Daub

This is, at core, a demonstration of the complex dimensionality of color.

Yellow is not lighter than blue, though I can understand why you say this.

In the hue, saturation and lightness (hsl) understanding of color, hue terms such as Blue/yellow and lightness terms such as light/dark are separate entities.

It is perfectly possible to have a blue and yellow of the same lightness value, but the yellow would be more dull. More dull = less pure = less saturated. The peak saturation to lightness of different hues is not consistent. Yellow is most yellow (ie most saturate/pure) when it is quite light. Conversly the peak saturationn of green or blue is in the dark range.

As you rightfully state, One key issue with the color wheel is that it is two dimensional. There does not exist a remotely complete color model that does not recognize at least three dimensions.

I am not dissing the utility of the color wheel, but it has application only to the ordering of hues.

Well... I would say that you are half right. The whole notion of primary/secondary is very dependent on application, so your primary set would depend on your intended use. Psychology recognizes six primaries: red, green, blue, yellow, white and black.

The author presents a four-color primary set. It clearly has its roots in Helmholtz's color physiology, but I confess I don't quite understand how it would be used. For me, I would miss the important blue/orange pairing.

> * A purple-inclined red (crimson) and an orange-inclined red (scarlet)

> * A green-inclined yellow (practically speaking, "spring green") and an orange-inclined yellow ("yellow")

> * A purple-inclined blue (ultramarine) and a green-inclined blue (cerulean)

> * White to make light tones (don't worry about black)

This is excellent advice for a painter, though I would not exclude black.

The six color you describe are, in essence, a warm/cool pairing of the three primaries. When I painted in color I used:

Cadmium red/alizarin crimson, lemon yellow/cadmium yellow, cobalt blue/Prussian blue

> The way traditional artists think and thought about colors is definitely not in the shape of color wheels.

Slightly disagree. I find that knowing the location of the pigments on the rtyb wheel is a very useful skill. A color too saturated or too light? add its opposite!

In my experience, artists have a very fuzzy understanding of color, even those who use it wonderfully. At art school we were taught 'color theory', almost all of which was hand-wavey fluff.

> instead of thinking in primary colours [Painters] will be much more familiar with the mixing of the pigments they use. (Cadmium red, cobalt blue, burnt sienna, etc)

Absolutely agree. A red is never just the abstract red, it is a cadmium red, alizarin crimson, rose madder etc.

The article was clearly written by an enthusiast, but is a bit muddled. I see nothing in what he has written that supports the idea that Color Wheels are wrong.

Color wheels are, in essence, highly abstracted slices across the equator of a color space. Only two color wheels are commonly used: the RGB and the RYB (aka the artists color wheel). Color from pigments and color from light are two wildly different things, but easy to confuse. For its absence of green as a primary, CMYK can be understood as a version of RYB. Black is used not just because it is cheap but also to add opacity to the inks (printing inks are more like dyes... very thin and transparent).

The color opposites the author describes are red/cyan in RGB and red/green in RYB.

One property of these opposites is that they mix to neutral. For this, the RBG pair works best. The other property is that they are perceptually antagonistic, for which the RYB pair works best.

Interestingly, the perceptually antagonistic pair set (red/green, yellow/purple, blue/orange) were spoken about well before Newton placed these colors in a circle. Leonardo Da Vinco refers to them as 'retto contrario', literally exactly opposite.

The author asks 'why a wheel'? which is a good question, and the answer he gives is reasonable. But... Newton was the first to employ this device, and he did so almost certainly because the harmony structure of the musical scale was commonly visualized as a wheel, and Newton was keen to draw an analogy between music and color and harmony and the music of the spheres and god etc etc. He may have been the first physicist, but he was also an alchemist.

Color is a frustrating beast... so many different ways to understand the same thing: perception, physics, aesthetics, chemistry etc. Truly the seven blind men and the elephant.

Agreed. RIP Blackberry and also Palm, who tried and failed to introduce new OSs.

In some areas affinity photo exeed PS. It's native support for EXRs is incredible. In PS, EXRs are opened once, following which they are vanilla PS files. In AP, the ability to access the full dynamic range of an EXR is preserved to a degree that PS cannot match.

It is also possible to stack and combine masks, an idea which is pure science fiction for a PS user. color selection masks can also update if the colors of the rgb component is changed.

> Writing helps refine your thoughts.

Very true. Indeed I would go further and say that unless you are capable of expressing your thoughts as words, then those thoughts will have no more substance than steam.

I thought I was a clear thinker until I entered academia. The many reports, instructional materials and academic papers soon enough showed me how wrong I was.

Edit: the illustration to this article is one of the most appropriate I have seen.

I had a friend who had tinnitus from repeated exposure to explosions in the army. To combat his tinnitus he developed the habit of talking incessantly and at home would always have music playing. Sounds kinda funny but I could tell that it was having a significantly negative impact on his life.

