We have a free webinar tomorrow (Thurs 23 Feb at 2pm UK time) about colour and AI. Anat Lechner will present about this topic. Here is the abstract below:
We’re at a new age where artificial intelligence is becoming the most influential technology, a technology that once arrived, is poised to morph all aspects of our lives, irreversibly.
Artificial Intelligence rapidly moves into the mainstream, demonstrating greater production efficiencies, marketing precision and at times, creative design output than what humans generate. As cross-industry disruption escalates, designing products, brands and environments is being challenged. Traditionally, design decisions relied heavily on personal preference, past experience, anecdotal or company data, or costly market research, but advancements in big-data and AI call for the integration of new capabilities into the design process to better inform, inspire and validate design decisions
This seminar will review the emergent cross-industry AI-driven disruption, providing examples of creative cognitive technology applications in product, brand, urban and experience designs. We will then center on data-driven color design decision processes, discussing new colour data insights and tools to enhance and solidify companies’ creative capabilities, data assets, design practices, and talent bench-strength.
Anat Lechner, PhD, is a Professor of Business at the Stern School of Business, New York University where she focuses on disruptive innovation and strategic change. She is also the co-founder of Huedata Inc., the Color Intelligence Company that provides colour data and analytics to designers, strategists and researchers to aid product, brand and environment design decisions. A former Researcher at McKinsey & Co. Dr. Lechner has advised global Fortune 100 firms in the Financial Services, Pharmaceuticals, Chemicals, Energy, Food, Technology, design and Retail industries. She has numerous appearances in NYT, WSJ, Forbes, BBC, Time and other premier global media outlets. Anat holds an MBA and a PhD in Organization Management from Rutgers University, NJ.
I really like this nice awareness video about colour blindness in sport – in football (or soccer, as you may know it) in particular. It is very well done and makes the point that it is not just about the spectators but about the players themselves – and even the referees!
I posted a few other comments recently about some recent activities in this area which you can see here and here.
However, despite the brilliance of the video about inclusivity in sport I want to make one point about the cone responses. The video states that the cones in the visual system are sensitive to red, green and blue light. There is a level of approximation where it is not unreasonable to say this – and to be honest, for this video it is probably fine. However, when we simplify things it can lead to misunderstandings which are then repeated when they really shouldn’t be.
The graph above shows the spectral sensitivity of the long-, medium- and short-wavelength sensitive cones. Note that neither is sensitive to just a few wavelengths; each has quite broad wavelength sensitivity. However, the L cone, in particular, is not even maximally sensitive to red. I took the table (below) from wikipedia but I think it is a reasonably summary of the colours that we normally associate with various wavelengths in the spectrum.
From this you can see that the L cone (the one that is sometimes referred to as the red cone) is maximally sensitive to light that we typically see as being yellow or even yellow-green.
One common assumption is that the cones are only sensitive to light that we see as being red, green and blue and it leads to people saying things such as – the visual system only sees in red, green and blue and then generates all the other colours form these. And this is a gross misrepresentation of course.
I gave a talk at the Leeds Philosophical and Literacy Society a week or so ago and it was recorded. In this talk I referred to this and related issues. If you would like to see it then you can do so here.
This weekend Manchester Utd played Middlesborough in the FA cup. We won’t talk about the result. However, so interesting that Utd changed the colour of their socks from black to white to make it easier for people with colour discrimination issues to enjoy the game. Above you can see a shot from the game with a simulation on the right of how it might look to a someone missing the L-class cone (red-green colour blind).
This comes just after I posted about the rugby game and the problem trying to discriminate between the red and green shorts of Wales and Ireland respectively. Given the news in that post that World Rugby is bringing in some legislation it does seem that colour blindness (as poor colour discrimination is often referred to) is finally being taken seriously.
Interesting article today in the BBC about the colour of rugby shirts and the experience of viewers who may be colour blind.
According to one fan, the Irish and Welsh national kits are particularly difficult to distinguish for some people. As you can see from the simulation below, it is particularly challenging for protanopia (where the long-wavelength cone class is missing and the viewer is a dichromat).
Apparently, World Rugby has proposed new laws to help people affected by Colour Vision Deficiency (CVD), meaning teams may have to change kit from 2027 in the event of a colour clash.
However, it would not be difficult for one team to make their kit a little darker and one a little lighter to allow more people to enjoy the game and follow the action more easily.
In the image below, on the left you can see the original colours and on the right you can see the simulated colours for a protanope.
The top rows shows the colours that will be used in the match this weekend. The bottom rows show slightly shifted reds and greens that are more inclusive on the left, and their simulated appearance on the right.
Earlier today I posted something on quora about who many colours there are. It’s quite a long post. You can read it here. However, if you want the short cut the answer is 3-5 million. 🙂
However, I also linked to the post on LinkedIn and someone asked me a question about the relationship between colour-matching functions and cone sensitivities so I thought I would make a new post today about that topic. I have used my message on LinkedIn as the basis for this post but modified it a little to make it suitable for general consumption.
Here are two diagrams:
This shows the actual spectral sensitivities of the MLS cones in the human eyeThe 1931 CIE XYZ colour-matching functions
It’s another common misconception that people get these two diagrams confused. The cone spectral sensitivities are the actual sensitivities of the cones in the eye. Although people often say that the eye responds mainly to red, green and blue light, it’s not so simple. In 1931 the CIE measured the colour matching functions. One of the reasons that they did this was that in 1931 we didn’t actually know what the cone spectral sensitivities were; these were only known for sure in 1964. So in 1931 the CIE measured the amounts of three primary lights that an observer would mix together (additively) in order to match a single wavelength of light. And they did this for each wavelength. The second of the diagrams above shows the amounts of each of the primaries needed to match each wavelength on the spectrum. Originally, the CIE used three lights (these were RGB) or primaries. However, they mathematically transformed their RGB colour matching functions to create the XYZ colour matching functions. These are sometimes also known as the CIE colour matching functions or the CIE standard observer.
These are the original CIE RGB colour-matching functions
The point of these (XYZ) colour matching functions are that they allow us to calculate the CIE tristimulus values XYZ of an object if we know the spectral reflectance of the object and the light it is viewed in. The XYZ values are the amounts of the three XYZ primaries that an observer would, on average, use to match that object viewed in that light source. If two samples have the same XYZ values then they are a visual match; because an observer would, on average, use the same amounts of the XYZ primaries to match each. And this was the whole point of the CIE system; to determine when two colour stimuli are a visual match. Had we known the cone spectral sensitivities in 1931 it’s possible that history would have taken a different course and that instead of having CIE XYZ we would simply calculate the cone responses LMS. And we could say that if two samples have the same cone responses they are a visual match. But I guess we’ll never know.
Now, if two samples have the same XYZ values then they will have the same cone responses. This is a bit technical but this is true because the cone spectral sensitivities are a linear transform of the CIE XYZ colour matching functions. They are also a linear transform of the CIE RGB colour-matching functions.
The colour-matching functions depend upon which primaries are used whereas the cone spectral sensitivities are more fundamental. Doesn’t this make the colour-matching functions arbitrary? Not really. Although the actual shapes of the colour-matching functions depend upon the actual primaries used, the matching condition does not. If two samples generate the same cone responses then the observer would match them with the same amounts of the XYZ primaries and the same amounts of the RGB primaries.
I have been posting here on Colourchat for a long time. I think it is nearly 10 years but it could be longer. Time flies. However, I just wanted to let you know that I also post on a website called quora. Quora is a site where people post questions and other people can answer them. It used to be completely free although quora have recently introduced a model where people can put their answers behind a pay wall. However, my answers are free and I just wanted to let you know that there is a lot of stuff there that might interest you. I have only been posting there about 3 years but my answers have received over 2 million views (whereas Colourchat has had less then 500,000 views over a much longer time period).
However, quora is a little bit tongue-in-cheek. Not all of the answers are serious though most of mine are. I still reserve my best content for Colourchat where I can give a lot more detail. And I also have a patreon page where I do charge a small fee (because that’s how patreon works) where I am curating my most detailed content and this includes quite a few videos that are unique to the patreon site.
Anyway, if you want to have a look at quora you could take a look at this post I made today which answered the question of why a mixture of red and blue light doesn’t generate a hue that is between the two ends of the spectrum. I hope you like my answer. What I focus on – and what I am striving towards though perhaps not always achieving – is to try to answer these questions in a way that is maximally informative but at the same time doesn’t require an understanding of maths, for example, so that it is maximally inclusive.
The European Chemicals Agency (ECA) have announced bans on certain coloured tattoo inks from January 2022.
Tattoo inks and permanent make-up often contain hazardous substances that cause skin allergies and may even be carcinogenic. Ink pigments can also migrate from the skin to the lymph nodes and the liver. Even the removal of tattoos can be dangerous because the laser that is used may break down the pigments into smaller substances which may themselves be dangerous.
Safer alternatives are not available for two particular pigments: Pigment Blue 15:3 and Pigment Green 7. These pigments are both copper complexes and are also known as Phthalocyanine Blue and Phthalocyanine Green. The ban will be enforced by Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) who may give ink manufacturers a year to find safe alternatives for these two coloured inks according to some reports. Some people doubt whether the restrictions are really necessary and here is a video from the perspective of a tattoo artist. And here is an open letter of concern from the European Society of Tattoo and Pigment Research.
There is a need for more research and a greater understanding of the effect of these tattoo inks on the body and especially the long-term effects.
Colours have meanings. By that I mean that when we see colour we are reminded of certain things. There is a symbolism which is related to the field of semiotics. This symbolism is, in my opinion, as important – if not more so – than the aesthetics of colour. At least, I think this is often true in design. And it is for this reason that the internet is awash with infographics and blogs that tell us what the meanings are so that we can use them appropriately. This is the sort of thing that we often see:
There is an element of truth in this sort of infographic of course but it’s far too simplistic. Does it explain, for example, why HSBC use red as their brand colour?
Or the use of red in Baxter’s soup packaging?
Of the use of red in packaging of fruit yoghurt?
I don’t think that infographic explains any of these uses of red. Nevertheless, there is design thinking behind the use of colour in each of these cases. However, it is the sort of thinking that requires a deep knowledge of various cultural ideas including traditions and trends. In fact, it is for this reason that I find the use of colour in design (particularly in packaging) fascinating. It’s Boxing Day and my teenage son is still in bed after an all nighter (don’t ask!). So I thought I would tell you what my thinking is about these three examples of the use of red. I apologise in advance that this will be quite a long blog post. So are you sitting comfortably?
Let’s take the use of red by HSBC first. I often see infographics that state that red is a bad choice for a bank.
And if we look at the logos of banks in the UK this certainly seems to hold some truth.
However, what if we look further afield? To Asia, for example.
It turns out that red is an incredibly popular colour for banks in some parts of the world. And this brings us to the first point which is that the meanings that colours have can often depend upon the cultural background of the viewer (or receiver). Whereas I would argue that in the West the colour most associated with good fortune is green, it is undeniable that it is red in many Asian countries, especially in East Asia. It is therefore not surprising that banks often use red for their branding because which bank doesn’t want consumers to be reminded of good luck and fortune when they are thinking of putting some money in the bank or considering some other financial transaction? So, to understand the HSBC colour, we have to understand that although HSBC is a common sight on UK high streets today, the origins of the bank are in Kong Kong and Shanghai. The clue is the name – the Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation. Interestingly, the shape of the HSBC logo is derived from the cross of St Andrew which turns out to be true of many Hong Kong company flags and logos. You can read more about the history of the HSBC logo here. Understanding that colour meanings in one geographical location might not translate to another location is important to avoid making simple, yet potentially serious, mistakes.
Second, we can turn to the use of red in tins of Baxter’s soup. If we look at the Baxter’s tin of soup the thing that stands out to me first of all is the green of the soup. A number of years ago, when I was developing my thinking around colour meaning whilst working with Seahwa Won who obtained her PhD in this topic and is now an academic in Korea, we developed the term original substance colour to explain the observation that for food packaging in particular, we often see the colour of the actual product being represented in the packaging. So we see orange packaging for orange juice, brown packaging for coffee, etc. This idea is never mentioned in the infographics you can find online. Often, the packaging is transparent so that the colour that you see is the actual colour of the product itself.
In this case the transparent packaging allows the colour of the fruit juice to be seen
In this case, the packaging uses orange; the original substance colour of the product
So with Baxter’s soup we have the original substance colour of the pea soup that dominates and starts the design. So what about the red? Well, there are a few things going on here which is often the case. Often, the colours used in a design work so well together in a number of different ways that you can only admire the ingenuity of the design team. There is the fact that the Baxter’s logo is red. I don’t know how long this has been the case – if anyone knows anything about the history of the Baxter logo please let me know in the comments. But we also have a colour harmony. Opposite hues – red and green, in this case – often work well together aesthetically. But if we have a really bright vivid red and a really bright vivid green next to each other then this can be unsettling. That might not be the intended effect here. It’s very often much nicer to have one of the hues quite bold and then have the other much more muted. This only goes to demonstrate another truism which is that colour harmony is about more than just the relationships between hues.
We have a red-green relationship in both cases but the relationship on the right will be seen as more aesthetically pleasing than the one on the right because of the difference in chroma
Finally, there is the fact that Baxter’s is a Scottish company. I don’t know if the tartan shown on the Baxter’s soup label has any connection with the company but that combination of red and green looks very much like the tartan of the Baxter Clan.
So there you have it, you have original substance colour, colour harmony, and the Scottish symbolism of the tartan to remind you that this is a Scottish heritage company all working together. And the pale green background and the dark red text even gives you excellent contrast for legibility. Very beautiful work in my opinion. The point is that something like this
doesn’t even begin to tell you about why these colours are used on the outside of this tin of soup. These infographics are way too simple; not even at undergraduate level to be honest and they are pretty much useless.
Finally we can look at the yoghurt pot. Again, the red is not used because it represents passion, energy, urgency, excitement, vibrancy or danger. It is simple original substance colour again with the red representing strawberries.
Red can mean so many things: original substance colour in many food packages, good luck and fortune in Asian bank logos, emergency and danger in health and safety equipment, stop when it is a traffic light. Yes, it can also mean passion and urgency and vibrancy. But context is everything.
In my teaching at the University of Leeds I often refer to this advertisement for the mini.
What does the red symbolise in this mini commercial?
The combination of red, white and black is aesthetically pleasing. But there are lots of similar combinations that could have been used. But the red is used symbolically. It is the True Blood mini convertible. Feel the wind in your fangs!! Exclusively for vampires. This is excellent colour design because the colours work with the text and the imagery and are consistent with the messages that are intended. The red symbolises blood. And the combination of red, white and black together in this context, with the other cues, indicate vampires!
I hope you found this interesting. It passed a few hours between one Boxing Day meal and the next for me. Leave a comment if you liked it or disagree with my analysis or if you noticed something that I didn’t. If you liked this post, take a look at my earlier holiday post about Christmas colour symbolism if you didn’t see it. Enter your email in the subscription box below to get updates when I post new stuff.
Visit my patreon page for more detailed colour education
On Dec 14th 2013 I posted about how the colour of your urine says something about your health (spoiler alert: the lighter it is the better!). Just over three years later I posted something similar, this time about the colour of poop. Let’s just say that you don’t want black.
Perhaps it is the time of year but today I read an article about why poop is brown. However, this time it was in TheConversation. TheConversation is an incredibly good website. It was first produced in Australia in 2011 and is a non-profit media outlet. In the UK it is supported the UK government and a number of UK universities (including University of Leeds where I work) to generate journalistic content that people can trust – academic rigour with journalistic flair.
I have only published in TheConversation once. I was invited to write about the effect of light on colour. I am quite proud of the fact that my article is the fifth most read article of any produced from the University of Leeds. It has 190,225 reads which is approximately 190,220 more reads than most of my academic papers ever achieve. So it’s a great way to get stuff out and have an impact.
However, I was invited to submit the article and even then I went through quite a rigorous process where the editor who is assigned to your case asks for evidence for every claim you make. So it’s not easy to publish there. The upshot of all of this is that TheConversation can be trusted. One of the problems with the current world, imho, is that the freedom that the internet has given us – where anyone can put stuff out there and where the world is no longer controlled by a small number of publishers – needs to be balanced by the problem that anyone can put stuff out there. There is more nonsense written on the internet about colour than almost any other topic apart from, perhaps, COVID, vaccines and masks. I won’t comment about those topics because I know no more about them than you – possibly less. But if you want to read reliable information about anything, written in a clear and simple way by people who study that topic for a living, I cannot recommend TheConversation more highly.
However, back to the more important topic – colour of poop. The article is actually a response to a question that was received from a child in Maryland and is part of a series for children of all ages called Curious Kids.
The brown colour is produced by the bile pigment stercobilin – first isolated from faeces in 1932 – without which poop would probably be very pale, almost white. The presence of this particular pigment in water is sometimes used to detect faecal pollution levels in rivers. So now you know one more colorant; albeit a natural one.
There is a related article about poop and health on TheConversation if you are interested. To make the point about articles in TheConversation being written by people who know what they are writing about they note in their article:
Have you ever wondered what’s going on in your poop? Perhaps not. But this is precisely what we think about every day at the American Gut Project, the world’s largest microbiome citizen science effort, located at UC San Diego School of Medicine.
It’s that time of year again. No – not Christmas. It’s that time when we get announcements about colour of the year. Pantone – the undisputed heavy weight champion of the world – when it comes to such matters has announced that the colour of 2022 is periwinkle.
Maybe it’s just me, but I cannot get excited by the colour of the year. To be fair, it’s not just plucked from nowhere. Colour of the year, like colour forecasting, is the result of a process that links colour to the cultural trends and values of our time – the zeitgeist, if you will. However, there are two reasons why I can’t get excited.
The first is that it is so trite. Colour forecasting is a little better. But just because Pantone have announced this insipid violet colour is the colour of the year, I am not going to be changing my purchasing habits. I won’t be buying purple trousers, a purple volvo or decorating my house in periwinkle any time soon. It seems to me that colour of the year is just a publicity stunt, a marketing device.
The second is that in terms of colour forecasting generally I fall into the camp of people that believe that it does more harm than good. If we take the textile and apparel industry, as an example, our consumption behaviour is simply unsustainable. As noted in fastcompany, our obsession with colour trends is killing the planet.
To be fair, there is another side of the argument. Those on that side would argue that colour forecasting helps companies to produce products in colours that people want and that reduces waste. However, I just don’t buy it. There is scant evidence that colour forecasting ‘works’ at all and the relentless pushing of the idea that we have to keep buying new stuff to keep up with colour trends is harmful in my opinion. Instead of obsessing with colour of the year we should be buying things in colours that we like. We don’t need people to tell us what is trendy. Just buy what you like and stick with it.
