whatever theory

Thanks Strange Color is such a fascinating subject. I agree with everything that you and science have pointed out about color and I understand that the light reflecting on an object, along with other factors, is what creates its color. Because of this you will get wildly different results when photographing under different lighting conditions. The world is so vast and the common problems that we all are having with my ideas are so difficult that this whole subject can make you a bit dizzy. But if you are all up for the challenge to figure all of these mysteries out, then I am in also. I would like to hopefully change any notions that any cherry picking is happening and that picking cherry is not that easy especially when there are no cherries on the tree. As you have pointed out Tar, there is almost 18 million possible colors on the current RGB scale. As you also pointed out there is about 4000 individual pixels in each picture. So for example there is around 2 million different shades of blue. So if you had a picture were each pixel, in the photo, was a different shade of blue, it would take you 500 pages like this to have all of the different shades of blue. So to identify the exact shade from 2 very small areas to each other should show that it is not just picking cherries. Even if a species had say 1000 shades of one color, on the grand skeem of things 1000 is very small and leaves about 2 million other shades of that color that this species does not posses. I figured out what was wrong with the Family image photo and why it was so pix-elated. The if you go to google images and type: mixed-race_1514221c When you click on a picture a window will open up to enlarge the picture, if you try to download the picture before it as finished loading on the screen the picture you saved will be pixelated like this. So I will remember this the next time I take pictures off of google images. Reflections and shadows are something that I try to stay away from and there are many other things that I am doing when performing these test like trying to find the same angle that each subject is facing. Below is an example of how same species will share colors within the same species, even though these colors may appear similar between different species, they are probably not. And even if they do share one color the chances that them sharing the whole range as another species is highly unlikely. Even if a species were to share an entire range of one color with another species, for them to share 2 or 3 or 10 different color ranges is even more unlikely. This is a picture of a Bearded Horse mussel shell with 3 purple Bearded Horse mussel pearls inside it. Matching an exact purple color of the pearls to each other and to there shell was very easy and took less then a minute. Next I have taken these same Bearded Horse pearls and tried to perform the same test with each of these purple shells from species other then the pearls. In none of these pictures was I able to match this same exact color no matter how hard I tried. This should help show that same species colors match each other but probably do not match other species, even if they appear to with the naked eye. I know that I am only using one pixel in this technique, but that one pixel represents a larger area and there are going to be many if not all pixels that can be chosen from a single picture that will correspond, not only this one. Here is some brown colored Bearded Horse mussel pearls that match the outside color of the Bearded Horse shell.(First picture) The other 3 pictures are this same pearl with 3 different species that appeared to have the same color as the pearl, but the exact color was able to be matched to any of these shells. Here is a pearl that matches the color of the shells beard. Next I have matched the exact same color from each shell of the same species, but not from the same animal. The color that I chose was what appeared to be the darkest shade of purple from each shell.

Thank you again for your comments Strange. I see your point. What It seems that you are saying is that not only do I have to show that same species share the same color with each other, but that they do not share these same colors with other species. Since all of the problems have not been fixed, when comparing different pictures, I need to find a way to show the similarities between same species along side other species, in the same picture. I have an idea for this. I am going to try to find some good pictures that have many different species of wild fish swimming around, along with some that are the same species. Good Idea Strange Thanks for the advice

Thank you for your comments Strange. The test was done and they results are there. I have done no cherry picking and the results, I have, speak for themselves, right or wrong. I chose the same area from all the subjects to test which appear to be in the same lighting conditions. Of course there is always going to be something in nature that is out of the normal and that is just part of nature. If I was to stop now just because there may be some problems down the road, I would not get any where. Of course I am looking for contradicts but the idea of this is to match the numbers/colors. That is the whole point of this. If you can match a color exactly from one species to the next then it should be safe to say that this color(s) is particular to its species, maybe another species shares it, but none the less it is still particular to its species. Humans are a tricky species because of the large amount of differences and they are similar to breeds of dogs or horses and they may not generally follow as many of the same rules is that of species that have evolved naturally in the surroundings. For instance a Mixed mutt dog may produce a white a black and a brown puppy all in the same liter. Any way thanks for the advice I will try to be as objective as I can be. As soon as I feel everybody has asked there questions I will list all of the problems that I am also having with these ideas. OK Some of the questions I have had have already been answered by the community here. Mike, I would love to test your pictures. Once everyone has asked there questions and I feel I can move on I will try to explain how you can take good controlled pictures of things in nature, around you, and we will start testing your pictures. OK Thanks again

I have not altered this picture in any way other then adding the dots to it. I think it is just a low quality picture. Maybe not the best example. I will try to find the link to where I got this pic from. Finding the color range, the way I am doing, is very time consuming and identify anythings complete color range, testing every single pixel, could take forever, but I do believe the technology already exist for a software program to be built that could accomplish this instantly. If we can figure out all of these issues it may help you and others that are having balancing issues else where. In my opinion, the first thing that needs to be done is to show that same species colors will match to each other, in the same photo. Once (if) we have given sufficient proof that a photo can accomplish this task, we would then have to figure out a way to synchronize everything so that we could compare these pictures to each other. Then we could move forward into finding applications in life that these advances can benefit. Maybe the meaning that can be found in Mike's photos is that : "The white is over exposed. The camera has auto white balance." Even the smallest pieces to the puzzle are still needed. Thanks

