Grey matters
felix
My gut feeling was, they were, though when I came to think of what the
colours actually were, I couldn't.
M-W tells us that 'grey' is a variant of 'gray.' I'm a bit sceptical
of this, and I'm far from an OED.
Thoughts?
felix
Richard Fontana
I'm not sure why you're so skeptical (= UK "sceptical").
"Gray" is an American variant spelling of "grey". Although Crayola uses
"gray", I got to prefer "grey" from reading Tolkien's books when I were a
child. (No, the American editions of Tolkien's books did not Americanize
spellings of words.)
Matti Lamprhey
> felix wrote:
>
> > Are grey and gray different colours?
> >
> > My gut feeling was, they were, though when I came to think of what the
> > colours actually were, I couldn't.
> >
> > M-W tells us that 'grey' is a variant of 'gray.' I'm a bit sceptical
> > of this, and I'm far from an OED.
>
>
> "Gray" is an American variant spelling of "grey". Although Crayola uses
> "gray", I got to prefer "grey" from reading Tolkien's books when I were a
> child. (No, the American editions of Tolkien's books did not Americanize
> spellings of words.)
I believe both spellings were around for a long time in Britain, but that
"grey" has forced out "gray" in the last century or two. As a surname,
"Gray" predominates, and by a wide margin.
As I write this I am looking out over the valley to Gray Hill, otherwise
known as Mynydd Llwyd.
Matti
Mike Lyle
<9q1fof$lhtj0$3...@ID-103223.news.dfncis.de>, Matti Lamprhey wrote:
>
[...]
>
>I believe both spellings were around for a long time in Britain, but that
>"grey" has forced out "gray" in the last century or two. As a surname,
>"Gray" predominates, and by a wide margin.
>
>As I write this I am looking out over the valley to Gray Hill, otherwise
>known as Mynydd Llwyd.
>
And "gray" took a bit of killing off in writing, too: Kipling is the first to
come to mind, and he died in 1936.
Mike, resident at Maenllwyd.
Spooky Guy Next Door
(fel...@hotmail.com) posted the following...
"gray" is a variant of "grey"; it's the Americanisation (should that be
"Americanization"?) of the word.
The colour is the same.
--
Mark Gallagher
A thousand thousand slimy things lived on, and so did I
blog - http://www.cyberfuddle.com/infinitebabble/
cyberfuddle - http://www.cyberfuddle.com/
alt.startrek FAQ - http://www.altstartrek.f2s.com/
learn HTML - http://smiley.vh.mewl.net/markhtml/
Spehro Pefhany
> The colour is the same.
Is grey (or gray, for that matter) a colour (or color, for that matter)?
Best regards,
--
Spehro Pefhany --"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
sp...@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
/.-.\
(( * ))
\\ // Please help if you can:
\\\ http://dailynews.yahoo.com/fc/US/Emergency_Information/
//\\\
/// \\\
\/ \/
Richard Fontana
> The renowned Spooky Guy Next Door <mgall...@cyberfuddle.com> wrote:
>
> > The colour is the same.
>
> Is grey (or gray, for that matter) a colour (or color, for that matter)?
Yes, of course.
Spooky Guy Next Door
(sp...@interlog.com) posted the following...
> The renowned Spooky Guy Next Door <mgall...@cyberfuddle.com> wrote:
>
> > The colour is the same.
>
> Is grey (or gray, for that matter) a colour (or color, for that matter)?
<stymied in his tracks />
Darnsharnit.
Donna Richoux
> The renowned Spooky Guy Next Door <mgall...@cyberfuddle.com> wrote:
>
> > The colour is the same.
>
> Is grey (or gray, for that matter) a colour (or color, for that matter)?
Oh, that should keep people arguing for days. Merriam-Webster
specifically says that it *is* a color, by definition 1a of color, and
that it is *not* a color by definition 1c (more specifically, it's not a
"hue.")
For me, if it's a name on a Crayola crayon, a choice in a clothes
catalog, or one of the 140 named HTML colors, it's a color.
--
Hue and cry -- Donna Richoux
Charles Riggs
I'd say so too, but what about black?
Charles Riggs
Charles Riggs
wrote:
It's a colour because I can mix some of my watercolours on a palette
and come up with it. I can't do that with black, so is black a colour?
Charles Riggs
felix
> I believe both spellings were around for a long time in Britain, but that
> "grey" has forced out "gray" in the last century or two.
Rather as the grey squirrel forced out the red...and don't they live
in a drey - or is that a dray?
felix
Matti Lamprhey
> "Matti Lamprhey" <matti-...@totally-official.com> wrote...
>
> > I believe both spellings were around for a long time in Britain, but
> > that "grey" has forced out "gray" in the last century or two.
>
> Rather as the grey squirrel forced out the red...and don't they live
> in a drey - or is that a dray?
Again, both spellings are used, with "drey" predominating.
Matti
Evan Kirshenbaum
> It's a colour because I can mix some of my watercolours on a palette
> and come up with it. I can't do that with black, so is black a colour?
