The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Fact: Monitors, TV's, etc - all use RGB colour scheme.
Fact: RGB colour scheme cannot represent all the visible colours of the electromagnetic spectrum. This is because some have a negative red component, that is to say, you'd have to add red to it to achieve a match with the RGB system.
In your opionion, is this significant, and will it prevent graphics ever being totally convincing?
Discuss ;)
Fact: RGB colour scheme cannot represent all the visible colours of the electromagnetic spectrum. This is because some have a negative red component, that is to say, you'd have to add red to it to achieve a match with the RGB system.
In your opionion, is this significant, and will it prevent graphics ever being totally convincing?
Discuss ;)
Page:
Fact: Monitors, TV's, etc - all use RGB colour scheme.
Fact: RGB colour scheme cannot represent all the visible colours of the electromagnetic spectrum. This is because some have a negative red component, that is to say, you'd have to add red to it to achieve a match with the RGB system.
In your opionion, is this significant, and will it prevent graphics ever being totally convincing?
Discuss ;)
Fact: RGB colour scheme cannot represent all the visible colours of the electromagnetic spectrum. This is because some have a negative red component, that is to say, you'd have to add red to it to achieve a match with the RGB system.
In your opionion, is this significant, and will it prevent graphics ever being totally convincing?
Discuss ;)
We can't actually see all the colours of the spectrum.
There's Infra-red, Ultra-violet, and more!
Human eyes aren't made to see them!
There's Infra-red, Ultra-violet, and more!
Human eyes aren't made to see them!
The RGB colour system can show 16,581,375 colours. Can you really tell the difference between the all?
You were starting to sound like a Curry's advert there...
I've got a DC, so I don't see any problem with graphics at all, in fact, if they were too real this could detract from the gameplay, which is the number one feature of most games today.
Is it that noticeable, can the human eye distinguish that what it is viewing on a monitor/TV is a little off-frequency compared to the colour of a real object? Surely the simple fact that graphics are already contained withing a little 15" box, or a 64" Sony WEGA, whatever, should indicate straight away that the visuals that you are watching have been created in the first place, thereby informing you that what you are watching is not 'real' in the first place.
If the game is good enough, and there a plenty of them out there now that are, you get immersed in the gameplay anyway so that you don't notice the odd colour difference here and there, not to mention the odd bit of bad collision detection, jaggies, popup, dodgy sound effects etc...
I think that it's a matter for the game developers to juggle these priorities, and because colour differences are themselves not really THAT noticeable I think they would prefer to concentrate on things like getting rid of jaggies or popup in the shortterm.
The colour problem is more likely to be solved in the future by technological improvements in display equipment, after all, we went from black and white to colour in a small matter of years, it won't be long before we get perfect colour presentation on a monitor using a new technology.
I've got a DC, so I don't see any problem with graphics at all, in fact, if they were too real this could detract from the gameplay, which is the number one feature of most games today.
Is it that noticeable, can the human eye distinguish that what it is viewing on a monitor/TV is a little off-frequency compared to the colour of a real object? Surely the simple fact that graphics are already contained withing a little 15" box, or a 64" Sony WEGA, whatever, should indicate straight away that the visuals that you are watching have been created in the first place, thereby informing you that what you are watching is not 'real' in the first place.
If the game is good enough, and there a plenty of them out there now that are, you get immersed in the gameplay anyway so that you don't notice the odd colour difference here and there, not to mention the odd bit of bad collision detection, jaggies, popup, dodgy sound effects etc...
I think that it's a matter for the game developers to juggle these priorities, and because colour differences are themselves not really THAT noticeable I think they would prefer to concentrate on things like getting rid of jaggies or popup in the shortterm.
The colour problem is more likely to be solved in the future by technological improvements in display equipment, after all, we went from black and white to colour in a small matter of years, it won't be long before we get perfect colour presentation on a monitor using a new technology.
turbonutter wrote:
> The RGB colour system can show 16,581,375 colours. Can you really
> tell the difference between the all?
