All human color technology - paintings, photographs, screens, lighting - is optimized to stimulate the three types of human retinal cone cells. The exact sensitivity of each cone type to light across the spectrum is not even as important as the relative levels of activation of the three cones by the light. Which is why when some light activates 100% of “red” cones and 100% of “green” cones you see it as yellow, regardless of whether the light is a broad-spectrum light from an incandescent lamp or a single frequency 575nm LED light. This is also why only 3 numbers (0-255, 0-255, 0-255) is enough to describe every color that humans can ever see.
Other animals can have different number of types of cone cells, and the light-sensitive pigments in them can be slightly different from human ones, having different spectrum response curves. Bees in particular can see ultraviolet light, and flowers have designs on them that can only be seen in UV, specifically for bees.
An arbitrary photograph will not appear color-photorealistic to other animals the way it does to us, but animals can still see shapes in it and identify objects, the same way you can recognize people even in a photo-negative.
I don’t think so, film only meant represent light and colors the human eye is capable of observing. For example flowers glow due to pigment diffraction with UV light, finished photographs tend to not be UV reactive.
Keep in mind that in real life, there are two types of energy radiation, reflection and emission.
First, photos are static records of light at a point in time, and don’t naturally emit light as radiation (in significant enough quantities for consideration). As such, they are only reflective, which is dependent on the light that is already in your environment (e.g., the LEDs in your home are missing huge bands of the spectrum), and as such, these wavelengths may not exist to be reflected by the photo.
Secondly, photos are generated by either film, or based on a cmos/ccd sensor, which are calibrated to capture a subset of em radiation in the human visible spectrum. As such, they have filtered the light that may be usable to other organisms.
So based on both of these, depending on similarity to human eyes, no, most animals (non mammals, in particular) would not see photos in the same way as real life.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community space dedicated to being helpful and answering each others’ questions on various topics.
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All posts titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That’s it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it’s in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content. Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
Partnered Communities
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
Community Moderation
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
Matrix Chat Room
To find & join our chat room, log into fluffychat.im(or any other matrix client) and put #nostupidquestions:matrix.org on the search bar.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
All human color technology - paintings, photographs, screens, lighting - is optimized to stimulate the three types of human retinal cone cells. The exact sensitivity of each cone type to light across the spectrum is not even as important as the relative levels of activation of the three cones by the light. Which is why when some light activates 100% of “red” cones and 100% of “green” cones you see it as yellow, regardless of whether the light is a broad-spectrum light from an incandescent lamp or a single frequency 575nm LED light. This is also why only 3 numbers (0-255, 0-255, 0-255) is enough to describe every color that humans can ever see.
Other animals can have different number of types of cone cells, and the light-sensitive pigments in them can be slightly different from human ones, having different spectrum response curves. Bees in particular can see ultraviolet light, and flowers have designs on them that can only be seen in UV, specifically for bees.
An arbitrary photograph will not appear color-photorealistic to other animals the way it does to us, but animals can still see shapes in it and identify objects, the same way you can recognize people even in a photo-negative.
I very much enjoy this thoughtful answer. Thanks!
I don’t think so, film only meant represent light and colors the human eye is capable of observing. For example flowers glow due to pigment diffraction with UV light, finished photographs tend to not be UV reactive.
Keep in mind that in real life, there are two types of energy radiation, reflection and emission.
First, photos are static records of light at a point in time, and don’t naturally emit light as radiation (in significant enough quantities for consideration). As such, they are only reflective, which is dependent on the light that is already in your environment (e.g., the LEDs in your home are missing huge bands of the spectrum), and as such, these wavelengths may not exist to be reflected by the photo.
Secondly, photos are generated by either film, or based on a cmos/ccd sensor, which are calibrated to capture a subset of em radiation in the human visible spectrum. As such, they have filtered the light that may be usable to other organisms.
So based on both of these, depending on similarity to human eyes, no, most animals (non mammals, in particular) would not see photos in the same way as real life.
Thank you, very comprehensive answer.
I believe no. Bees see ultraviolet light that photos don’t emit.
Weak photos not capturing things we cannot see!
You can get (or at least you could, I assume they still make it) infrared film, it tends to make things look sort of white and ghostly.
Wow. That’s a thing. Imna start calling this bee film!