You can't? You should be able to, at least in theory.
In theory, combining 100% of each cyan, magenta, and yellow should
produce a pure black. In practice, however, the combining of cyan,
magenta, and yellow inks does not produce a pure black due to
impurities in inks. For this reason, black ink (K) is used in
addition to the cyan, magenta, and yellow inks in four-color
printing.
http://www.adobe.com/support/techguides/color/cms_glossary/S.html
Mixing white would be more problematic. Of course, I'm kind of
surprised that your watercolor set doesn't come with black. If it
does, can you mix up all the other colors that come with it?
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |Bullwinkle: You sure that's the
1501 Page Mill Road, Building 1U | only way?
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |Rocky: Well, if you're going to be
| a hero, you've got to do
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com | stupid things every once in
(650)857-7572 | a while.
Charles Riggs
<kirsh...@hpl.hp.com> wrote:
>Charles Riggs <chr...@gofree.indigo.ie> writes:
>
>> It's a colour because I can mix some of my watercolours on a palette
>> and come up with it. I can't do that with black, so is black a colour?
>Mixing white would be more problematic. Of course, I'm kind of
>surprised that your watercolor set doesn't come with black.
I'd be more surprised if any artist's set of colours contained black.
It's neither useful nor pleasant. Modern art, where one isn't caring
about accuracy of representation or, perhaps, even beauty, may be a
different story but I don't mess with modern art so I don't know.
> If it
>does, can you mix up all the other colors that come with it?
I wouldn't want to try that.
Charles Riggs
felix
>
> It's a colour because I can mix some of my watercolours on a palette
> and come up with it. I can't do that with black, so is black a colour?
In art school, dollink, one is told that black is an *absence* of colour.
Make of this what you will. I bet the english teachers used to earn more.
felix
Aaron Davies
> Charles Riggs <chr...@gofree.indigo.ie> writes:
>
> > It's a colour because I can mix some of my watercolours on a palette
> > and come up with it. I can't do that with black, so is black a colour?
>
> You can't? You should be able to, at least in theory.
>
> In theory, combining 100% of each cyan, magenta, and yellow should
> produce a pure black. In practice, however, the combining of cyan,
> magenta, and yellow inks does not produce a pure black due to
> impurities in inks. For this reason, black ink (K) is used in
> addition to the cyan, magenta, and yellow inks in four-color
> printing.
>
> http://www.adobe.com/support/techguides/color/cms_glossary/S.html
>
> Mixing white would be more problematic. Of course, I'm kind of
> surprised that your watercolor set doesn't come with black. If it
> does, can you mix up all the other colors that come with it?
I remember trying as a kid, it generally makes a really muddy-looking
brown. As Adobe says, the idea only works with perfect ink.
--
__ __
/ ) / )
/--/ __. __ ______ / / __. , __o _ _
/ (_(_/|_/ (_(_) / <_ /__/_(_/|_\/ <__</_/_)_
Aaron Davies
> On 11 Oct 2001 17:12:48 -0700, Evan Kirshenbaum
> <kirsh...@hpl.hp.com> wrote:
>
> >Charles Riggs <chr...@gofree.indigo.ie> writes:
> >
> >> It's a colour because I can mix some of my watercolours on a palette
> >> and come up with it. I can't do that with black, so is black a colour?
>
> >Mixing white would be more problematic. Of course, I'm kind of
> >surprised that your watercolor set doesn't come with black.
>
> I'd be more surprised if any artist's set of colours contained black.
> It's neither useful nor pleasant. Modern art, where one isn't caring
> about accuracy of representation or, perhaps, even beauty, may be a
> different story but I don't mess with modern art so I don't know.
I'm sure there would be black. Not so much for painting directly as for
blending with other colors to create "tones".
Chris Malcolm
>In art school, dollink, one is told that black is an *absence* of colour.
In bad art schools. In good art schools they will be able to show you
the simple lighting experiment where a black piece of paper is turned
into a pale grey piece of paper, and more often than not it's a tinted
pale grey.
--
Chris Malcolm c...@dai.ed.ac.uk +44 (0)131 650 3085
School of Artificial Intelligence, Division of Informatics
Edinburgh University, 5 Forrest Hill, Edinburgh, EH1 2QL, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/daidb/people/homes/cam/ ] DoD #205
Chris Malcolm
>I'd be more surprised if any artist's set of colours contained black.
If you need a lot of surprises I recommend a visit to an artist's
supply shop then.
felix
> fel...@hotmail.com (felix) writes:
>
> >In art school, dollink, one is told that black is an *absence* of colour.
>
> In bad art schools.
Darn. That's why I always get blackballed at the Royal Watercolour
Society, no doubt.
felix
Mike Lyle
"Dollink"? Vot der dumblast? Do my finely-tuned senses detect the other
surviving Katzenjammer Kids fan? If so, come to my arms, long-lost brother, and
ignore the double-headed pig as you step carefully over the dodrotted
glue-coated doormat.
Mike.
Charles Riggs
(Aaron Davies) wrote:
>Charles Riggs <chr...@gofree.indigo.ie> wrote:
>
>> On 11 Oct 2001 17:12:48 -0700, Evan Kirshenbaum
>> <kirsh...@hpl.hp.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Charles Riggs <chr...@gofree.indigo.ie> writes:
>> >
>> >> It's a colour because I can mix some of my watercolours on a palette
>> >> and come up with it. I can't do that with black, so is black a colour?
>>
>> >Mixing white would be more problematic. Of course, I'm kind of
>> >surprised that your watercolor set doesn't come with black.
>>
>> I'd be more surprised if any artist's set of colours contained black.
>> It's neither useful nor pleasant. Modern art, where one isn't caring
>> about accuracy of representation or, perhaps, even beauty, may be a
>> different story but I don't mess with modern art so I don't know.
>
>I'm sure there would be black. Not so much for painting directly as for
>blending with other colors to create "tones".
You're *sure*? Are you an artist? That's not how it's done and there
is no black.
Charles Riggs
Charles Riggs
What's a dollink?
Charles Riggs
Charles Riggs
wrote:
>Charles Riggs <chr...@gofree.indigo.ie> writes:
>
>>I'd be more surprised if any artist's set of colours contained black.
>
>If you need a lot of surprises I recommend a visit to an artist's
>supply shop then.
When I go to Dublin I almost live in artist's supply shops. No black.
Nada. It's useless.
Charles Riggs
Laura F Spira
http://www.bpib.com/gross.htm
The word was always accompanied by a knip when used by my grandparents.
--
Laura
(emulate St. George for email)
Donna Richoux
You're talking specifically about watercolors, right? I can agree with
both sides. When I learned how to paint with watercolors, I was warned
never to use black as it would "bring down" the tone of my painting.
However, black watercolor paint is available, both in sets and
separately. (It was on the set that I used to learn with, which was why
I had to be warned.) I just browsed through the large art-supply site
www.dickblick.com, and found sets that do include black and sets that do
not. Here are two brands that sell black:
Daler-Rowney List: Ivory Black & Lamp Black
http://www.dickblick.com/zz003/57/products.asp?param=0&ig_id=4774
Loew-Cornell
http://www.dickblick.com/zz003/33/products.asp?param=0&ig_id=151
So, Charles, if you're *hoping* to find black, it's time for a little
mail-order.
--
Best --- Donna Richoux
Rowan Dingle
>On Fri, 12 Oct 2001 01:33:46 -0400, aa...@avalon.pascal-central.com
>>I'm sure there would be black. Not so much for painting directly as for
>>blending with other colors to create "tones".
>
>You're *sure*? Are you an artist? That's not how it's done and there
>is no black.
'Black! Black!'
'Johnny...'
'Stygian blackness oozing from the stump of the tree, spreading across
the ground, spreading everywhere! My toes! Oh lovely black, blackness!'
'Sit down, Johnny.'
--
Rowan Dingle
Linz
'They keep me in the cellar and feed me on worms.'
--
I'm all heart, me.
This makes tying shoelaces more than a little tricky.
(Ancipital, urs)
felix
'We shall have to work like *demons* before the light goes...'
felix
Charles Riggs
wrote:
>
>You're talking specifically about watercolors, right?
I am, but I rather doubt if oil colourists use black either.
> I can agree with
>both sides. When I learned how to paint with watercolors, I was warned
>never to use black as it would "bring down" the tone of my painting.
Certainly, and in addition to that, black is almost never seen in
nature.
>However, black watercolor paint is available, both in sets and
>separately. (It was on the set that I used to learn with, which was why
>I had to be warned.) I just browsed through the large art-supply site
>www.dickblick.com, and found sets that do include black and sets that do
>not. Here are two brands that sell black:
>
>Daler-Rowney List: Ivory Black & Lamp Black
> http://www.dickblick.com/zz003/57/products.asp?param=0&ig_id=4774
>
>Loew-Cornell
> http://www.dickblick.com/zz003/33/products.asp?param=0&ig_id=151
My brochure from Daler-Rowney shows their Lamp Black to be more of a
very dark blue than a black. If I were painting the sky at night,
which I've never had occasion to do, this would be a good colour to
use. Their Ivory Black appears to be a dark, and unhappy, grey and I
can't think of a use I'd have for it. I like blue in my greys (most
people do I think) and use Paine's grey, or a variation on it, when
painting shadows, for example.
>So, Charles, if you're *hoping* to find black, it's time for a little
>mail-order.
No, Donna, the only time I use black is when I'm doing someone's
portrait in charcoal. As a watercolourist, I have no need for black.
Charles Riggs
Charles Riggs
<la...@DRAGONspira.u-net.com> wrote:
>Charles Riggs wrote:
>>
>> On 11 Oct 2001 22:17:31 -0700, fel...@hotmail.com (felix) wrote:
>>
>> >Charles Riggs <chr...@gofree.indigo.ie> wrote in message news:<eneastsoe9lj59l9d...@4ax.com>...
>> >
>> >>
>> >> It's a colour because I can mix some of my watercolours on a palette
>> >> and come up with it. I can't do that with black, so is black a colour?
>> >
>> >In art school, dollink, one is told that black is an *absence* of colour.
>> >Make of this what you will. I bet the english teachers used to earn more.
>>
>> What's a dollink?
>>
>>
>You don't know from dollink, dollink? This may help:
>http://www.bpib.com/gross.htm
Not much of a cartoonist, is he. Gross is the word.
Charles Riggs
jan sand
>Are grey and gray different colours?
>Thoughts?
>
>
>felix
Perhaps it might be helpful to know something of the way people who
work in graphics view the dimensions of color.
What is commonly called color (or colour) is analyzed by professionals
in three dimensions.
There is hue which is broken down into the various hues such as red,
blue, green, etc.
Of course, each of these main classifications has many variations so
that some are difficult to describe as belonging to one or the other
main classes such as blue-greens, orange-yellows, violet-blues, etc.
And then there are the browns, pinks, etc.
The next dimension is intensity wherein any of the hues may vary from,
say, a very bright intense red to an extremely pale intensity which is
difficult to distinguish from white.
The other dimension is value. Value, at one extreme, is black. At
the other extreme it is white. The grays (or greys) vary in
brightness between the extremes. There are many charts with chips
which demonstrate combinations of hue, intensity and value for
reference purposes.
Pigment colors behave quite differently from colored light. When a
pigment is illuminated by white light, the molecules react with the
light to absorb certain frequencies of the white light and reflect
other frequencies. It is the reflected frequencies which we see as
the color of the pigment. Green plants reject the color green and
absorb the others, so we see the plants as green.
Combinations of pigments result in different results than combinations
of colored lights.
Yellow and blue pigments combine to produce green pigment but the same
is not true of yellow and blue light combined since the pigment colors
are the result of absorbing light while light combined is not the same
thing.
Colors emitted by incandescent matter (matter heated to become
incandescent) emit the colors characteristic of the atoms and
molecules which form the matter and the spectrum can be analyzed to
reveal what those components are, which is how we know what matter is
in the stars.
When a pigment is illuminated by a colored light which is completely
absorbed by the pigment, the pigment appears black which is why a
green pigment appears black under red light.
Both my parents worked in watercolor and they avoided black as a color
since the same effect as black can be obtained much more vibrantly in
a painting by a combination of colors and pure black is rather unusual
in nature where light intrudes everywhere. But modern artists use
black freely if they find it useful. Dubuffet, Rouault, and may others
incorporated black in their work. To term these painters "modern" is
rather peculiar since "modern" art has been extant for around a
century. The cave painters of Lescaux and Altamira used black as did
the bushman drawings and other "primitive" painters and these were
hardly modern.
Jan Sand
Richard Fontana
> Certainly, and in addition to that, black is almost never seen in
> nature.
Are you suggesting that art must imitate nature?
felix
They are a bit of a shock, aren't they?
I guess times have moved on..they must have been acceptable once -
strange tho, the written stuff is still hilarious.
felix
felix
> Certainly, and in addition to that, black is almost never seen in
> nature.
What about a rainy night with no moon in the middle of nowhere? I've
been in places where the 'hand in front of face' rule applied. And
it's been even more common in the past, before electricity. And then
of course, there's the darkness of the human soul...
felix
Spehro Pefhany
> Certainly, and in addition to that, black is almost never seen in
> nature.
Dog noses? Dog lips? The pupils of the eye? Well dead squirrel?
Human skin? Crickets? Ants?
Best regards,
--
Spehro Pefhany --"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
sp...@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
/.-.\
(( * ))
\\ // Please help if you can:
\\\ http://dailynews.yahoo.com/fc/US/Emergency_Information/
//\\\
/// \\\
\/ \/
George Hardy
> Are grey and gray different colours?
Yes. Grey is a colour; gray is a color.
GFH
R H Draney
wrote:
>fel...@hotmail.com (felix) wrote in message news:<430d1c32.01101...@posting.google.com>...
>
>> Are grey and gray different colours?
>
>Yes. Grey is a colour; gray is a color.
For those who have never looked into such things, the colors defined
in HTML are depicted in a chart I threw up (unfortunate phrase that)
at:
http://home.earthlink.net/~dadoctah/paintchips.htm
Note that some of the color names are illegible; one can highlight
them and see what they actually spell...also, the boxes with four
smaller boxes within describe variant colors; some browsers may
distinguish "brown1", "brown2", "brown3" and "brown4" from simple
"brown"....
Note too that some color names seem to bear no resemblance to the
color represented...on my screen "azure" appears white,
"lightgoldenrod" is pale green, "darkgray" is lighter than "gray", and
"lightgray" is actually dark blue; you will undoubtedly notice other
discrepancies on your own system....