How the HELL did you know that!
> The RGB colour system can show 16,581,375 colours. Can you really
> tell the difference between the all?
How the HELL did you know that!
Okay, I'll calrify a couple fo things
1) I'm only referring to the visible part of the electromagnetic spectrum
2) I can tell the difference between green, and any 17 million shades of blue you care to mention.
I'll clarify the last point, seeing as I'm being a little obscure. A test was performed, on human subjects. They were given a sample colour, and told to recreate it using only RGB. For some colours, it couldn't be done, and was noticably different. The colour would not be made from the RGB scale, unless it had more red in it.
What I'm saying, is not that they aren't good enough at covering RGB colours, but rather RGB isn't good enough at covering the spectrum of visible light.
1) I'm only referring to the visible part of the electromagnetic spectrum
2) I can tell the difference between green, and any 17 million shades of blue you care to mention.
I'll clarify the last point, seeing as I'm being a little obscure. A test was performed, on human subjects. They were given a sample colour, and told to recreate it using only RGB. For some colours, it couldn't be done, and was noticably different. The colour would not be made from the RGB scale, unless it had more red in it.
What I'm saying, is not that they aren't good enough at covering RGB colours, but rather RGB isn't good enough at covering the spectrum of visible light.
VenomByte wrote:
>What I'm saying, is not that they aren't good enough at
>covering RGB colours, but rather RGB isn't good enough at >covering the spectrum of visible light.
The answer is simple then, invent another system other than RGB that will do the job. Like, for instance, er....
laser? Maybe?
>What I'm saying, is not that they aren't good enough at
>covering RGB colours, but rather RGB isn't good enough at >covering the spectrum of visible light.
The answer is simple then, invent another system other than RGB that will do the job. Like, for instance, er....
laser? Maybe?
Can you actually name all 17million shades of blue then?
(btw: I'm not saying there are 17 millions shades of blue and I certainly can't distinguish between every single colour of visible light...I doubt anyone could! Anyway what's this got to do with videogames? The most commonly seen colours in life are in videogames so why do we need more?
(btw: I'm not saying there are 17 millions shades of blue and I certainly can't distinguish between every single colour of visible light...I doubt anyone could! Anyway what's this got to do with videogames? The most commonly seen colours in life are in videogames so why do we need more?
Simple calculation. Each projector gun in a TV/monitor can fire at 255 differant levels and off. That makes 256 (2^8). So, you do 256³ which equals 16,777,216 (sorry, I did 255³ the first time).
You get to know these things if you are a proper webdesigner.
You get to know these things if you are a proper webdesigner.
Edgy wrote:
> The most commonly seen colours in life are in videogames so why do
> we need more?
The quest for perfection? If 10,000 years ago people had said "I'm happy with my bit of flint, it lights a fire no probs, so why do we need more?" then I'd have given up smoking a long time ago, because it would have been just too difficult to light a fag on a windy day.
If 80 years ago people had said "I'm happy with my wireless, I can hear what people are saying just fine, why do I need to see them as well?" then we'd never have had EastEnders.
And if Venombyte hadn't asked today "Why CAN'T we have perfect colours in videogames?" some bright spark inventor may never get the urge to go out and develop something worthwhile that could revolutionise the way we view gaming in the future.
> The most commonly seen colours in life are in videogames so why do
> we need more?
The quest for perfection? If 10,000 years ago people had said "I'm happy with my bit of flint, it lights a fire no probs, so why do we need more?" then I'd have given up smoking a long time ago, because it would have been just too difficult to light a fag on a windy day.
If 80 years ago people had said "I'm happy with my wireless, I can hear what people are saying just fine, why do I need to see them as well?" then we'd never have had EastEnders.
And if Venombyte hadn't asked today "Why CAN'T we have perfect colours in videogames?" some bright spark inventor may never get the urge to go out and develop something worthwhile that could revolutionise the way we view gaming in the future.
Page: