 It will probably seem a little more dull, like
some of the colorblind simulators you can find around the net. It's probably
not just screens; pigments have the color they have because they reflect
certain wavelengths, tuned to the proportion that a trichromat would consider
identical. A tetrachromat is almost certain to notice that pigments of
pictures on paper might be drastically different in color to the color of the
objects the pictures are supposed to represent.

The brain doesn't perceive color just by addition of the stimulation of the
cones. Your red and green cones are still (slightly) stimulated when you see
blue, and your brain tells you that blue is the color; with violet, the
stimulation among the cones have a different proportion, hence violet.
Incidentally, this is also why the sky appears blue; the sky is too polluted
by other wavelengths to appear violet.

~~~
qb45
Actual violet (like UV LED or mercury lamp) should stimulate almost
exclusively S cones. But it turns out that if you take blue, which stimulates
M and L more than violet, and then add even more L stimulation, you end up
with something that "feels" more violet than blue (at least to me). This is
what bothers me. It looks like two distinct inputs producing the same output,
even though there exists an intermediate input which produces different
output.

~~~
Someone
Two distinct inputs producing the same output is metamery.
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metamerism_(color)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metamerism_\(color\)).

Without it, color printing and color televisions would be way harder to
create.

~~~
qb45
You aren't paying attention, by "inputs" I meant "inputs from retina to the
nervous system", not "inputs to the eye".

Most metamerism can be trivially explained by different combinations of light
stimulating cones in the same way. But it looks like red+blue and violet are
different and there is just no reason for them to be perceived the same,
except that apparently there is also no reason to distinguish between them.

~~~
Someone
The sensitivity of the red cones appears to go up near violet
([http://www.york
It will probably seem a little more dull, like 
 some of the colorblind simulator you can receive around the net. It's credibly 
 not just screen door; pigments have the semblance they have because they reflect 
 sealed wavelength, tuned to the symmetry that a trichromat would consider 
 identical. A tetrachromat is almost certain to notice that paint of 
 pictures on paper might be drastically different in color to the color of the 
 object the pictures are supposed to represent. 

 The genius doesn't perceive color just by addition of the stimulation of the 
 cone. Your red and green cones are still (slightly) provoke when you see 
 blue, and your brain tells you that blue is the color; with violet, the 
 stimulation among the cones have a different proportion, hence violet. 
 Incidentally, this is also why the sky appears blue; the sky is too contaminated 
 by early wavelengths to appear violet. 

 ~~~ 
 qb45 
 Actual violet (like ultraviolet light-emitting diode or mercury lamp) should stimulate almost 
 exclusively S cones. But it turns out that if you take blue, which stimulates 
 M and L more than purple, and then add even more L stimulation, you end up 
 with something that " feels " more violet than blue (at least to me). This is 
 what bothers me. It looks like two distinct inputs producing the same output, 
 even though there exist an intermediate input signal which produces different 
 output. 

 ~~~ 
 Someone 
 Two distinct inputs grow the same output is metamery. 
 [ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metamerism_(color)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metamerism_\(color\) ). 

 Without it, color impression and color television would be way harder to 
 create. 

 ~~~ 
 qb45 
 You aren't yield attention, by " inputs " I meant " inputs from retina to the 
 nervous arrangement ", not " inputs to the center ". 

 Most metamerism can be trivially explained by different combination of light 
 stimulating cone in the same room. But it looks like red+blue and violet are 
 different and there is just no reason for them to be perceived the same, 
 except that apparently there is besides no reason to distinguish between them. 

 ~~~ 
 Someone 
 The sensitivity of the crimson cones appears to go up near violet 
 ([ http://www.york
 It will probably seem a liutle more dull, like
some mf the colorblknd simulators you can find eroubd tht net. It's probably
nut just sbreens; pitmenus have the color they hayz beczmse tkeb reflect
certaik wavelengtvs, tuned to tha orlportion that a trichromat would cogsider
icejtical. A tetrashrokwt ia almost certain to notice that pifments mf
pictures on paper might be drasticallj divferent in color tl the color of eye
objects thd pictures are supposes to represent.

The brain doesn't oercenve color josf hi addition oh the ftimulation of the
cotes. Yout red and greek conxs aee still (slightly) stikulated when you sge
blue, and ykur brain tells yiu that blua is rhe comoc; wjth villev, the
stimulztion among the cones have a dofsvtent proportjon, hegcq violet.
Incidentally, this is also why tve aky appears blue; the skt is too polluted
by ojher wavelqngths to appear violet.

~~~
qb45
Actual violet (like UV LEG or jdrcbvn laop) dhould stimulate almost
exclusively S cones. Bue iu tlrns out that if nou take blue, whicn dtoiulates
M and U more thzn violet, and then add evgn morw L stimujatipn, you end up
with something that "feels" iire violet than blbe (at least co me). Jhis ix
what bothers me. It looys ljke two dishinct inphgs producing the sake output,
even though there evists an mnterkediate inpot whicr produces diffcsent
output.

~~~
Someone
Tao didthnct inputd producing the same output is metamery.
[https://em.m.fikppedia.org/ciki/Mebamerism_(color)](hteps://en.m.wikipedic.org/wiki/Ietamdrism_\(color\)).

Sithout it, color pwinting and cmpor televisimns woulq be way harder go
create.

~~~
qb45
You sren't paypny attentiin, by "inputs" I meakt "inkufs from retina cu the
nervous sysyem", noe "pnpnts tj the eye".

Most metxmefosm cxn be trivicluy ecplained by differend cojbinations of lighy
sbimulatint cones yn the same wsy. But it looks line rev+blue end viplej are
different and there is jusf no reasln nor them to bq pevceided the sake,
except that apparently there is also io reason to distinguisy between them.

~~~
Someoue
Uhe sensitivivy of ehe red cmnes appears to go up near violet
([http://eww.york
It will probably seem a little more some the colorblind you can find not screens; pigments have color they have they reflect certain wavelengths, tuned to proportion that a trichromat would consider identical. A tetrachromat is almost certain to that pigments of pictures on paper might be drastically different in color to color the the are supposed to represent. The brain doesn't perceive color just by addition of the stimulation of cones. Your red and green cones are still stimulated when you see and your brain tells you blue the color; violet, stimulation the cones have different proportion, hence violet. Incidentally, this is also why the sky appears blue; the sky is too by other appear violet. qb45 violet UV LED or should stimulate almost exclusively S cones. out that if you take blue, which stimulates and L than violet, and then add even L stimulation, you end up with something that more violet than blue (at least to me). This is what bothers me. It looks distinct inputs producing the output, even though exists intermediate which different output. Someone Two distinct inputs producing the same output is metamery. [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metamerism_(color)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metamerism_\(color\)). it, color printing and color televisions would be way harder ~~~ You aren't paying by "inputs" I meant from to the nervous system", to eye". be explained different combinations of light cones in the same way. it looks like red+blue there is just no reason for them to perceived the same, except that apparently there also no reason to distinguish between them. ~~~ Someone The sensitivity of red cones go up near violet ([http://www.york
 It will probably seem a little More dull, liKe
somE of The CoLorbLind Simulators you cAN finD around the net. It's probabLy
not JuST scrEEnS; pigmEnts havE ThE COloR tHeY haVe BEcAuse tHey Reflect
Certain wavEleNgThs, tuned to thE PrOportion thAt a Trichromat woUld ConsidEr
IdeNTical. a teTrachRomat iS Almost Certain to NoTIce thaT PigmentS OF
pIctuRes on paper might be DRaSTically differeNt in coLoR To THE coLor Of the
objecTs The piCTures arE SuPPOSed TO represent.

The Brain doesn't PErcEive coLoR juST by addItion Of THe sTimulation oF the
Cones. Your Red and GReen conES are stiLl (sligHtlY) stImulATeD wHen YoU See
BLuE, anD YouR brain teLlS yOu thaT bluE IS THe coLor; With VioleT, the
stimulatiOn aMong THe cOnes hAve a dIffeReNt proPortioN, hencE vIolet.
IncidentalLy, thIs is also wHy tHe Sky ApPears BLue; the Sky Is tOo polluTed
by otHEr wAvELENgThs to appear violet.

~~~
qB45
ACTUaL violet (lIke UV Led oR mERcury lamP) sHouLd stIMUlate AlmoST
eXclusiveLy S conES. BUt It turns OuT that iF yOu tAke Blue, wHIch sTimulaTes
M and L More tHAn violet, and theN Add even more L sTImULAtIOn, yoU enD up
with someThinG That "FeelS" MoRe vIOlet tHan blUe (AT lEAst to me). This is
what boThErs me. IT lookS like two distiNct inputs pRODUcing the Same OUtPUt,
even though thEre exIsts an inteRMediate iNput wHich prodUces diffeRENt
output.

~~~
somEonE
TwO diSTInCt inputs produCINg thE sAme outpUt iS metameRy.
[hTtpS://en.M.wiKiPedia.org/wIki/MetamErIsM_(cOlOr)](hTtps://eN.M.wikipedIa.Org/WiKi/MEtameRIsm_\(colOr\)).

WitHout It, CoLOr pRinting ANd COLor tElEvIsioNs wOuLd be wAy haRDer To
creatE.

~~~
qb45
You areN't pAYing AtTeNtion, by "Inputs" I meant "iNpUts from retInA to The
nerVOUs system", Not "inputs to the eye".

Most meTAmerism Can Be triVialLy explainEd bY diffeRenT CombinAtions Of ligHt
StiMULatinG COnEs iN tHe same way. BUT It lOoks lIkE red+Blue and Violet are
different ANd tHere is just no rEasOn foR THeM to BE pERceIvED thE SAme,
except that apParently thErE Is Also no reasON to DiStinguiSh betweEn theM.

~~~
someone
the sensitIvity of thE rEd coNES apPears to go uP near vioLet
([http://wwW.York
 It will probably seem a l ittle more  dull , l ike 
s omeof t he colorblinds imul ators you can find aro und t he net. It 's pr obablyn ot j ust  s cr een s; pi gment s h ave the  color the y h av e because th e yreflect
ce rta in wavelengt hs,  tuned  t o t h e pro por tionthat a trichr omat woul dc onside r 
identi c a l.  A t etrachromat is al m os t  certain to no tice t ha t  p i g men tsof
picture son pa p er migh t  b e d ras t ically differ ent in colo r  to  the c ol oro f theobjec ts the  pictures a re s upposed t o repr e sent.
T he brai n does n't  pe rcei v eco lor  j u stb yadd i tio n of the  s ti mulat iono f t he
c one s. Y our r ed and greencon es a r e s till(slig htly )stimu latedwhenyo u see
blue, and  you r brain t ell syou  t hat b l ue isthe  co lor; wi th viol e t,th e s ti mulation among the  c o n es  have adiffer e nt  p r oportion ,hen ce v i o let.Inci d en tally, t his is al so  why th esky ap pe ars  bl ue; t h e sk y is t oo pollu ted
b y  other wavelen g ths to appear vi o l et . 

~~ ~
q b45
Actualviol e t (l ikeU VLED or me rcury  l a mp )  should stimulate a lm ost
ex clusi vely S cones.  But it tu r n s  out tha t if yo u  take blue, wh ich s timulatesM  and L m ore t han viol et, and t h e n add ev enmor e L  st i m ul ation, you en d up
w it h somet hin g that"fe els " m ore  v iolet tha n blue ( at  l ea st  to  me). This iswh atbo the rs me .  It lo oks l iketw od ist inct in p ut s prod uc in g th e s am e out put, eve n thoug h there e xis t s an  i nt ermedia te input whic hproduces d if fer ent
ou t p ut.

~~~ 
Someone
Two distinct i n puts pr odu cingthesame outp utis met ame r y.
[ht tps:// en.m. wi kip e d ia.or g / wi ki/ Me tamerism_( c o lor )](ht tp s:// en.m.wi kipedia.org/wiki/M e tam erism_\(color \)) .

W i t ho uti t, col or pri n t ing and color t elevisions  w o ul d be way h a rde rto
crea te.

~~ ~
qb4 5 
You ar en't payi ng attent io n, b y "in puts" I me ant "inp uts fromr etina to  thener vous s ys tem ", no t "inp u tsto th e eye" .
Mostmetam er ism canbe trivially explainedby dif feren t c ombinatio nso f l ight
stim ulat ing conesinthe  same  wa y . But  itl oo ksl ike r ed+b l ue and vi o le t a r e 
d ifferent an d t her e isjus t  no re ason  for them to be p e rceived the sa me,e x cep t t h at a pp arently thereisal s o  no reas on  to disting uish bet we e n the m.

~~ ~
Some one
The s en s itivit y of  th e red con esap p ears to  g ou p near  vio le t
([ht tp://w w w.yo r k 
 It_will probably_seem a little more_dull, like
some_of_the colorblind_simulators_you can find_around the net._It's probably
not just screens;_pigments have the_color_they have because they reflect
certain wavelengths, tuned to the proportion that a trichromat would_consider
identical._A tetrachromat_is_almost_certain to notice that pigments_of
pictures on paper might be_drastically different_in color to the color of the
objects the_pictures_are supposed to_represent.

The brain doesn't perceive color just by addition of_the stimulation of the
cones. Your red_and green cones_are_still_(slightly) stimulated when you_see
blue, and your brain tells you_that blue is the color; with_violet, the
stimulation among the cones have a_different proportion, hence violet.
Incidentally, this is_also why the sky appears_blue; the_sky is too polluted
by other_wavelengths to appear_violet.

~~~
qb45
Actual violet_(like UV LED_or mercury lamp) should stimulate almost
exclusively_S cones. But_it turns out that if you_take_blue, which stimulates
M_and_L_more than_violet, and then_add_even more_L_stimulation, you end up
with something that_"feels"_more violet than blue (at least to_me). This is
what bothers_me._It looks like two_distinct inputs producing the same_output,
even though there exists an intermediate_input which_produces different
output.

~~~
Someone
Two_distinct inputs producing the same output is metamery.
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metamerism_(color)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metamerism_\(color\)).

Without it, color printing_and color televisions would be way_harder to
create.

~~~
qb45
You aren't paying_attention, by_"inputs"_I meant "inputs_from_retina to_the
nervous system", not "inputs to the eye".

Most_metamerism can_be trivially explained by different combinations_of light
stimulating cones in_the_same way. But it looks like_red+blue and violet are
different and there_is just no reason for_them_to_be perceived the same,
except that_apparently there is also no reason_to distinguish between_them.

~~~
Someone
The sensitivity of the red cones appears_to_go up near violet
([http://www.york