Finally, I'm not sure whether I consider "gainsboro", "moccasin" and
"papayawhip" colors at all, but they were in the book with the
rest....r
jan sand
<sp...@interlog.com> wrote:
>The renowned Charles Riggs <chr...@gofree.indigo.ie> wrote:
>
>> Certainly, and in addition to that, black is almost never seen in
>> nature.
>
>Dog noses? Dog lips? The pupils of the eye? Well dead squirrel?
>Human skin? Crickets? Ants?
>
>Best regards,
>--
>Spehro Pefhany --
In the field of painting the black you describe is known as local
color. When it is illuminated, it reflects the light in different
ways depending upon its texture and other surface factors and may be
represented in other pigments. Occasionally, it (or parts of it) can
be represented in black pigment.
Jan Sand
Rob Bannister
> For those who have never looked into such things, the colors defined
> in HTML are depicted in a chart I threw up (unfortunate phrase that)
> at:
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~dadoctah/paintchips.htm
>
> Note that some of the color names are illegible; one can highlight
> them and see what they actually spell...also, the boxes with four
> smaller boxes within describe variant colors; some browsers may
> distinguish "brown1", "brown2", "brown3" and "brown4" from simple
> "brown"....
>
> Note too that some color names seem to bear no resemblance to the
> color represented...on my screen "azure" appears white,
> "lightgoldenrod" is pale green, "darkgray" is lighter than "gray", and
> "lightgray" is actually dark blue; you will undoubtedly notice other
> discrepancies on your own system....
>
> Finally, I'm not sure whether I consider "gainsboro", "moccasin" and
> "papayawhip" colors at all, but they were in the book with the
> rest....r
Interesting - I had the same effects with lightgoldenrod (bluish-green) and darkgray, but azure came out a
sort of mauve colour.
-- Rob Bannister
Nyal Williams
> wrote:
>
> >
> >You're talking specifically about watercolors, right?
>
> I am, but I rather doubt if oil colourists use black either.
>
> > I can agree with
> >both sides. When I learned how to paint with watercolors, I was warned
> >never to use black as it would "bring down" the tone of my painting.
>
> Certainly, and in addition to that, black is almost never seen in
> nature.
Except, maybe in Newcastle?
Charles Riggs
>Charles Riggs <chr...@gofree.indigo.ie> wrote in message news:<v0iist4l1aaojulbf...@4ax.com>...
>
>> Certainly, and in addition to that, black is almost never seen in
>> nature.
>
>What about a rainy night with no moon in the middle of nowhere?
I'd have to see the night, but a very dark purple probably. Not black
I think. Even without a moon, the sun and our atmosphere influences
the colour of the night sky, I'd say.
> I've
>been in places where the 'hand in front of face' rule applied. And
>it's been even more common in the past, before electricity. And then
>of course, there's the darkness of the human soul...
I can think of an example or two and that's why I said "almost". The
inside of a deep cave is black I suppose but how would I be able to
paint it? so that's a moot point.
Charles Riggs
Charles Riggs
I suggest that it must improve upon it and black wouldn't do that
since it is an unpleasant colour to look at when surrounded by colours
of beauty.
Charles Riggs
Charles Riggs
I've never had the pleasure of being there so I don't know.
Charles Riggs
Charles Riggs
That may well be so, but the pictures seem very crudely drawn.
Charles Riggs
Charles Riggs
<sp...@interlog.com> wrote:
>The renowned Charles Riggs <chr...@gofree.indigo.ie> wrote:
>
>> Certainly, and in addition to that, black is almost never seen in
>> nature.
>
>Dog noses?
I've never gotten that close, for fear he might lick me, to one of
those critters to know; I'd guess a dark brown though.
>Dog lips?
They'd be pink or red, wouldn't they?
>The pupils of the eye?
I just checked in a mirror, Spehro. I saw a white highlight from the
bathroom light and a miniature reflection of my face. The surrounding
area did appear black but I'd probably paint it as a dark purple or
something, depending on the surrounding light.
That is the key to it, by the way: the influence of the surrounding
light; Monet and friends taught us this. Light is never black.
>Well dead squirrel?
>Human skin?
Holy cow, man, not even close.
> Crickets? Ants?
You may be right about ants but since I don't own any brushes that
small I'm not going to worry about them too much.
Charles Riggs
Skitt
Beauty, to be fully appreciated, must be contrasted by ugliness. Compare
the wives I married versus those women that tried to capture my fancy.
Sometimes it doesn't work, but it is still enjoyable to some extent.
Shallowness, fun be thy name.
Love and kindness, something that I have finally found, is the ultimate
reward.
--
Skitt (in SF Bay Area) http://www.geocities.com/opus731/
I speak English well -- I learn it from a book!
-- Manuel of "Fawlty Towers" (he's from Barcelona).
