 as the surround is raised — and only the bottom of that range has a name.

part 4 · brain

The eleven basic colour terms, at their quoted centroids. Each patch is the CIELAB centroid quoted for that term, converted to a stimulus and drawn — except blue, whose focal colour is outside the sRGB gamut and is therefore hatched rather than clipped, which is the rule for an unreachable colour everywhere else and applies here too. The centroids are rounded to 5 units in each coordinate, and moving them by that much either way leaves the same term outside.

A colour has a name

Every quantity here is a number, and the question a reader arrives with is what colour something is called. The eleven basic terms of English divide the space into territories that differ by a factor of five, the metric accounts for fifteen per cent of that, and one of the eleven focal colours cannot be shown on this page at all.

part 4 · brain

five greens, no neutral, under D65 — four guesses at the illuminant. The scene's surfaces as they reach the eye, and each estimator's angular error in degrees against the illuminant that actually lit them. Grey-world 43.1°, Max-RGB 27.7°, Shades-of-grey (p = 6) 31.4°, Grey-edge 34.4°. The best here is Max-RGB, which is best because this scene happens to satisfy its assumption — something reflects fully in every band — and not because it is the better algorithm. Any hatched patch is a surface this display cannot show under this light.

The algorithms that guess the light

What reaches a sensor is an illuminant multiplied by a reflectance, and no arithmetic separates a product into its factors. Every white-balance algorithm therefore works by assuming something about the world — and the interesting content of each is not its formula but the assumption, because a scene can violate it.

part 5 · brain

A patch is not a scene

A paint chip is the wrong size, on the wrong background, at the wrong luminance, in the wrong surround. Every one of those is a term in an appearance model, and the model says how much each of them moves the answer — which is the difference between a caution and a prediction.

part 5 · brain

A gain has a time constant

An afterimage and the clock on chromatic adaptation were built in different files from what the last phase said was one mechanism. Joining them removes a free parameter, reproduces both, and predicts a third thing — that two people in one room, at one moment, looking at one patch, do not agree about its colour.

part 5 · brain

The eye's own drift, and what it does to every spatial frequency. A pattern of f cycles per degree, drifting across the retina at 0.5 degrees a second, arrives at each receptor at f × 0.5 hertz. The curve is the temporal sensitivity at that rate, against the pattern's spatial frequency. Every frequency the eye can resolve stays above a quarter of the temporal peak, and the band of drift speeds for which that holds is 0.02–0.71 degrees a second — with the measured drift inside it. Faster and the finest detail is carried past 60 hertz, where there is no sensitivity at all.

The eye is never still

A perfectly stabilised retinal image disappears within seconds. What keeps the world there is a drift of about half a degree a second between the microsaccades — fast enough to keep the finest detail modulating and slow enough not to carry it past fusion, in a band whose upper edge is at 0.71 degrees a second.

part 5 · brain

How large a step changes the name, across the ab plane at L* 60. At each point, the smallest ΔE00 step in any direction after which the probability of two people using the same word has halved. It runs from 4.8 to 33.8 units across this one plane, in eight quantised levels: the palest cells are where a name is finest — a short step changes it — and the strongest are the middles of large territories, where a colour can move twenty units and keep its word. The ragged edge is the sRGB boundary at this lightness rather than a property of the vocabulary. The boundary softness is a stated parameter of the model, and the map barely moves when it is changed fourfold, because what sets this quantity is how far apart the centroids are.

A name is not a threshold

Two colours have to move about ten times a just-noticeable difference apart before people stop calling them the same thing, and how far varies threefold across one plane of the space. A tolerance and a word are answering different questions, and nothing in colorimetry converts between them.

part 5 · brain

A viewing condition is a moment

CIECAM16's degree of adaptation is a function of the surround and the adapting luminance and of nothing else, because the model has no time in it. Solving for when an observer who will adapt completely has got that far turns the standard's three surrounds into three clock readings — 107, 50 and 21 seconds — and the two readings are distinguishable by waiting.

part 6 · brain

How much of the gamut changes name, and what changed it. The eleven basic terms are quoted as centroids in CIELAB, and a colour is named by which one it is nearest. Two things nobody records decide the answer. Changing the distance function renames 20.5 per cent of the displayable gamut. Changing the room — the same colours, the same words, a different surround, through the appearance model — renames up to 26.8 per cent. The centroids were measured in one viewing condition and are applied here in every essay as though a name were a region of a space with no room in it.

A name moves with the room

Eleven basic colour terms are quoted as centroids in CIELAB and a colour is named by which one it is nearest. Two things nobody records decide the answer — which distance function is used, which renames a fifth of the displayable gamut, and which room the colour is in, which renames more than a quarter of it.

part 6 · brain

Every published adaptation transform, and one computed from daylight, on every change. What each basis leaves an adapted observer with, row by row. Darker is worse. The last column is not a published transform: it is the basis in which a change from D65 to D50 is exactly diagonal, computed in closed form from the two spectra with nothing fitted. It is far the best on the daylight rows and it is beaten on the discharge lamps, which is the trade the published transforms are sitting in — they were fitted to data containing both kinds of light and are therefore optimal for neither. Over the census as a whole the winner is Bradford at ΔE00 1.14.

A gain needs a basis

Adaptation scales three signals, and which three is a choice. The basis in which a change from D65 to D50 is exactly diagonal can be computed in closed form from the two spectra, it beats every published transform on daylight by a factor of five, and it loses to all of them on a fluorescent tube.

part 7 · brain

A name in the model's own words

The eleven basic colour terms move when the room does, and the obvious objection is that they were being measured in a space with no room in it. Quoting them in an appearance model's own coordinates instead does not shrink the renaming — it grows it by four per cent — and the space alone renames an eighth of the gamut with the room held still.

part 7 · brain

A brighter white still looks white

Colorimetry says a brightened sheet is nine units of b* from neutral, which sounds like a visible blue. An appearance model with the observer adapted to the room says it carries eleven units of chroma at a hue of 295 degrees — genuinely blue-violet — and that the number falls by nearly half between a bright room and a dark one. What it cannot say is why anybody calls the result white.

part 7 · brain

Where each published matrix puts the confusion points, whether or not it meant to. Every matrix from tristimulus values to cone responses commits itself to three confusion points, because the point is the direction the other two rows annihilate. The first row is the construction from the measured points and returns them exactly. The rest were chosen for other reasons and land elsewhere — Hunt–Pointer–Estévez, the cone space used throughout these essays, misses the deuteranope's point by 1.28 in chromaticity. The worst here is 4.09.

The cones an appearance model uses

CIECAM16 adapts in three axes whose rows are labelled L, M and S, and they were fitted to corresponding-colour experiments rather than measured on receptors. Run the dichromat construction backwards on them and they commit to a deuteranope confusion point 1.45 away in chromaticity from the measured one — which is a test the axes were never asked to pass.

part 8 · brain

Every basis against both objectives at once. A scatter with the mean adaptation residual across the illumination census on the horizontal axis and the mean axis ratio of MacAdam's ellipses in a lightness–chroma space on the vertical. Lower is better on both. The two winners sit at the two ends of an empty diagonal: the basis that adapts best leaves 7.70 on the vertical and the basis that discriminates best leaves 1.79 on the horizontal, each worse on the other objective than every published transform. The basis built from the dichromat confusion points is at (1.65, 2.60) — best at neither and within a factor of two of both floors, which no other entry in the picture manages.

No basis is good at both

The same nine numbers decide how well a von Kries gain reproduces a change of light and how nearly a lightness–chroma space makes the discrimination ellipses circles. Minimise either one and the other collapses. The basis built from the receptors is best at neither and is the only entry in the table respectable at both.

part 9 · brain

How far from circles every basis leaves the ellipses. Eight bases ranked on the mean ratio of the long to the short axis of MacAdam's twenty-five discrimination ellipses, measured in a lightness–chroma space built on that basis. The range runs from 1.61 for best for discrimination to 7.70 for best for adaptation. The ordering is not the ordering on the other objective and is nearly its reverse.

One matrix doing two jobs

CIECAM16 adapts in CAT16 and then applies its response compression in the same axes, so a single matrix decides both how well the model handles a change of light and how uniform the space it produces is. The two jobs have different best answers, and the matrix was chosen against only one of them.

part 9 · brain

A mid-grey's lightness across a continuum of rooms. The lightness a mid-grey is predicted to have, plotted along the continuous surround parameter running from an average room to a dark one. The three rooms the standard tabulates are marked on it: average at the left, dark at the right, and dim 61% of the way between them rather than halfway. The whole span is 9.71 units of lightness and the step from average to dim is 5.64 of it — 58% — so choosing one of the three rows is a decision worth most of the range.

The surround is three rows of a table

An appearance model takes the room as three constants, and the standard tabulates three rooms. Every appearance figure in this collection is drawn at one of them. The parameter they are three points of is continuous, and the middle row is not in the middle.

part 9 · brain

The cheapest direction to give ground in is the flattest one. Six bars, one per direction the adaptation objective can see, showing how much of the other objective a fixed budget of adaptation buys if it is spent along that direction. The rate is the slope of the second objective divided by the square root of the first's curvature, so it rewards a direction the second objective wants and punishes one the first is stiff in. The flattest direction wins at 10.68 against 3.29 for the next best and 0.54 for the stiffest — a factor of 20. Spending 1 per cent of the adaptation optimum there moves the anisotropy from 7.70 to 5.02.

The trade only runs one way

Standing at the basis that adapts best, one per cent of adaptation buys forty-four per cent of the way to the discrimination floor. Standing at the basis that discriminates best, the same one per cent buys under two. The scatter that shows two objectives pulling apart looks symmetric and is not, and the asymmetry is what a committee choosing between them would most want to know.

part 10 · brain

A population of receptor bases, in the plane the published ones live in. The two axes this collection scores an adaptation basis on — the residual across the illumination census on the horizontal, ellipse anisotropy on the vertical, lower better on both — with 200 extra points on it. Each is the basis a member of the population's own confusion points determine. The cloud is not a point: it runs from 1.22 to 2.24 ΔE00 horizontally, which is wider than the whole spread of the published transforms marked on it. The observer this site quotes sits inside the cloud and near one edge of it, and the sentence "the receptor basis costs seventy per cent" is a sentence about that one point rather than about the construction.

A trade between matrices, not people

Across the space of possible bases, adapting well and discriminating well pull in opposite directions — the two optima sit at the ends of an empty diagonal. Across a population of actual observers the same two costs move weakly together, at a correlation of +0.29. The trade-off is a property of the set of matrices somebody could choose, not of the eyes anybody has. One measurement inside the population does trade, and it is the macular pigment.

part 10 · brain

Every adaptation number here assumes a complete adaptation. Three curves and their mean: the colour difference an adapted observer is left with after a change of light, against the degree of adaptation from zero — no adaptation at all — to one. Every adaptation figure in this collection is computed at one, the right-hand end. The appearance model's own formula puts the degree at 0.941 for an average surround at a hundred candelas, marked, where the residual is 2.21 ΔE00 rather than 1.27 — larger by a factor of 1.74. The left-hand end is exactly the unadapted change, which is not an approximation but an identity, and is what says the curve interpolates between the two things it claims to.

A discount nobody measured

Every adaptation number in this collection assumes an observer who adapts completely. The appearance model's own formula says they do not — it puts the degree at 0.94 in an ordinary room — and the difference is not a rounding. It is a factor of 1.7 on the residual every one of those figures reports.

part 10 · brain

The same claim in nanometres of pigment, where no declared width can reach it. Five horizontal bars on a scale of nanometres, one per published chromatic-adaptation transform, each showing how far the medium-wave cone pigment's absorption peak would have to move for the receptors' own protan confusion point to land where that transform puts it. Zero is the measured peak. The bars run from -10.5 to 18.2 nanometres — in both directions, so two of the transforms want the pigment shorter and two want it longer. Drawn across them is the 25 nm separation between the L and M pigment peaks, which is the whole basis of red-green vision and is not a number this collection declared. The nearest transform asks for a displacement of 30 per cent of that separation, and the span across the table is 28.7 nanometres — larger than the separation itself. No population, cloud or standard deviation appears anywhere in the statement.

Five transforms and the space between them

Every appearance prediction here chooses one of five published adaptation transforms, and the five disagree about where a protanope's confusion lines meet by more than the distance between the two pigments the disagreement is about. That spread is itself a scale, and using it needs no population model at all.

part 11 · brain

Two slabs with one reflectance, and two colours through an aperture. Two constructed media whose bulk reflectance agrees at every wavelength to fifteen figures, and whose diffusion lengths differ by a factor of four. The upper curve is that shared reflectance — both slabs lie on it exactly. The two patches on the right are what a 4 millimetre radius returns from each, and they are 6.3 ΔE₀₀ apart. This is a metamerism with no observer in it: the two samples are the same colour to anybody under any light, and the instrument separates them because it is measuring a kernel through a hole rather than measuring a reflectance.