Many thanks! Book marking now,

The super high resolution photos are taken with a special rig. Details: https://www.dpreview.com/news/1947958268/google-art-camera-u...

From what I recal, the software used for stitching is more like Excel than Photoshop.

In my opinion, it's usability has decreased over the years. Predictably this is a result of Google adding new features like pre-curated collections.

I use this feature in my painting class all the time. The ability to zoom in so close to a painting is incredible. In many ways, it offers a better learning experience for a young painter than seeing the paintings in real life.

This link might help... https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2854146

The linked pdf has lots of details.

You all probably know this, but the way that a cursor changes to an icon of a hand when hovering over a link was directly inspired by HyperCard. In many ways a browser is a development of a Hypercard stack.

Beer bottles to make rounded corners? Brilliant!

In the original Cinderella, the slipper was made of fur, not glass. Still now, fur slipper is slang for... Well, you know.

I live in urban Vietnam. However, my visual imagination is derived heavily from paintings, particularly those of the romantic era (eg the Hudson river school). The promt suggest something very asymmetrical, which is anathema to the romantic schema (they avoid asymmetry but also too much symmetry). Not saying it's impossible for me to get there, just very difficult.

I guess the larger point is that vusualisation is as much fiction as it is recal.

By the way, I love the gmap link image, but I don't see it as an effective responce to the hint. I see it instead as a classic vista (I.e framed window-form).

Yeh... I can now see that. Thanks. Context is everything. Though I paint landscapes, I rarely stray outside the city. hence my knowledge of landscapes is mostly from paintings, not real life. The scene you describe is difficult to find in the painting lexicon (for it's asymmetry), though doubtless common in nature.

> If somebody told me "image you are walking a winding path. To your right there is a wood, to your left there is a mountain".

As someone who paints landscapes, I have a huge amount of trouble with this prompt. I am trying to construct something that is topographically feasible and artistically agreeable. I can imagine walking through a wood, but not alongside one. I know (of course) that it is possible to walk alongside a wood, but every time I try to picture it, my mind balks. Also, combining a wood with a mountain I find tough, other that a mountain covered by trees. I think it is because of their genealogical dissimilarity.

Perhaps you just think you are loosing.

I'm ashamed to say that I have not heard of R3DS Wrap. It does not seem to re-mesh as such. Rather it seems to 'wrap' an existing mesh around your raw mesh. It also manages the baking, which is sweet.

This seems like a valid approach. After all, every human figure in a Pixar movie has been sourced from the same base mesh.

Instant Meshes is pretty good. We have it installed in all our labs. The results you share seem fine for the purpose. In our experience, Quad Remesher is the best. It certainly helps that QR sits inside of Blender as an add on (unlike Instant Meshes). It is also pretty much industry standard, being used in Max, Maya, ZBrush. As for its results... I find that it has a deeper 'awareness' of the source topology. The meshes are dense when they need to be and not dense when they don't need to be.

A good test of any re-mesher is to apply it to some 3D text. 3D text geometry is famously horrible. Another test is to apply it to a face. Face topology is very prescribed: there is a (mostly) single way of doing it. Any non-standard approach will create issues, especially if you wish to animate it. I would not have expected any automatic approach to work very well, yet have been surprised by the quality of QR.

In my experience depending on the model, it can be between hard and very hard. Blenders remesh will produce something reasonable but with a gazillion polygons. Guided approaches are a lot better but are labour intensive as the user is effectively tracing over the source model.

Retopology will destroy the old uv map, so a new map will need to be made. Following that, the old textures will need to be baked onto this map.

I have spent easily as much as a day cleaning up (I.e. re-mqking) 3d scans.

This looks interesting. The results look reasonable. Thanks.

> if gen3D is going to be a thing then they need to listen to the people actually doing 3D work, not just chasing benchmarks invented by other gen3D researchers.

Completely agree. I used to take an interest in reserach into non photorealistic rendering. The same thing happened there. Paper after paper detailing 'novel' approaches to yet another cross hatch algorithm that no artist was ever going to use.

As someone who teaches 3D, a 'high quality' model would need to have clean topology: all quads which flow around the form in a predictable and rational manner. From this, I would expect a clean texture map. I am fairly certain that current technology is not up to this.

I have seen a few of these papers, and (from my limited experience) very rarely is the 3d model avauable for review.

How amusing. The images he uses for bouba/kiki are non-standard. In fact, they were sourced from an educational rescource I made over ten years ago. So nice to see them again, though in retrospect it would have been better had I used the standard set.

As an art teacher I use this effect to demonstrate how meaning in an image can be inate, as opposed to socially constructed. To demonstrate social construction I use an image of an arrow. To an Australian aborigini an arrow 'points' in the 'wrong' direction as it's directionality is derived from its semblance to a birds footprint.