Skitt
"Charles Riggs" <chr...@gofree.indigo.ie> wrote
> >> Certainly, and in addition to that, black is almost never seen in
> >> nature.
> >
> >What about a rainy night with no moon in the middle of nowhere?
>
> I'd have to see the night, but a very dark purple probably.
Purple? Were you tripping?
Naah, not purple. I have been in the Santa Cruz mountains, living there
among the redwoods, trying to make my way within the campground on the paved
road to the bottom of the hill overshadowed by those huge trees. Naah, the
only way to see anything was to not look at it directly. That has to do
with the construction of the human eye and its perception of certain light
frequencies. Looking down or straight ahead allowed me to perceive the
small opening between the trees above me on both sides of the road, thus
allowing me to proceed to my goal -- the side of one of the open-sided
cabins where the church-group gals, specifically one named Carol, was
sleeping. See, these are occurrences that memories are made of.
Thanks for the memories.
Skitt
> On Sun, 14 Oct 2001 20:23:04 GMT, "Spehro Pefhany"
> <sp...@interlog.com> wrote:
>
> >The renowned Charles Riggs <chr...@gofree.indigo.ie> wrote:
> >
> >> Certainly, and in addition to that, black is almost never seen in
> >> nature.
> >
> >Dog noses?
>
> I've never gotten that close, for fear he might lick me, to one of
> those critters to know; I'd guess a dark brown though.
Poor dude! There's nothing more devoted to one than a dog, lest it be two
dogs. I owned two Labradors at one time, and they were the best friends I
have ever had. Sure, they demanded attention and care, but much less that
that demanded by a wife (oo, I'm in trouble now). They were far more
forgiving, didn't hold grudges longer than a day, unfailingly licked
(kissed) me when I come home from work every day, never told me what a rough
day they had and never insisted for me to take them out to a fancy
restaurant once a week. Dry dog food did just fine.
> >Dog lips?
Mostly cleaner than those of humans.
> They'd be pink or red, wouldn't they?
Black.
> >The pupils of the eye?
Black.
> I just checked in a mirror, Spehro. I saw a white highlight from the
> bathroom light and a miniature reflection of my face. The surrounding
> area did appear black but I'd probably paint it as a dark purple or
> something, depending on the surrounding light.
>
> That is the key to it, by the way: the influence of the surrounding
> light; Monet and friends taught us this. Light is never black.
No, but the lack of it is.
> >Well dead squirrel?
Yechh. Not black.
> >Human skin?
Never seen one, but there were some that were close.
> Holy cow, man, not even close.
>
> > Crickets? Ants?
>
> You may be right about ants but since I don't own any brushes that
> small I'm not going to worry about them too much.
There are some ants and other bugs that are black. I've seen them. The
bugs (crickets?) in Oklahoma.
Fabian
"Charles Riggs" <chr...@gofree.indigo.ie> wrote in message
> Certainly, and in addition to that, black is almost never seen in
> nature.
One or near the equator, after sunset and before sunrise, without street
lights, you cannot see your hand in front of your face. This is a fairly
common natural occurance.
That black enough for you?
--
--
Fabian
Sig under deconstruction
Simon R. Hughes
Is chartreuse in there?
--
Simon R. Hughes -- http://www.geocities.com/a57998/subconscious/
felix
> Naah, not purple. I have been in the Santa Cruz mountains, living there
> among the redwoods, trying to make my way within the campground on the paved
> road to the bottom of the hill overshadowed by those huge trees. Naah, the
> only way to see anything was to not look at it directly. That has to do
> with the construction of the human eye and its perception of certain light
> frequencies.
Yep, there are more rods than cones at the retina's periphery, which
is why peripheral vision is in grayscale. They're more light-sensitive
as well, so if you want to see really faint stars, look at 'em
sideways.
> Looking down or straight ahead allowed me to perceive the
> small opening between the trees above me on both sides of the road, thus
> allowing me to proceed to my goal -- the side of one of the open-sided
> cabins where the church-group gals, specifically one named Carol, was
> sleeping. See, these are occurrences that memories are made of.
And - and? Finish the story! With detailed descriptions, please :)
felix
Donna Richoux
> I suggest that it must improve upon it and black wouldn't do that
> since it is an unpleasant colour to look at when surrounded by colours
> of beauty.
At least you acknowledge here that black is a color, then. That was the
original question. It doesn't have to be a color that you like or a
color that you can reproduce with watercolors to be "a color."
I see you've gone native with your spelling.
--
Best -- Donna Richoux
Rowan Dingle
[snip salacity]
>Thanks for the memories.
You sometimes see goats with black horns.
--
Rowan Dingle
R H Draney
<hug...@tromso.online.no> wrote:
>Thus Spake Rob Bannister:
>> R H Draney wrote:
>>
>> > For those who have never looked into such things, the colors defined
>> > in HTML are depicted in a chart I threw up (unfortunate phrase that)
>> > at:
>> >
>> > http://home.earthlink.net/~dadoctah/paintchips.htm
>>
>> Interesting - I had the same effects with lightgoldenrod (bluish-green)
>> and darkgray, but azure came out a sort of mauve colour.