The appearance model has no slot for it

Two slabs with identical reflectance and different kernels come out of CIECAM16 with identical lightness, chroma and hue — to six decimal places, because the model's input is a stimulus and their stimuli are the same. Translucency is a recognised appearance attribute with no correlate in any appearance model, and the reason is structural rather than an oversight.

part 12 · brain

A model judged in another model's unit

An appearance shift is a change in what an observer would report, not a change in a stimulus, so measuring one with a matching difference means first asking what stimulus a settled observer would need to be shown to give the same report. That step is not bookkeeping — it is the whole distinction the field rests on, and it costs a factor of 1.7 across the menu.

part 13 · brain

Each departure over forty-two surfaces rather than one. The same six departures measured over a family of forty-two analytic reflectances — an absorption band of stated centre, width and depth — with the smallest, the median, the ninety-fifth percentile and the largest marked. Every one of them spans more than a factor of three, and the ranking between them is not stable across the family: what decides a departure's size is which sample it is asked about, because a departure is a pairing and the sample is one of the two factors. Quoting any single number for what an observer's age is worth is quoting a choice of example.

The census under another observer

This collection's largest computed result is an adaptation census — fourteen changes of light judged over a hundred and twenty-five constructed surfaces. Every number in it was computed through one observer, and the observer's own departures are between one and two and a half units on the same surfaces, which is the size of the effects the census reports.

part 14 · brain

What choosing a space to divide the white out in is worth. Three pairs of routes to the same colour, over forty-two surfaces: dividing the white out in tristimulus values, in a published cone space, and in the observer's own cones. The first two agree to 0.59 ΔE₀₀ at the median. Either of them differs from the observer's own cones by more than fifteen. That is why the two exact conditions in this round are exact only in the eye's own coordinates: the identity belongs to the receptors, and every published arithmetic works in a basis somebody else chose.

The appearance model takes XYZ

CIECAM16 predicts how a colour looks, and its input is three tristimulus values computed through a standard observer. Everything this round measures happens before the model is called, so an appearance prediction inherits six observer departures and a choice of cone space before it begins.

part 14 · brain

The two tabulation choices over forty-two surfaces, under a 6500 K thermal radiator. Each column is one choice, measured over a family of forty-two analytic reflectances rather than on a single example: an absorption band of stated centre, width and depth. The four marks are the smallest, the median, the ninety-fifth percentile and the largest cost in ΔE₀₀, logarithmically. Under a smooth light the range is worth 9.1 times the step at the median, so a collection wanting one repair should widen its range rather than refine its step — and under a fluorescent tube the ranking reverses outright.

The grid under the census

The adaptation census is computed on eighty-one wavelengths from 380 to 780 nanometres. Under the daylight and blackbody sources it uses, the range is worth about half a colour difference on ordinary surfaces and the step about a twentieth — so the census carries a tabulation term as well as an observer one, and they are not the same size.

part 15 · brain

Where a stated appearance has no stimulus under it. The chroma the inverse can still return a light for, at lightness 50, all the way round the hue circle. Below the curve a stated appearance corresponds to a stimulus; above it the formula still returns three numbers and one of them is negative. Over a lattice of 10488 appearances spanning the whole space a specification is written in, 10.8 per cent are of that kind, and only 44 per cent are colours a display could show.

An appearance is not always a stimulus

CIECAM16's inverse is a closed form that returns three numbers for every lightness, chroma and hue it is handed. Whether those three numbers are a light it does not ask, and over a lattice spanning the space a specification is written in, 10.8 per cent of them are not — one tristimulus value negative, or a relative luminance above the white's. Only 43.8 per cent are colours a display could show at all.

part 16 · brain

The model's hue scale, and the four numbers it is built from. Hue quadrature against hue angle. The four anchors are the unique hues, each with its own weight, and between them the scale is a hyperbolic interpolation rather than a straight line. The quadrant from blue back to red spans 143 degrees of hue angle for its hundred units of quadrature, against 70 for red to yellow.

The hue scale has four corners

CIECAM16 reports hue twice — as an angle in its own opponent plane, and as a quadrature interpolated through four unique hues with four fitted weights. The second is the one hue tolerances and hue-preserving mappings are written in, and it is piecewise — its slope jumps at each of the four anchors, by a factor of 1.74 at green and by 0.41 at blue, and it runs 4.1 times faster near yellow than near blue.

part 16 · brain

Where the model's curve does not matter

This round has been about what a nonlinearity does to an average, and CIECAM16 is the most nonlinear thing in the collection. Over the spread a population of observers produces, the average of its predictions is its prediction for the average to within 1.4 per cent — the nonlinearity is there and the excursion is too small to reach it. Over the range of adapting luminance one room covers in a day, the same gap is 59 per cent of the spread, and from indoors to outdoors 74.

part 17 · brain

The audit's six departures, read twice. Each departure priced in the matching unit it was published in and in the appearance unit an appearance prediction would be judged by. The model does not scale them by one factor: it amplifies the smallest by 1.58 and the largest by 1.03, so the range between them narrows from 3.34 to 2.17. The mean ranking is unchanged and 14 of the 42 surfaces reorder.

The audit, read as appearances

The previous round priced six observer departures in a matching unit and left them there. Read in the appearance unit an appearance prediction would actually be judged by, they are not the same six numbers scaled by a constant — the model amplifies the smallest by 1.58 and the largest by 1.03, so the range between the largest and smallest term narrows from 3.34 to 2.17. The published ranking survives in the mean and changes on fourteen of the forty-two surfaces it was averaged over.

part 17 · brain

Which appearances a surface can have, lightness by lightness. The same lattice of lightness, chroma and hue a specification is written in, 10488 points, inverted under daylight with the observer adapted to it. Each row is one lightness, split into three shares: appearances a reflecting surface can have, appearances that are a light but that no surface can return, and appearances with no light under them at all. Over the whole lattice the first is 66 per cent, the second 23 and the third 11. At J 90 a surface can have 38 per cent of the row.

A third of the appearance box is no surface

An appearance specification is written as a lightness, a chroma and a hue, and the model's inverse turns any such triple into three numbers. A tenth of the space turns into something that is not a light at all. A further quarter turns into a light no reflecting surface can return, because a surface cannot give back more than all the light at any wavelength. So a third of the space a paint, a print or a dye is specified in cannot be made from paint, print or dye, and at lightness 90 nearly two thirds cannot.

part 17 · brain

$What a stated lightness pins down, and where. A lightness quoted to 0.05 of a unit, inverted, and the luminance it fixes. Read as a fraction of the colour's own luminance the requirement is 0.90 per cent at J 10 and 0.097 at J 95, a factor of 9.3. Read in absolute luminance it is the other way round, by a factor of 6.5. Both readings are true and they answer different questions.$

A stated lightness is two requirements

A specification quotes an appearance to a stated precision — a lightness to a tenth of a unit, say — and the same precision everywhere. Inverted, a twentieth of a unit of lightness fixes the luminance to nine tenths of one per cent at the bottom of the scale and to a tenth of one per cent at the top, a factor of 9.3. Read in absolute luminance it is the other way round by a factor of 6.5, and both readings are true.

part 18 · brain

The average surface does not look average

Over a population of observers the appearance model is so nearly linear that the mean of its answers is its answer for the mean, to 1.4 per cent of the spread. Over the surfaces in a scene it is not. On 240 smooth reflectances the gap is 21 per cent of the spread, and the mean surface looks 4.2 units lighter than the surfaces look on average. The grey that matches the average light is a 47 per cent reflectance; the grey that matches the average look is a 43 per cent one.

part 18 · brain

How much of a display's gamut each observer names differently. Each of 60 observers names every colour of the displayable gamut that the panel can make — 823 of them — and the histogram is how much of that gamut each observer names differently from the standard observer. On an OLED panel the median observer renames 8.1 per cent and the furthest 13.1 per cent. Nobody agrees with the standard observer about all of it.

