Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
raaaid

raaaid's corner for tea and cookies

Recommended Posts

Personally I find this thread brilliant! Only if you take its contents seriously will you be disappointed.

Raaaid is obviously enjoying spreading his knowledge (lol) and everyone else is having some tongue-in-cheek fun with it. 

 

As it is, my personal vote is close it and ban every participant ever from any internet-related activity whatsoever.

Bit harsh. You seem to be suffering from the same symptom most people on this thread are suffering from: actually taking it seriously. 
It's a bit like someone getting pissed off about Sarah Palin; you've got to ask yourself: "is it worth it?". I mean really. How can anyone take Raaaid's pink argument (or any other, for that matter) seriously? 
Let's leave the thread as it is. It's "free topic" for a reason; people who want to read it can, those who don't, won't. Simple as. "Raaaid's corner for tea and cookies" (wonderful name by the way) seems to be a refuge for him, of sorts, and as Feathered said, it'll keep his deep introspection in one thread, rather than all over the forum.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nono as the wiki proves on afterimage entry human colour perception works on 3 antagonics tones including black and white

So, according to you, we have black, white, and one other one. Which is it?

 

 

all rgb screen work wrong were just no used to anything better

32 million colors and no pink. Oh wait, except for the one that NO ONE ON THE PLANET (including you) CAN DIFFERENTIATE from the pink you make with oil paints. Yep, you're right, other than that, they are all wrong.

 

Geez.

 

It has been POSITIVELY PROVEN by the posts and examples in this thread that RGB can produce many shades of pink. Regardless of what colors are mixed to produce them, the shades are perceived by the eye as being identical. There is no way to dispute this. Therefore, at this point, the words that spew forth through your keyboard are now just lies on your part. Plain and simple lies used because you can do nothing else. There is nothing else that can support your original assinine statements so you simply start clicking on the, "related links", sections of your googling and regurjitate that upon the forum.

 

No originality, no free thinking, nothing of consequence.

 

 

--Outlaw.

Edited by Outlaw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 red vs green in other blue vs yelloe and in other black vs white

 

all im saying its rgb doesnt work according natures rules but antagonist pairs do as that wiki link proves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with Leaf. This thread is completely harmless and an outlet for a guy who's a bit of an oddball and what I'd call a "benign troll", one who certainly doesn't have any ill intent.

 

No, this thread has absolutely no value to this forum as such, but it provides raaaid with a secluded space, where he can be as quirky as he wants (and I really think we oughta have room for his quirkiness) and occasional entertainment for those of us who follow it. I've had some great laughs here and never felt that things got out of hand.

 

I say: Let it live.

Edited by Finkeren
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

all im saying its rgb doesnt work according natures rules but antagonist pairs do as that wiki link proves

Liar!!!! Capital L, little i, little a, little r....LIAR!!!!!!

 

to back up my point that rgb means 32 million colours but no pink check this out:

You clearly stated on page 31 (by my settings) that RGB is incapable of producing the color pink. You also made the same statment numerous other times. I hope you have a fire extinguisher nearby.

 

Feel free to explain how an RGB display does not, "...work according natures rules...". It produces photons that impact the retina producing a signal that is interpreted by the brain. What part of that is, "breaking nature's rules"???

 

 

On a related note, please explain how you would implement a BLACK LED.

 

--Outlaw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a related note, please explain how you would implement a BLACK LED.

 

LDO, use one LED of each primary color and let there light interfere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

besides real colours dont shine as current screens do

 

i see the future for screens as digital ink following antagonist pairs of images as the eye to render colour :red vs green, blue vs yellow and black vs white

 

i would render black by the absence of light

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

besides real colours dont shine as current screens do]

Of course they do. You do realise what "colour" is, right? The only things we can see are those that either emit or reflect electromagnetic radiation within a certain spectrum of wavelengths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i meant this, this is invisible in the dark as it should:

 

this is much more  NATURAL than current screens as the colour space following afterimage rules:

 

KS-slate-02-lg._V401628951_.jpg

 

that is not a normal screen its what is called digital ink, much closer to real paper than a normal screen

Edited by raaaid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can always set your screen to emit light that matches your surroundings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh come on thats what everybody says(my sister discovered that) still is not the same thing as its not the same lighting a red and blue led than a white and red one

 

it may SEEM the same but factually its not the same

 

same-but-different.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Electromagnetic radiation is electromagnetic radiation. The source is completely irrelevant. Modern LED screens have the visible spectrum pretty well covered and the RGB composition matches the 3 types of receptors on our retina, so given a high enough resolution and correct setting of light intensity, it can replicate images from the real world with near perfection.

