[HN Gopher] Tetrachromatic Vision
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Tetrachromatic Vision
        
       Author : surprisetalk
       Score  : 18 points
       Date   : 2025-06-14 14:53 UTC (3 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.bookofjoe.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.bookofjoe.com)
        
       | oofbey wrote:
       | At some point the world's gonna figure this out and start making
       | tetrachrome cameras and screens and it's gonna be the next big TV
       | upgrade after 8k.
        
         | carlosjobim wrote:
         | Current technology is far more advanced than that, with
         | hyperspectral cameras which can make images to identify
         | different geological materials etc.
        
       | _vaporwave_ wrote:
       | Is there a simple (visual) way to test for this?
        
         | varunneal wrote:
         | Not publicly, but a few people in berkeley are working on it.
         | Here is a paper from last year: https://imjal.github.io/theory-
         | of-tetrachromacy. (Disclaimer: i am on this paper).
         | 
         | They've prototyped displays that can test for it as well.
        
           | glkindlmann wrote:
           | This is so cool. For your figures, how did you decide the RGB
           | colors of the 4D colorspace? Or did you convince ACM to print
           | your paper with special inks? :)
        
         | colechristensen wrote:
         | Simple? No. My understanding is that the perceptual difference
         | is much less significant than for colorblindness and while
         | visual tests exist they are less reliable and less obvious than
         | the visual tests for colorblindness.
        
         | glkindlmann wrote:
         | afaik not based on standard RGB displays. All widespread
         | technology for digital color reproduction is based on RGB
         | primaries, i.e. a 3D space of color, or rather a 3D submanifold
         | of spectra inside the effectively infinite-dimensional space of
         | spectra. It is feasible to test for color deficient vision
         | (deficiency or absence of one or more cones, reducing color
         | perception to a 2D or 1D space) because it is easy to sample 3D
         | RGB space and behaviorally detect if colors that are different
         | in 3D are conflated because in some viewer they project to the
         | same location in their 2D or 1D "color" sub-submanifold.
         | 
         | But we'd need a convenient way to sample a 4D space of colors
         | (perhaps with 4 monochromatic sources?), and thereby generate
         | different spectra that normal trichromats see as the same color
         | (called "metamers"), but that tetrachromats could recognize as
         | distinct. And, how the 4D space is sampled would have to be
         | pretty carefully optimized to generate distinct spectra that
         | have the same response with the M (medium or "green") and L
         | (long or "red") cones (which are actually quite similar
         | already!) while also generating different responses for the
         | putative tetrachromat's additional code between M and L. And
         | that isn't possible with any conventional display device.
        
           | carlosjobim wrote:
           | On the contrary, RGB displays should be excellent tools to
           | determine if somebody has vision which differ from normal.
           | Ask the person to adjust the color settings so that real
           | world footage on the display looks like how they experience
           | the real world. Then you will see if there's any divergence
           | in color perception, since display images are direct light
           | while real world vision is reflected light.
        
             | glkindlmann wrote:
             | Whether via direct or reflected light, spectra in
             | trichromat's eyes are still projected down to a 3D space
             | (the responses of the S, M, L cones). What you describe
             | would still require a standardized and reliable way to
             | probe an extra degree of freedom in spectra that
             | conventional RGB displays can't access. The paper shared by
             | varunneal explains it better than I can.
        
               | carlosjobim wrote:
               | If we assume that digital video/film recording will
               | compress the spectrum to images which are composed of
               | three colors, somewhere in the processes between the
               | light hitting the camera and the light being emitted from
               | a display to the viewer, that means any tetrachromatic
               | person will notice a difference between the images and
               | the real world.
        
           | glkindlmann wrote:
           | (in the awesome paper shared by varunneal, the metamers are
           | named "keef" and "litz")
        
         | postalrat wrote:
         | Maybe if colors on a monitor or photographs don't match colors
         | in real life? Like how a how black and white displays don't
         | match. This would probably be pretty subtle differences.
        
       | crazygringo wrote:
       | > _The first known human tetrachromat, an English social worker
       | identified in 1993, sees 10 distinct colors looking at a rainbow,
       | whereas the rest of us see only five._
       | 
       | What does this even mean? It's setting off my BS detector.
       | 
       | I can see as many colors in the rainbow as I want, since colors
       | are culturally determined. Cyan is prominently there in the
       | rainbow, even though most people don't include it in the
       | traditional "Roy G Biv" -- red, orange, yellow, green, blue,
       | indigo, violet. Speaking of which, where did 5 even come from in
       | that quote? I mean, the fact that we can argue over how many
       | colors the rainbow has just shows how unscientific such a
       | statement is.
       | 
       | If there's anything potentially scientific here, you could say
       | that humans see three primary colors associated with the three
       | cones -- red, green, blue -- and therefore three intermediate
       | colors -- yellow, cyan, magenta. A fourth cone between red and
       | green means that it _might_ be possible to see 8 primary and
       | intermediate colors instead of 6. But it also might not do much
       | of anything at all, if it 's then mapped to our existing opponent
       | process [1] that is fundamentally based on red vs. green and blue
       | vs. yellow. In other words, it would just be a redundant or
       | ignored sensory input to our conceptual color processing.
       | 
       | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opponent_process
        
       | spondylosaurus wrote:
       | When I learned about tetrachromacy as a kid I remember being
       | devastated for like a week afterwards that I wasn't one too. It
       | felt like discovering that superpowers _are_ real but that you
       | 'll never have any :P
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-06-17 23:00 UTC)