>
>Is chartreuse in there?
Third row, fourth column...the "paint chips" are in alphabetical order
because I couldn't think of a better way to organize them....r
--
"Why is everything so blue?"
- English translation of the female background
voice in War's "Spill the Wine"
M.J.Powell
Williams <nyalwi...@home.com> writes
Brown, surely?
Mike
--
M.J.Powell
Jacqui
> >> Certainly, and in addition to that, black is almost never seen in
> >> nature.
> >
> >Except, maybe in Newcastle?
>
> I've never had the pleasure of being there so I don't know.
Never put coal on a fire?
Jac
Jerry Friedman
> On Sat, 13 Oct 2001 12:42:13 +0200, tr...@euronet.nl (Donna Richoux)
> wrote:
>
> >
> >You're talking specifically about watercolors, right?
>
> I am, but I rather doubt if oil colourists use black either.
I recently sat for a portrait in oils (as a favor to the painter, a
friend of mine) and he told me he makes "black" by mixing, um,
viridian and alizarin? The result is more flexible (he can change the
proportions) and warmer than lampblack, which is also available.
>
> > I can agree with
> >both sides. When I learned how to paint with watercolors, I was warned
> >never to use black as it would "bring down" the tone of my painting.
>
> Certainly, and in addition to that, black is almost never seen in
> nature.
>
> >However, black watercolor paint is available, both in sets and
> >separately. (It was on the set that I used to learn with, which was why
> >I had to be warned.) I just browsed through the large art-supply site
> >www.dickblick.com, and found sets that do include black and sets that do
> >not. Here are two brands that sell black:
> >
> >Daler-Rowney List: Ivory Black & Lamp Black
> > http://www.dickblick.com/zz003/57/products.asp?param=0&ig_id=4774
> >
> >Loew-Cornell
> > http://www.dickblick.com/zz003/33/products.asp?param=0&ig_id=151
>
> My brochure from Daler-Rowney shows their Lamp Black to be more of a
> very dark blue than a black. If I were painting the sky at night,
> which I've never had occasion to do, this would be a good colour to
> use. Their Ivory Black appears to be a dark, and unhappy, grey and I
> can't think of a use I'd have for it. I like blue in my greys (most
> people do I think) and use Paine's grey, or a variation on it, when
> painting shadows, for example.
>
> >So, Charles, if you're *hoping* to find black, it's time for a little
> >mail-order.
>
> No, Donna, the only time I use black is when I'm doing someone's
> portrait in charcoal. As a watercolourist, I have no need for black.
Sounds like false advertising or bad printing from Daler-Rowney. Real
lampblack is pretty black; carbon (like that charcoal you mention) is
one of the places that black appears in nature. So is the night
sky--even on a full-moon night you can't see colors in nearby objects,
still less the sky, and on a moonless night there's no doubt that the
sky is absolutely black. Of course if the night sky *looks* bluish or
purplish to your artist's eye, you'll want to paint it that way (if
you ever paint it).
How would you paint a crow if one flew into one of your landscapes?
Red and green, like my friend?
--
Jerry Friedman
Charles Riggs
wrote:
>
>"Charles Riggs" <chr...@gofree.indigo.ie> wrote in message
>news:qqvkst0h1oumscnhf...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 14 Oct 2001 08:52:28 -0400, Richard Fontana
>> <rf...@sparky.cs.nyu.edu> wrote:
>>
>> >On Sun, 14 Oct 2001, Charles Riggs wrote:
>> >
>> >> Certainly, and in addition to that, black is almost never seen in
>> >> nature.
>> >
>> >Are you suggesting that art must imitate nature?
>>
>> I suggest that it must improve upon it and black wouldn't do that
>> since it is an unpleasant colour to look at when surrounded by colours
>> of beauty.
>
>Beauty, to be fully appreciated, must be contrasted by ugliness. Compare
>the wives I married versus those women that tried to capture my fancy.
>Sometimes it doesn't work, but it is still enjoyable to some extent.
>Shallowness, fun be thy name.
You're right, of course. How could I ever have forgotten about my
former wife?
>Love and kindness, something that I have finally found, is the ultimate
>reward.
?
You have a pet monkey?
Charles Riggs
Charles Riggs
wrote:
>Charles Riggs <chr...@gofree.indigo.ie> wrote:
>
>> I suggest that it must improve upon it and black wouldn't do that
>> since it is an unpleasant colour to look at when surrounded by colours
>> of beauty.
>
>At least you acknowledge here that black is a color, then. That was the
>original question.
Was it? I clean forgot. I had to call it something so I called it a
colour. Hate is the absence of love and love is an emotion and black
is the absence of colour, but hate is still an emotion as black,
perhaps, is still a colour. I hope that clears up my thinking on the
matter, for you.
>It doesn't have to be a color that you like or a
>color that you can reproduce with watercolors to be "a color."