 

Just be glad you aren't a mantis shrimp. Those buggers have 16 different colour receptors in their eyes, as opposed to our 3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yesh honestly:

 

i found out while wanting to paint the skies that light red was not the kind of pink i got with oils

 

i thought this a check mate for with paintings i could get pencil light red or oil pink at will

 

but what rgb does is get pencil pale red with a red led on low intensity and oil pink mixing red and violet (red and blue)what renders the invisible

 

makes sense oil pink its invisible for rgb so it renders it as the invisible mix of violet and red

 

i admit i cant distinguish both but i guess as you point a mantis would

 

anyway i dont think we should conforms with things like adjusting light and so on we should demand better and better hardware and research on colour digital ink

 

in fact i demand a screen that works normally at night and works as colour digital ink in sunny days

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no why i just admitted i can not tell the difference between white and red oils or red and violet digital paint even if theyre don different way

Edited by raaaid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

raaaid, if you see the same colour in oils or in rgb monitors it means your eyes are picking up the same colour wavelength, so there is no difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LDO, use one LED of each primary color and let there light interfere.

You didn't read raaid's msg. He thinks there should be FIVE LED subpixels. One each of red, green, blue, white, and black.

 

--Outlaw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but what rgb does is get pencil pale red with a red led on low intensity and oil pink mixing red and violet (red and blue)what renders the invisible

Renders the invisible??? That is very close to the 23rd most assinine thing you have ever said. In addition to lying about what you previously said you are now claiming that an RGB display must render the invisible to display pink.

 

 

makes sense oil pink its invisible for rgb so it renders it as the invisible mix of violet and red

Lemme see, R-red, G-green, and B-blue.....nope, don't see a V for violet in there. Therefore, it is imposible for RGB to MIX violet with anything.

 

But, even if there were, it wouldn't matter in your statement because YOU BELIEVE THE VIOLET AND RED AS MIXED BY RGB IS....INVISIBLE?

 

The depth of your inability to understand is astounding on levels that are impossible to truly comprehend.

 

 

i admit i cant distinguish both but i guess as you point a mantis would

Then your entire argument is 100% WRONG and POINTLESS.

 

 

anyway i dont think we should conforms with things like adjusting light and so on we should demand better and better hardware and research on colour digital ink

 

in fact i demand a screen that works normally at night and works as colour digital ink in sunny days

OMG I can't stop laughing at that one. You admit that your assinine argument is 100% wrong by saying that you can't tell the difference then you DEMAND that hardware be researched and produced DESPITE THE FACT THAT NO ONE EXCEPT YOU WANTS IT.

 

Why don't you do your own research? If you have such a magnificent genius mind that is capable of finding all these problems that the rest of us moron cor-magnons can't understand, why do you demand that someone else fix it? Fix your own problems like the rest of us do.

 

 

--Outlaw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh no i just drop it here and there so somebody else does it, remmeber:

 

blue-yellow leds, red-green leds and black and white leds you may call it raaaidcolour if you want

 

also i would like a singing game in which just the singing in tone goes through the speaker and the out of tone singing remains silent

 

oh and a buttom in the remote so when im laid watching tv i can rotate the tv image 90º

 

also a sound system a combination of headphones and speakers

 

and a virtual orchestra in my living room by 6dof headphones

 

oh and i liked the tablet thing for 39 euros, im broke but like the digitally paint thing, thanks universe

 

btw if anybodys listening id like a digital paint program that mixed realistically colours not following rgb

 

thanks :)


You didn't read raaid's msg. He thinks there should be FIVE LED subpixels. One each of red, green, blue, white, and black.

--Outlaw

you miss yellow

 

Edited by raaaid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

blue-yellow leds, red-green leds and black and white leds you may call it raaaidcolour if you want

 

raaaidcolour it is, pointless.

 

 

 

also i would like a singing game in which just the singing in tone goes through the speaker and the out of tone singing remains silent

 

what? you mean like autotuned karaoke?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you miss yellow

No, I didn't...

 

I think rgb should be switched to rgbbw with a cuatomizable background and saturation

I see no Y in RGBBW.

 

--Outlaw.

Edited by Outlaw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mine works perfectly realistically, I don't know how yours works.

 

no if you mix red and white with oils for rgb its a mix of red and blue

 

 

what? you mean like autotuned karaoke?

 

not just that if you dont sing the right note your voice doesnt sound through the speakers on that way the more voice you get through the speaker the more in the right pitch you are and trully better singer and the audience gets pleased

 

 

I see no Y in RGBBW.

 i said that prior to my knowkledge of how the eyes works knowledge obtained by afterimages what i mean NOW is:

 

red to green

yellow to blue

white to black

Edited by raaaid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh and a buttom in the remote so when im laid watching tv i can rotate the tv image 90º

Oh the wonders of ESL. But I won't go there.

 

If what you see rotates when you tilt your head sideways then your brain is SERIOUSLY messed up.

 

i said that prior to my knowkledge of how the eyes works knowledge obtained by afterimages what i mean NOW is:

 

red to green

yellow to blue

white to black

OK, so NOW you mean there should be SIX LEDs -> RGYBWB.

 

--Outlaw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

If what you see rotates when you tilt your head sideways then your brain is SERIOUSLY messed up.

 

so if you relax upside down like michael keaton aka batman you see tv in the right position, interesting perception

 

 

 

If you mix red and white you get pink (pale red) this is true no matter what the medium
 

 

you havent watched my video have you?