A name moves with the reader

Three earlier essays have moved a colour's name by changing the distance function, the room and the space. All three held the observer fixed. Handed the same light from the same display, sixty observers rename between 3.5 and 13.1 per cent of the gamut against the standard observer, a quarter of its colours have a dissenter in twenty, and the narrower the display's primaries the worse it gets.

part 19 · brain

How far CIECAM16 moves a monochromatic hue when the light is brightened thirtyfold. A monochromatic stimulus at a relative luminance of 2 and of 60, read through CIECAM16 in one room, and the difference between its two hue angles. The model was never fitted to this effect and has it anyway: the shift is positive at the short end, negative through the greens, positive again in the yellows and reds, and crosses zero at 459, 495, 502, 570 nanometres. The marks are the invariant wavelengths the literature reports — 474, 506, 571.

The model has a hue shift it was never given

A monochromatic light changes hue as it is brightened, except at three wavelengths that do not move — an effect measured since the nineteenth century and not among the things CIECAM16 was fitted to. The model has it anyway: brightening a stimulus thirtyfold moves its hue angle, and the places where the movement crosses zero land at 459, 495, 502 and 570 nanometres against the reported 474, 506 and 571. The sizes are another matter.

part 19 · brain

What the choice of adopted white is worth, in a room lit by two lights. A room lit half by daylight and half by an incandescent lamp. The light on the surfaces is fixed; what varies is the white the model is told the observer has adapted to, running from the lamp on the left to the window on the right. The median of twelve surfaces moves 32.6 CAM16-UCS units if the lamp is adopted and 24.5 if the window is, against the room's own mixture in the middle. The model offers no way to choose, and its degree of adaptation is 0.94 at every point of the dial.

A room with two lights has no white

An appearance model takes one adapting white. A desk beside a window has two, and the mixture falling on the paper is not the same thing as the white the person reading it has adapted to. Mixing the lights is arithmetic. Choosing the white is not, and the choice is worth sixty units of appearance — most of which is a cast, and not all of which is.

part 20 · brain

One grey scale, three backgrounds. CIECAM16's lightness against the luminance factor of a neutral sample, with only the background changed. A grey reflecting 19% reads 46.7 on a near-black background and 32.8 on a near-white one. The three curves are not three shapes: each is the same curve raised to a different power, because the background reaches lightness only through the exponent z, which runs 1.621 to 2.374 across the three.

A dark background moves every difference and no match

CIECAM16's background is one number, and it reaches lightness as one exponent. That is enough to change what a grey looks like and not enough to change which of two greys is lighter — so a match survives the background exactly, a corresponding colour is invariant to it, and a tolerance is not. The effect the background is usually invoked to explain is absent from the model entirely.

part 21 · brain

The cancellation is exact and cheap to lose

CIECAM16 has no crispening, and adding one was expected to be expensive: the background's exactness in a corresponding colour comes from its being a common exponent, and a function of the sample's own level is not one. It is expensive in kind and not in size. A term that raises a straddling pair's lightness difference by half moves a corresponding colour by five thousandths of a tristimulus unit — a thousandth of what stating the background differently at the two ends already costs.

part 22 · brain

The pairs that change places in chroma are a wedge with two straight edges. Every pair of samples, plotted by the log ratio of the two samples' background-free responses across and the log ratio of their chroma at a background of 2 up. A pair changes places between that background and one of 80 exactly when its chroma ratio and its response ratio point in opposite directions and the chroma ratio is the smaller — which is the wedge between the horizontal axis and a line of slope -0.2598, half the change in the lightness exponent. 754 of 14028 pairs are inside it, and the condition names every one of them and nothing else: 0 disagreements between the line and the model. The pale dots are one pair in eleven of those outside; the filled ones are every pair inside.

The reversals have a straight edge

Twenty-one of 276 pairs change places in chroma between a dark background and a light one, and the reason given was that chroma is a product of a term carrying the exponent and a term that does not. That is true and it is not a description of which pairs. Chroma at one background is a single common factor times a power of lightness at another, so a pair reverses exactly when its chroma ratio and its lightness ratio point opposite ways and the first is the smaller — a wedge with two straight edges, which names every reversal and nothing else.

part 22 · brain

One lightness scale, drawn as a contour across the rooms. Three surrounds up the page and the background's luminance factor across it, on a square-root scale so that the model's own exponent base is linear in the axis. Each curve joins the rooms whose lightness exponent is the same, and every room on one curve returns the same lightness for every sample. The marked curve is the one through a television in a lit living room against a mid grey: it also passes through a print on a desk against a background of 2.8 and a projection in a dark room against 47.0. A curve that leaves the plot has no member in that surround, because each surround multiplies a base that runs only from 1.48 to 2.48.

Two rooms with one lightness scale

CIECAM16's surround and its background both reach lightness, and they reach it through one product. So the rooms fall into classes: a television in a lit living room against a mid grey returns exactly the lightness a print on a desk against a background of 2.8 does, for every sample, to the last bit of a double. It returns 0.76 of its chroma and 0.81 of its brightness. Two of the model's four viewing-condition parameters are one parameter, and only colour tells them apart.

part 22 · brain

How far each model turns a display colour's hue as white is added. The twenty-four most saturated colours an sRGB display makes, one every 15° of HSV hue across, each mixed with the display's white at the same luminance down to a fifth of its purity. Up, how far that mixture's hue angle turns in CIECAM16, CIELAB and Oklab. From red to a fifth of its purity CIECAM16 turns −9.4° and Oklab −10.2°; CIELAB −18.1°. From the display's blue, Oklab turns +16.3°, CIECAM16 +3.6° and CIELAB −8.9°.

White turns a hue, and the models part at blue

Mix a saturated light with white and its hue changes as well as its saturation — the Abney effect, and the reason lines of constant perceived hue curve in a chromaticity diagram. Asked what adding white does to the twenty-four most saturated colours a display makes, CIECAM16, CIELAB and Oklab all turn the hue. About reds they agree: CIECAM16 turns within a degree of Oklab, whose hue was fitted to observers' constant-hue judgements. About the display's blue they do not: Oklab turns sixteen degrees, CIECAM16 four, and CIELAB nine the other way.

part 23 · brain

Which way a tint turns a pigment's hue, made in paint and made in light. For eight pigments tinted nineteen parts white to one of colour, the Oklab hue turn from the pure pigment: of the tint made in paint (upper bar) and of the additive mixture with white at the same luminance (lower bar). For seven of the eight the two point in opposite directions. The orange turns +13.5° in paint and −13.9° in light.

A tint in paint turns the other way

A pale colour can be made two ways: by stirring white pigment into a coloured one, or by adding white light to it — which is what a halftone on white paper and a display both do. At the same luminance the two tints are not the same colour. For seven of eight pigments they turn the hue in opposite directions, an orange by +13.5 degrees in paint and −13.9 in light, and the paint tint is the more colourful of the two every time. The cause is in the reflectance: diluting a pigment moves its absorption edge, and adding light does not.

part 23 · brain

A halftone tint, between the two ideals and nearer one of them. For each pigment, how far the hue turns when it is tinted to the same lightness three ways: mixed with white pigment, mixed with white light, and printed as a halftone at a Yule–Nielsen factor of two. Right is towards a longer wavelength. 7 of the eight pigments' two ideals turn the hue opposite ways. The halftone mark sits between them at every pigment and between 26 and 44 per cent of the way from the light ideal to the paint one — so it keeps the additive tint's direction and loses about a third of its size.

Printing does not change the sign

A tint mixed in paint and a tint mixed in light turn seven of eight pigments' hues opposite ways. A halftone sits between the two because light entering the paper between dots emerges under a dot, and the question was where. At the optical gain a coated sheet is fitted at, a halftone has travelled between 26 and 44 per cent of the way from the light ideal to the paint one — the same fraction for every ink — and only one pigment in eight changes direction.

part 24 · brain

White drains the blue last in every model

CIECAM16 says a dab of white costs a deep red wall four times the colour it costs a dark blue one, and the experiment proposed to test it asked whether observers lose colour in that hue order. Held at equal luminance and given equal doses of white, twenty-four display hues are ordered alike by CIECAM16, CIELAB and Oklab — an orange loses fastest and a blue slowest in all three. So the order cannot tell the models apart. What does is how much slower the blue is: CIECAM16 has it losing a sixteenth of what the orange loses, CIELAB and Oklab about a quarter. That ratio is the number an observer study has to measure.

part 24 · brain

An orange ink's tints on three papers: which way the hue turns. The hue of each tint of an orange ink, from the solid to a tenth coverage, against the solid on the same paper, in degrees of Oklab hue: on a coated sheet, an unbrightened uncoated sheet and a newsprint. Solid lines are read against daylight's white, as an instrument reads them; dashed lines against the paper's own white, as a reader adapted to the page. At a tenth coverage, read against daylight, the coated sheet's tint has turned -8.7 degrees and the newsprint's 21.8; read against each paper's white, -8.7 and -1.1.

Newsprint turns a tint with its colour, not its gain

A halftone tint turns its hue the way a mixture of light does, by less, because optical dot gain carries it part of the way towards a paint tint. The straight line through a coated sheet's gain predicted that an uncoated sheet's larger gain would carry the orange past the crossing at a factor of 3.2, so that the same ink would turn opposite ways on two papers. It does turn opposite ways — on newsprint the orange's pale tints swing 13 degrees one way where a coated sheet's swing 8 the other. But the gain is not what does it. The road towards paint bends and stops at 60 to 70 per cent of the way, the orange needs a factor of 5.4 to cross, and newsprint's reversal comes almost entirely from the paper being yellow. Read against the paper's own white, as a reader looking at the page is adapted, it goes away.

part 25 · brain

The blue resists through the model's denominator

CIECAM16 says a saturated blue is nearly impervious to added white: at equal luminance and an equal dose it loses a sixteenth of what an orange loses, where CIELAB and Oklab say a quarter. The model has two obvious places for that to come from — a hue factor fitted to make colourfulness equal across hues, and the sum of cone signals it divides its opponent signals by. Setting the hue factor to one changes nothing. Replacing the sum with the model's own achromatic signal makes the blue lose 0.233 of the orange's loss, beside CIELAB's 0.221 and Oklab's 0.223. The disagreement is one denominator.

part 25 · brain

How much of the turn a reader sees, adapted part of the way to newsprint. The hue turn of a fifth-coverage tint against its solid ink on newsprint, for five pigments, as the reader's adaptation moves from daylight's white to the paper's. Open circles mark where each tint stops turning the opposite way from the same tint on a coated sheet: orange at 0.97, red at 0.89, magenta at 0.98, cyan at 0.90, green at 0.93. Half-way, the orange still turns 7.3 degrees.

A reader sees the reversal until almost adapted

An orange halftone tint on newsprint turns its hue one way and the same tint on coated paper turns it the other, and the reversal is the newsprint's yellow. An instrument sees it in full; a reader fully adapted to the paper does not see it at all. A real reader is somewhere between, adapted to a mixture of the paper and whatever surrounds it. Half-adapted, the reader still sees more than half of the instrument's turn, and the reversal lasts until the reader is adapted nine-tenths or more of the way to the paper. On a paler uncoated sheet it is gone by just past half-way. A coated sheet does not care.

part 26 · brain

How far white turns each display colour's hue, in CIECAM16 and with its cone space changed. The twenty-four most saturated sRGB colours, each mixed with white of the same luminance down to a fifth of its purity, and the turn of its hue angle in Oklab, in CIECAM16, in CIECAM16 with its compression done in the Hunt–Pointer–Estévez space rather than CAT16's, and in CIECAM02's front end. At the display's blue Oklab turns 16.3 degrees and CIECAM16 3.6; compressed in Hunt–Pointer–Estévez it turns 15.6, and CIECAM02 16.1. Over all twenty-four the two lie 3.2 and 3.2 degrees from Oklab, root mean square, against CIECAM16's 5.3.

The blue's hue turn was lost with a matrix

Add white to a saturated blue and its hue turns — sixteen degrees by the constant-hue data Oklab was fitted to, four by CIECAM16. The obvious suspect was the model's compressive response, acting on a very large blue signal. It is not: removing the compression's saturation moves no hue by half a degree, and a cube root instead of its exponent moves the blue by one. What decides it is the cone space the compression happens in. Computed in Hunt–Pointer–Estévez, the space CIECAM02 compressed in, the same model turns the blue 15.6 degrees; CIECAM02's own front end turns it 16.1. CIECAM16 merged CIECAM02's two spaces into one sharpened for adaptation, and that one gives a display's blue almost as much long-wave signal as white has.

part 26 · brain

A pale orange tint's turn on a brightened sheet, against the reader's adaptation. The hue turn of a fifth-coverage orange tint against its solid on brightened office paper in daylight, as the reader's adaptation moves from daylight's white to the sheet's, beside a sheet of the same colour that does not fluoresce, a white sheet with the same dot gain, a heavily brightened sheet, newsprint and a coated sheet. Unadapted the brightened sheet turns it -41.5 degrees, the coated sheet -8.0 and newsprint 12.7. Fully adapted, the non-glowing sheet of the same colour comes down to -3.2, beside the white sheet's -3.4; the brightened sheet stops at -10.0.

Adapting to a brightened sheet leaves the glow

A pale tint on newsprint turns its hue one way and on coated paper the other, and a reader fully adapted to the paper sees newsprint's reversal vanish, because it was only the paper's colour. On a sheet with an optical brightener the tint turns the coated way and five times as far — 41.5 degrees for a fifth-coverage orange. A reader adapted to the sheet removes most of that, as expected, but not all: ten degrees stay. The sheet's colour adapts away like newsprint's. The brightener's glow does not, because the ink puts it out under the solid and leaves it under the tint, and an added light is not something adapting to a white can divide out.

part 27 · brain

How far below nought the two-matrix model's smallest signal goes, along the locus. For every spectral light from 380 to 700 nm, the smallest of its three Hunt–Pointer–Estévez signals after CIECAM16's adaptation, divided by the light's luminance, adapted to the display white and to illuminant A, drawn down to −2. Adapted to the display white the smallest signal dips below nought only past 560 nm, and by at most 0.0037; adapted to A it is below nought from 380 to 474 nm and reaches −6.7 of its luminance at the violet end.

Two matrices fail under a warm white

Compressing in Hunt–Pointer–Estévez after adapting in CIECAM16's own space restores the blue's Abney turn, and the reason CIECAM16 stopped using two spaces was that converting between them sends some colours to negative signals. Where it does depends on the white. Adapted to a daylight display's white, only spectral lights past 560 nm fail, in their short-wave signal, by thousandths of their luminance, and nothing on sRGB's boundary fails at all. Adapted to a tungsten white, every spectral light from 380 to 474 nm fails in its long-wave signal, some by several times their luminance, and so do points on every display's boundary; there the display blue's restored turn becomes a swing of fifty degrees.

part 28 · brain

Where each display's boundary and the spectrum fail, as the adapting white warms. For radiators from 6500 K down to 2700 K, the temperatures at which the two-matrix front end sends some point of each display's boundary, or some spectral light, negative: shaded where it fails. sRGB and Display P3 first fail at 2871 K, just above illuminant A; BT.2020 at 3626 K. P3 and BT.2020 also fail at their red corners under whites cooler than 5700 K, and no spectral light fails between 5700 and 4700 K. The dashed line is the 3500 K the prediction named.

Two matrices hold to almost tungsten, and the blue turns long before

An appearance model that adapts in CIECAM16's space and compresses in Hunt–Pointer–Estévez gets the blue's hue turn right under daylight and sends the display's blue to a negative signal under illuminant A. The prediction was that the failure reaches sRGB's blue near 3500 K, a warm-white LED, and that the blue's turn holds its daylight value down to about 4000 K. Walked down the radiator and daylight loci, sRGB's boundary holds to 2872 K — fifteen kelvin short of illuminant A — while BT.2020's fails at 3626. There is a neutral window, 4700 to 5700 K, where no colour at all goes negative. But the blue's turn does not wait for the failure: it is five degrees above its daylight value by 4500 K and nearly three times it before anything breaks, because it follows the blue's long-wave signal down towards nought.

part 29 · brain

What adaptation cannot remove from an orange tint, with and without a thin dot edge. For a reader fully adapted to brightened office paper, the orange tint's hue turn against its solid beyond what a non-fluorescent sheet of the same colour leaves, at coverages from five to sixty per cent, with a uniform ink film and with rims of three, six and twelve micrometres. The residue is largest at the palest tint for every rim, and every wider rim raises it: at a fifth coverage from 6.8° to 7.9°.

A thin dot edge lets the glow back in

A pale tint printed on brightened paper keeps part of its hue turn however fully a reader adapts to the sheet — ten degrees for a fifth-coverage orange where a non-fluorescent sheet of the same colour leaves three — because the ink's vehicle puts out the brightener's glow under the solid and the tint's bare paper keeps it. That census gave every dot a uniform film. A real dot thins at its edge, a thin film lets ultraviolet through, and at the pale end of a ramp most of a dot is edge. The prediction was that the edge would restore the glow under the tint's dots, shrink the residue by a third at a fifth coverage and move the worst of it to the mid-tones. The edge does restore the glow — nine times as much under a small dot with a twelve-micrometre rim. And the residue grows: 6.8 degrees to 7.9 at a fifth coverage, 7.2 to 9.0 at a twentieth. The residue is the tint glowing where the solid does not, and more glow under the tint's dots is more of the difference. The palest tint keeps the most, with or without an edge.

part 30 · brain

What adaptation cannot remove from an orange ramp, screen by screen. For an orange ramp on brightened office paper, the hue turn against the solid that a reader fully adapted to the sheet still sees beyond what the sheet's colour accounts for, on conventional screens of 100, 150, 200 and 300 lines and on stochastic screens of 10, 20 and 35 µm dots, every dot with a six-micrometre rim. The 150-line screen falls from 8.1° to 5.7° along the ramp; the 20 µm stochastic screen stays near 9.0°; the 10 µm one rises, from 10.4° to 11.4°. The axis starts at 4.5°.

Stochastic dots hold the glow at every tint

On brightened paper a halftone tint keeps a hue turn that a reader fully adapted to the sheet cannot remove, because the paper's glow survives under the ink where the solid puts it out, and a dot's thin edge lets more of it back. A dot's size at a given coverage is set by the screen. Across conventional rulings from 100 to 300 lines the residue rises at every coverage for every pigment, a finer screen making every dot more edge. A stochastic screen of twenty-micrometre dots holds it flat — the orange within a quarter of a degree from five per cent to sixty, starting where a 300-line screen starts — as predicted. What the prediction did not say is where the switch costs: not the pale tints, by under a degree, but the mid-tones, by three or four, because a conventional screen's mid-tone dots are large and mostly full film. On ten-micrometre dots, all edge, the ramp turns over and the mid-tone keeps more than the pale tint. At any one coverage the residue is set by the dot's diameter alone, whichever screen printed it.

part 31 · brain

What merging the spots gives back along an orange ramp. For an orange ramp on brightened office paper, the turn a reader fully adapted to the sheet still sees beyond the sheet's colour, on a stochastic screen of twenty-micrometre square spots kept separate and merged where they touch, beside the round-dot stochastic screen and a 150-line screen. Merged and separate agree until the spots begin to touch near thirty per cent; at sixty per cent the merged screen keeps 6.9° against the separate spots' 8.6°. The axis starts at 4.5°.

Merged spots give the mid-tones half the glow back

On brightened paper a halftone tint keeps a hue turn a reader adapted to the sheet cannot remove, and a stochastic screen's small dots, being mostly thin edge, keep it high along the whole ramp — three times the 150-line screen's cost in the mid-tones. That census kept every dot separate. A real stochastic screen's spots touch and merge, and a shared edge between two spots is no edge of the ink. The prediction was that a merged screen would follow the separate-dot curve to about thirty per cent and then fall towards the conventional screens, giving back half the mid-tone cost by sixty. It does, almost exactly. Square spots twenty micrometres on a side, switched on in a dispersed order, stay apart up to a fifth coverage and start touching near thirty per cent; by sixty, nine in ten touch, the rim has fallen from 84 per cent of the ink to 50, and the merged screen keeps the orange's residue at 6.9 degrees against the separate spots' 8.6 and the 150-line screen's 5.7 — giving back 58 per cent of the cost. Every pigment gets back the same share, 55 to 58 per cent, because the share is set by the geometry of the ink, not by its colour.

part 32 · brain

Clustered spots along an orange ramp. For an orange ramp on brightened office paper, the turn a reader fully adapted to the sheet still sees beyond its colour, on stochastic screens of twenty-micrometre spots switched on singly and in clusters of two, three and four, beside 150- and 300-line screens. At five per cent clusters of four leave 8.14° against the single spots' 8.94° and the 150-line screen's 8.12°; at sixty per cent, 6.00° against 6.90° and 5.67°. The axis starts at 5°.

Squares of four print a pale tint like a 150-line screen

On brightened office paper a stochastic screen's twenty-micrometre spots are mostly rim while they stay apart, and the rim lets the paper's glow through, so the palest tints carry the screen's whole cost in hue a fully adapted reader still sees. Merging gives back half of it in the mid-tones, where the spots touch, and nothing in the pale tints, where they do not. A second-order screen switches its spots on in clusters from the first tint, and the prediction was that clusters of four would take the orange's pale-tint residue down by about a degree, to within half a degree of a 300-line screen, while the sixty-per-cent tints stayed where the merged first-order screen leaves them. Squares of four do better in the pale tints than predicted and differ where predicted to agree. At five per cent they take the orange from 8.94 degrees to 8.14 — 0.02 above a 150-line screen and 0.81 below a 300-line one — and every pigment lands within a tenth of a degree of the 150-line screen. At sixty per cent they keep the orange 0.9 degrees below the first-order screen, where pairs and Ls come back to within a quarter. From ten per cent on, the 150-line screen pulls ahead.

part 33 · brain

Growing clumps follow the 150-line screen along the ramp. For an orange ramp on brightened office paper, the turn a reader fully adapted to the sheet still sees beyond its colour, on single stochastic spots merged where they touch, on squares of four, on thirteen clumps grown from those squares as the tint darkens, and on a 150-line screen. The growing clumps start as the squares, 8.14°, and follow the 150-line screen from there: 7.22° against 7.09° at thirty per cent, 5.65° against 5.67° at sixty. The axis starts at 5°.

A growing clump prints like the screen with as many dots

On brightened office paper a halftone's ink lets the paper's glow through at its thin rim, and the share of the ink that is rim decides how much hue a fully adapted reader still sees turned. A stochastic screen of squares of four prints the palest tint like a 150-line screen and falls behind it from ten per cent, because its clusters multiply where a conventional dot grows. A hybrid grows each cluster as the tint darkens, the number of clumps held, and the prediction was that it keeps the squares' pale tint, reaches within a tenth of a degree of the 150-line screen by thirty per cent, and stays slightly above it through the mid-tones. With thirteen clumps on the census's tile it follows the 150-line screen within two tenths of a degree at every coverage, within a twentieth at twenty per cent, and dips just below it at sixty. The reason is a count. Thirteen clumps on a tile 640 micrometres across are as many dots per area as a 143-line screen; twenty-six follow the 200-line screen and fifty-two the 300-line. A clump's irregular place on the tile does not matter to the glow; how many clumps share the ink does.

part 34 · brain

Most of the residue is not at the rim. At each coverage of the orange ramp, the residue a single clump on the tile leaves — the least rim the tile can hold — beside thirteen clumps'. The single clump keeps 92 per cent of the thirteen clumps' residue at five per cent and 94 at sixty: the rest of the turn is the tint's bare paper glowing beside ink that does not.

The rim was never most of the glow

On brightened paper a halftone tint keeps a hue turn a reader fully adapted to the sheet cannot remove, and five essays have chased the part of it that lives at the ink's thin rim — merging spots, clustering them, growing them — down to a rule: the clump count sets the residue, and only coarser patterns lower it. The proposal was a screen coarse in the pale tints and finer as the tint darkens, and the prediction that six clumps on the tile beat the 150-line screen by more than half a degree below twenty per cent. They beat it by 0.11 to 0.17. Scheduled six, thirteen and twenty-six clumps save a third of a degree at ten per cent and give back a fifth at sixty. The reason is the floor. One clump on the tile — the coarsest pattern it can hold, nearly all its rim gone — still leaves 7.48 degrees of an orange's 8.14 at five per cent and 5.30 of 5.65 at sixty. What screening can move is the rim's tenth; the other nine tenths is bare paper glowing beside ink that does not.

part 35 · brain

A light ink can cancel the glow at one strength

A pale tint on brightened paper keeps a hue turn a reader fully adapted to the sheet cannot remove, and nine tenths of it survives every screen, because it is the tint's bare paper glowing beside ink that puts the glow out. A light ink — the same pigment diluted, printed over more of the paper — was the proposed lever, and the prediction that a quarter-strength ink lowers a five-per-cent orange's residue by a third. It does not lower it; it reverses it, from −7.2 degrees to +10.2. Somewhere between, the residue passes through nought, and for every one of eight pigments there is a strength that cancels it: 0.41 for the red, 0.54 for the orange, 0.80 for the blue and the cyan at a five-per-cent tint. The cancelling strength moves by under a tenth from five per cent to forty, so one ink per pigment keeps every pale tint within a degree and a quarter to twenty per cent, where full-strength ink leaves up to nine. The lever is real; it has a setting, and the light inks printers carry are diluted past it.

part 36 · brain

One ink overshoots on the light sheet and falls short on the premium. Every pigment printed at the strength that cancels its ten-per-cent residue on the office sheet, its coverage matched to each sheet's own five-per-cent target: the residue a reader adapted to each sheet still sees, signed. On the office sheet it is near nought; on the light sheet seven of eight pigments' residues have turned past nought the other way, and on the premium sheet all eight keep the full-strength ink's sign, by under 1.8 degrees.

One light ink serves three papers within two degrees

On brightened office paper a pale tint keeps a hue turn even for a reader fully adapted to the sheet, and each pigment has one light-ink strength — the pigment diluted and printed over more of the paper — at which that residue vanishes. The prediction for a printer with several stocks was that the cancelling strength falls as the brightener loading rises, and that the office sheet's ink leaves a premium sheet's pale tints within two degrees and a lightly brightened sheet's within one. The strength does fall, at every step and for every pigment — by a fifth for the orange and the yellow, by under one per cent for the green. The office ink keeps the premium sheet within 1.8 degrees, as predicted, but the light sheet only within 1.8 too: it overshoots there, turning seven of eight pigments' residues past nought the other way, and falls short on the premium sheet for all eight. Either way it removes more than four fifths of what the full-strength ink leaves.

part 37 · brain

The fresh sheet's ink holds until half the brightener is gone. On the premium sheet as its brightener bleaches, the worst residue any of eight pigments leaves from five to twenty per cent: printed at full strength, with the fresh premium sheet's light inks, and with the office sheet's. The fresh premium inks stay under two degrees to half bleached (25%: 1.75°, 50%: 1.80°, 75%: 2.35°); the office inks, 1.80° on the fresh sheet, stay under one and a half once any of the brightener has bleached.

An ink for a fading sheet is set for its middle age

A light ink cancels a pale tint's residual hue turn on brightened paper at a strength that falls along a straight line in the sheet's glow, and a brightener bleaches with use, so a sheet's glow falls over its life. The prediction was that as the premium sheet's brightener bleaches, every pigment's cancelling strength rises back along that line, and that the fresh sheet's ink stays within two degrees until half the brightener is gone. Both hold. Bleached by a quarter, a half and three quarters, the premium sheet asks for strengths within 0.015 of the census line at its glow, always on or just below it; the fresh premium ink errs by 1.75, 1.80 and 2.35 degrees at worst. But the office sheet's ink, set for a glow the premium sheet passes through on its way down, keeps the bleaching sheet within 1.4 degrees at every stage after the first. An ink set for the sheet's middle age outlasts one set for its first day.

part 38 · brain

The census line is a chord across a curve. For four pigments, the cancelling strength less the census line's at each sheet's glow — the light, office and premium sheets and the three bleached and yellowed premium sheets — in order of glow. The light and premium sheets sit above their own line and the office sheet under it, the orange by −0.0161, deeper than any bleached sheet: the line through the three census sheets is a chord across a sagging curve, and the bleached sheets sag beneath it as the office sheet does.

A yellowing base leaves the ink where the glow put it

A light ink cancels a pale tint's residual hue turn on brightened paper at one strength for each pigment, and as a premium sheet's brightener bleaches that strength rises back along the straight line in glow through three census sheets — a shade under it, by up to 0.013. Real photo-ageing yellows the base paper as well, and the prediction was that a base yellowed in step lifts the strengths onto the line within 0.01 and that the office sheet's ink still holds every residue within one and a half degrees. The ink holds, at 1.38°, 1.13° and 1.38°. The strengths do not lift: no pigment's moves by more than 0.0023, and its gap under the line by more than 0.0006. The yellowing raises the sheet's b* by 0.31 at most while the bleaching raises it by five. And the gap was never the base's: the office sheet itself sits 0.016 under the line, deeper than any bleached sheet. The line is a chord across a sagging curve.

part 39 · brain

Every stock's ink lies on the premium stock's curve. Five pigments' cancelling strengths at a ten-per-cent target against the sheet's glow: the premium stock at eleven brightener loadings from a tenth of its own to all of it, the light, office and premium census sheets, and the premium stock bleached until its glow equals the office's and the light's. Every census sheet lies on the premium stock's curve, and the bleached premium sheets on the census sheets — the orange at 0.5581 and 0.6461 against 0.5578 and 0.6456.

The glow alone sets the light ink

A light ink cancels a pale tint's residual hue turn on brightened paper at one strength for each pigment, and that strength falls with the share of the sheet's luminance that is glow — along a curve, not the straight line through three census stocks, which runs as much as 0.016 above it. The prediction was that the strength is one curve in the glow whatever the stock: that a premium sheet bleached until its glow equals the office sheet's, or the light sheet's, needs that sheet's ink within 0.003 for every pigment. It needs it within 0.0007, though the two papers differ in base, in whiteness and in how much of the brightener their ink shields. Traced across eleven loadings of the premium stock, the curve runs through every census sheet within 0.003, sags under every chord, and falls five to nine times as steeply on a dim sheet as on a bright one for the orange, red and violet.

part 40 · brain

The glow's colour sets the blue ink and spares the orange

A light ink printed on brightened paper turns in hue, because the paper's glow passes through the ink's open area differently from the ink's own film, and a cancelling strength undoes the turn. Every sheet so far glowed with one brightener, and its ink was set by the glow's amount alone. The prediction was that a brightener emitting fifteen nanometres longer, nearer the blue and violet inks' hues, moves their strengths by more than a hundredth and the orange's and red's by under a fifth of that. It does: the blue's strength rises from 0.81 to 0.98, because a glow at the blue's own hue barely turns a blue tint, the violet's falls by 0.06, and the orange moves by a thousandth though the glow's share of the sheet's luminance nearly doubles. A brightener emitting fifteen nanometres shorter moves every ink, the orange by 0.04, and no curve in the glow's luminance reads any of them.

part 41 · brain

The glow's pull on the white sets every ink

A light ink on brightened paper is diluted to cancel the hue turn the paper's glow gives its tints, and on sheets that all glow with one brightener its strength is a single curve in the glow's share of luminance. Move the brightener's emission and that curve fails by up to 0.21. The prediction was that two numbers — the share and the glow's chromaticity — read every ink within a hundredth. Across thirty sheets, eight of them a grid of emission peaks from 420 to 455 nm, they miss by up to 0.07, and the share alone misses the blue by a quarter. The two numbers that work are the glow's pull: how far, in Oklab, it moves the paper's own reflection to the white an adapted reader sees. Read with their squares, they set every ink within 0.014 — and the warm inks need least strength just short of where that pull is strongest.

part 42 · brain