It has to be a colour I like for it to appear in my crayon box and if
it doesn't appear in my crayon box, it's sight unseen and I don't have
to worry about it.
>I see you've gone native with your spelling.
I have three options:
1. Stand out as a foreigner (even more than I already do) by
continuing to spell like an American.
2. When in Rome, spell as the Romans do.
3. Be inconsistent and spell as the wind blows me.
I think option 2 makes the best sense.
Charles Riggs
Charles Riggs
<use...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In alt.usage.english, Skitt <sk...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>[snip salacity]
>
>>Thanks for the memories.
>
>You sometimes see goats with black horns.
Thanks, Rowan, I'll try to keep that in mind the next time I have an
urge to paint a goat. Or even get close enough to one to have a
look-see.
Charles Riggs
Charles Riggs
If true, then yes. But it's a moot point since I wouldn't be able to
find my brushes to paint it, even if they were in front of my face.
Charles Riggs
Charles Riggs
Not anymore. I have a lovely, clean, gas fire.
Charles Riggs
Charles Riggs
Friedman) wrote:
>Charles Riggs <chr...@gofree.indigo.ie> wrote in message news:<v0iist4l1aaojulbf...@4ax.com>...
>> On Sat, 13 Oct 2001 12:42:13 +0200, tr...@euronet.nl (Donna Richoux)
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >You're talking specifically about watercolors, right?
>>
>> I am, but I rather doubt if oil colourists use black either.
>
>I recently sat for a portrait in oils (as a favor to the painter, a
>friend of mine) and he told me he makes "black" by mixing, um,
>viridian and alizarin? The result is more flexible (he can change the
>proportions) and warmer than lampblack, which is also available.
"Black", yes. I'm with you there.
Perhaps it looks that way to me because I want it to look that way.
That's okay, no? I'm not a camera.
>How would you paint a crow if one flew into one of your landscapes?
>Red and green, like my friend?
I often observe the crows out front as they pick through our garbage.
Interesting animals. They have a nice sheen to their bodies; are they
red and green? I'll take a closer look next time, but I think a purple
would be closer.
Charles Riggs
R H Draney
<chr...@gofree.indigo.ie> wrote:
>On Mon, 15 Oct 2001 13:17:34 +0200, tr...@euronet.nl (Donna Richoux)
>wrote:
>
>>At least you acknowledge here that black is a color, then. That was the
>>original question.
>
>Was it? I clean forgot. I had to call it something so I called it a
>colour. Hate is the absence of love and love is an emotion and black
>is the absence of colour, but hate is still an emotion as black,
>perhaps, is still a colour. I hope that clears up my thinking on the
>matter, for you.
Why are people insisting that black isn't really black?...if you need
a cite:
http://www.summer.com.br/~pfilho/html/lyrics/b/black_is_black.txt
Truly Donovan
>news:qqvkst0h1oumscnhf...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 14 Oct 2001 08:52:28 -0400, Richard Fontana
>> <rf...@sparky.cs.nyu.edu> wrote:
>>
>> >On Sun, 14 Oct 2001, Charles Riggs wrote:
>> >
>> >> Certainly, and in addition to that, black is almost never seen in
>> >> nature.
>> >
>> >Are you suggesting that art must imitate nature?
>>
>> I suggest that it must improve upon it and black wouldn't do that
>> since it is an unpleasant colour to look at when surrounded by colours
>> of beauty.
--
Truly Donovan
http://www.trulydonovan.com
Fabian
"Charles Riggs" hu kiteb
> "Fabian" wrote:
> > "Charles Riggs" wrote in message
> >
> >> Certainly, and in addition to that, black is almost never seen in
> >> nature.
> >
> >One or near the equator, after sunset and before sunrise, without street
> >lights, you cannot see your hand in front of your face. This is a fairly
> >common natural occurance.
> >
> >That black enough for you?
>
> If true, then yes. But it's a moot point since I wouldn't be able to
> find my brushes to paint it, even if they were in front of my face.
No ifs about it. I've btdt. I speak from personal experience.
Rowan Dingle
>I often observe the crows out front as they pick through our garbage.
>Interesting animals. They have a nice sheen to their bodies; are they
>red and green? I'll take a closer look next time, but I think a purple
>would be closer.
'Purple! Purple! Robe of glory, robe of death!'
'Sit down, Charles.'
--
Rowan Dingle
felix
> I often observe the crows out front as they pick through our garbage.
> Interesting animals. They have a nice sheen to their bodies; are they
> red and green? I'll take a closer look next time, but I think a purple
> would be closer.
I never saw a purple crow;
I hope to never see one;
But I can tell you anyhow
Next time I go down Bayswater Road on a Sunday I'll avert my eyes in
case Charles is flogging his paintings and there happens to BE one.
felix
Aaron Davies
Is that supposed to cancel out your latest duplicate?
--
Aaron Davies
ag...@columbia.edu
sig coming Soon(tm)