We don't know if you've done any research in to the physiology of human vision - it's a fascinating subject!I have no interest in input formatting tricks to create some clever optical illusion for a seamless image between the two, in order to mimic natural vision.
...
In other words, I am solely designing a device that will inject photons at frequencies of my choosing into each individual eye irrespective of one another, with a simple array of mirrors to have said photons coming from all angles.
You may want to consider some optics to present the image at a certain distance to the eye - if there are any variations in the wall of colour you're planning to present your eyes will try to focus on the detail and you'll likely end up with horrible headaches if they are very close to the eye. This can be an issue with simple stereoscopic viewers for example.
And secondly you talk about injecting photons at various frequencies - most modern displays only produce light at three frequencies - we call them red, green and blue - because on average humans have detectors in the retina which operate at those frequencies - but there are genetic variations - colour-blindnes, or even people who are tetrachromic who have receptors for two different blues. That's before you encounter people who have had eye surgery for cateracts and are sensitive to UV...
I'm no expert, just have encountered a few things and people which have opened my eyes a bit more
yea unfortunately any display is going to generally be limited to three chosen "primary" colors- that is, colors at frequencies that can produce a large spectrum of colors when mixed. our entire spectrum of vision consists of spectral colors and extra-spectral colors. spectral colors are colors that can be produced given a single consistent frequency of light in normal atmospheric conditions, and extra-spectral, as you may have guessed, are colors that can ONLY be produced given a combination of spectral light. Generally, there are two areas where these frequencies "mix":
Firstly, the lightwaves constructively and deconstructively interfere as they travel through space, and if you have studied sine waves in physics class, I'm sure you know what I'm talking about and could at least somewhat accurately predict the outcome of two given photon wavelengths travelling adjacent to one another. as you may also know, light exists around us as if we were submerged in a body of water with many different internal currents twisting around eachother. The original light source spits out light like a hose spits out water, and the "stream" bounces into objects at a bunch of angles, or "splashes" into the object, forming a number of currents. these currents run into different objects, rinse and repeat, until light fills the room. of course all this happens almost instantaneously as the "water" from this "hose" is completely weightless, in most cases ignores gravity and travels at imperceptibly fast speeds. All this to say, lightwaves within the same "current" travelling adjacent to eachother at a distance where their amplitudes intersect will interfere with one another in the aforementioned manner.
secondly, the light "mixes" within your eye, so to speak. the light reaches your eye after bouncing off an object at an angle that would send it in a straight line to your eye, of course. as you know, the collection of waves slams into the rods and cones inside your eye, which then send a code of electrochemical signals to your brain to make vision. however, the "resolution" of rods and cones within your eye is several orders of magnitude lower than the very precisely and delicately defined field of lightwaves that compose the "input" of your vision, and the "image" your brain produces and comprehends as a result of the electrochemical signals from your optic nerve has a "resolution" that is much lower than the "resolution" of your rods and cones. And so, your brain has to approximate. This is the second place that wavelengths are mixed, and why your computer screen produces precise shades of "yellow" by weaving a given lattice of green and red.
Generally, there are going to be a huge number of different potential spectral colors to produce any given extra-spectral color, because that's just how math is, but also due to the number of variables at play here. However, regarding screen displays, they've standardized the mixes of color for any given color key so its actually possible to code that shit. programs that can give me this information are available on the internet for free, though i don't know if there are any device-specific programs.
and so when i said that i want "precise frequencies" of light, i was really referring to the composite wave of a given color produced by the display's mix of RGB/CMY, in order to map a given composite wavelength out of the visible spectrum to a given pattern of brain activity in my brain, and maybe this will allow me to generate a graph and maybe even an equation, though i doubt i will be that lucky. i would also like to find a program that allows me to manipulate each color component on a slider to REALLY design my own color instead of having to pick from a stupid swatch.
This experiment is by no means a complete and satisfactory replication of real world conditions, but its the best I've got honestly, and in order to really improve this experiment I would need access to a lot of advanced technology, lots of which don't even exist yet. as far as i know, it isn't even close to possible to produce an array of lights that capture the full visible spectrum of light. Also, I'm not even a sciences student, just a visual arts student that studies physics and never sleeps. Also, the fact i am solely studying myself means that my data is fundamentally inapplicable to the vast majority of people, not just because the subjectivity of the visual interpretation of color, but also because I myself am tetrachromatic. also, the more i work on the overarching project of trying to measure my own perception of beauty, the more i am losing enthusiasm for it. partly because it is completely impossible, but also partly because if i manage to actually do it I'm afraid it will either completely nosedive my sense of creativity or broaden it multiplicatively, and that is kind of an insane gamble to take frankly.
Statistics: Posted by alex:) — Fri Apr 19, 2024 9:39 pm