 

again:

 

ill make you a resume if you dont want to wacth it:

 

i mix white and red oils but the screen renders it as a red blue mix

 

http://youtu.be/drhbNKdoR-k?list=UUYQFAGpkzeOzPbniEw3BIRg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i mix white and red oils but the screen renders it as a red blue mix

 

I think you have never heard of or don't understand the difference between additive and subtractive colour mixing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the name of the app?

sketchbook its in google play free

I think you have never heard of or don't understand the difference between additive and subtractive colour mixing.

thanks for the hint ill study on that :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

raaaid is correct that coloured lights and pigments do not interact in the same way

 

raaaid isn't even making that claim, everybody knows they don't interact the same, raaaid as usual is simply under the impression that he has a better solution for technology based on the stuff he does finger painting with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

coloured lights and pigments do not interact in the same way

 

That has to do with the difference between additive and subtractive colour mixing as I mentioned prior to your post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so if you relax upside down like michael keaton aka batman you see tv in the right position, interesting perception

That depends on your definition of, "position".

 

Ordinary cues from your surroundings should enable your brain to determine your body position and correct as needed. So, in the case you noted my brain can easily detect that I am upside down and allow me to easily watch TV. So, for me, the TV is always in the right position as long as my body has the cues necessary to determine its position.

 

Now, if the TV were turned upside down, that would be difficult to watch because my brain has never learned to compensate for such activity. I presume that even if I were to hang upside down it would STILL be difficult to watch the upside down TV b/c other cues from my surroundings would inform my brain that my body was upside down so it would EXPECT the TV image to be upside down as well.

 

So, unless I am the only one that experiences life this way, then the obvious conclusion is that your brain is SERIOUSLY messed up. Of course you have admitted that is true due to a massive drug O/D in your younger days so I can't help but wonder why you don't believe that, due to the aforementioned brain discombobulation most of what you say is probably wrong in the first place and that maybe arguing about whether you are correct or not is almost assuredly not the best choice you could make.

 

On a related note, it is surprising that, with all your massive intellect and "free thinking" ability, you don't remember that we have had the conversation regarding body position and vision before (around 6-7 years ago give or take).

 

--Outlaw.

Edited by Outlaw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes outlaw i remember it was a hint into a past sketch

 

extreme thats pale red one class of pink not the red and blue like one

 

what i did:

 

i mix red and white with oils and photograph it with good light

 

open it with skecthbook and make it recognize that mix

 

it recognized it as a red blue mix

 

extreme youre behind the class the rest of the pupils already got this fact im gonna send you to a corner with the donkey hat

Edited by raaaid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

don't forget raaaid based his entire argument on reverse engineering the colour from a photograph of his mixed paint......completely forgetting that a 32 million colour photo is going to use pixels of many colours to interpret the original.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The red/blue mix is properly called violet, purple or crimson (oops) depending on the mix. Pink is pale red. The letters spelling the word "Pink" in raaids video are not in fact pink. They are pale violet.

 

Part of the issue is that colour names, excluding the obvious primaries, are not very precise and may not even translate exactly.

Edited by unreasonable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yep exactly

 

and thanks ufflake i mean digitally painting mix colours adictively

 

anyway most people here admits that mixing white and red in real life leads to be rendered by red and blue leds in rgb screens

Edited by raaaid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

anyway most people here admits that mixing white and red in real life leads to be rendered by red and blue leds in rgb screens

 

yes, and it works perfectly, you seem to be forgetting that a white pigment is reflecting blue light too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually to make white in rgb screens you have to have equal r+g+b. So to get from purple (r+b) to pink, you have to add g!

 

To get from pure red, you would have to add b and g.

Edited by unreasonable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Part of the issue is that colour names, excluding the obvious primaries, are not very precise and may not even translate exactly.

That has been noted to raaid multiple times.

 

it recognized it as a red blue mix

HOW ELSE CAN IT BE RECOGNIZED if you are in the RGB color space???? By DEFINITION there are ONLY 3 CHOICES...RED, GREEN, or BLUE.

 

If it can render the color such that your eyes cannot tell the difference, AND YOU HAVE STATED THAT IS TRUE, then it, BY DEFINITION, correctly renders the color.

 

Arguing the semantic point that an artist NAMES a mixture of red and blue PAINT as purple and therefore the rendered color is not pink is just blindingly stupid.

 

That's like me arguing that you are wrong if you point at a pair of shoes and say "zapatos".

 

On a more important note, let's get back to your messed up brain...

 

Does your field of view actually rotate such that vertical objects no longer appear vertical when you tilt your head???

 

--Outlaw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes so tell me if i want to pink the sky beyond the dome i know it should be pink and purple, like a purple sun emitting pink light 

 

the problem i have its IN RBG THEYRE THE SAME COLOUR



Does your field of view actually rotate such that vertical objects no longer appear vertical when you tilt your head???

--Outlaw.

vertical from an inertial or non inertial system?

 

if i take as vertical my nose position its pretty evidently it doesnt

 

so thats why i want to be able to rotate tv image 90º when im leaned

 

i can do that on tablets


  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well.....raaaid +1'd that so maybe he finally gets it, after 20 or so attempts to explain the same thing.

 

standby for the next instalment of the whacky pointless world of raaaid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...