Sorry I missed your question yesterday Klaynos I am not comparing photos to each other yet. I am only collecting data from each picture itself. Comparing pictures to each other represents soooooo many problems. I am still trying to solve all of these problems and I have not figured out every aspect so far. But in theory we already have all of the technology to do what I am suggesting, but those like yourself, that have a lot of experience in these fields should be able to do a better job figuring out everything, then me. So I will try to learn from your suggestions and point out problems that I am already having. Thanks for the pictures Mike I hope you did not get too wet taking them. I have tested the white from each of your pictures. In one photo the white balancing card matched exactly to true white r-255, g-255, b-255 The other 2 fluctuated in their values. If you will notice one was held at a severe angle from the camera lens and the other was put in the grass which may have distorted the color of light that was coming threw the grass. I think that we would have to figure out how to try to be as controlled as possible with the balancing card. It should be at the same distance and the same angle in each photo. Also you are holding the paper facing up towards the sun, so you may be getting some reflection off of the sun. We also do not know exactly what color white paper you used. White paper can vary in color as Klaynos has politely pointed out. Any way thank you for taking the time to do this and even though this did not answer all our questions it definitely helped in showing ways that could benefit or improve this technique. Thank you very much Mike, good job!!! Thank for your comments "Tar" and thank you for sharing the information you provided. I really like the color experiment that you explained. Pretty fun!!! In the picture, that you are mentioning, I only showed a quick way of testing colors. I have taken that same picture and I have tried to find the color range from each person. The color range being the lightest of one color to the darkest. This color range and the ratios, pattern, between the numbers should stay at a consistent pattern all threw out the range. The colors might bounce around a little bit if you were to just randomly pick any pixel, but they will bounce around in a certain pattern which will be consistent. For example you may get a color, from a subject that is r-123, g-123, b-123 in one area and next to it you may get a color that is r-128, g-128, b-128. So you might think that it is wildly bouncing, but if you look at the pattern of ratios between the red, green and blue they should stay consistent all across the range. If you test one species and say it has a range of red 123-153, green 123 to 153, blue 123 to 153 and a different species has a range of say red 113 to 133, green 113 to 133, blue 113 to 133 then these 2 different species will share the same color for a little while on the scale, but seeing that the range is different from both will help you identify what species it is. If the colors from the 2 different species match then you need to find a different color from each species to test. The more colors you can compare like this, the better you will be able to identify the species. I hope this was not too confusing. I have redone the mentioned picture where I have identified the color range of each person. I used the original value for the lightest shade in the color ranges, which was directly in the center of the foreheads. I have added a second dot the each person, on the right of there forehead, which represents the darkest area of each person. You can see that even though the values have changed the ratios between the values has stayed the same and even on the darker end of the range the child still fits perfectly in between her parents. Here is another example of finding the color range of a species. There are 2 different species of seashells here from the same family. These species color range, to the naked eye, appears very much the same, but with this technique you can find the color range of each shell and then you can see what range each pearl falls into. I have added to the Nobilis dark black range, because it was covered up by the bicolor shell) based on the lightest and darkest black areas that I already had. I have been trying to figure out a way to calculate all of the different possibilities of different colors on the RGB scale. Is this amount? I am a little confused... As for me trying this technique with a spectrometer. I do not have one and although this technique may very well work with these machines as well, I just do not see them being practical for the average person. Only those with one of these machines would be able to benefit from this. If we can not figure out ways of solving all of these problems with regular photos this research may have to be rethought with a different type of camera/spectrometer in mind. But can we give it a try with photos first? Thank for your comments, any help would be greatly appreciated, you have already given me a lot to think about. If you want to send my a picture of your family, all in one picture, I would be happy to try. Thank you Strange for your suggestions on how to better improve on the crystal experiment. After re reading my earlier post I feel I am to blame for the confusion. If you google image search quartz crystals most of the photos come up with a black background, but a lot of them the black fluctuated in the photo so I was just trying to find pictures that had a solid black ground. I was not trying to suggest that a black back ground was important, only that I was trying to find a back ground with one solid color. Until Ajb suggested quartz I had not been able to think of anything in nature that could be transparent so this new technique for testing something that is transparent is still new in my mind. So I have found pictures that have a white background. The only test I am trying to do here is to see if any crystals surface colors match that of the back ground. Because this new technique is very new to me and the fact the quart is very reflective and I can not find any pictures taken in a light box, to diffuse the direct light, these experiments show little but may help us figure out what needs to be changed in the future. Thanks again Strange

Hello Strange and thank you for your comments. I hope we can find away to come together to either prove or disprove these ideas.Yes, the burden is on me so if could please help me, I would appreciate it. I will try not to go off topic again, even if I think it may relate to anyone else's comments and I was not sure if I should have, when I did it. I will also try not to make any statements about anything that I do not have a way to test any more, also. I know you have a job to do and you have probably heard a lot of crazy ideas here, in the past, which has probably caused you to raise your guard, but please give me a chance before you dismiss all of my ideas. There was no citation on these comments only my own observations. I see my errors in this. You are right, all of my ideas are based on current technologies that already exist. I am just trying to tie them altogether in a way that can benefit us. Thanks for the links. I do know that there are others out there using colors as one way of color coding a species, but if you look at the links you sent me, none of these people are doing or suggesting what I am. Thanks again for your thoughtful comments

Thank you for your comment Klaynos. If you were going to take photos in a Black Box, you would take many different pictures of the same white piece of paper and then you would perform the technique that I have been demonstrating on each different picture to make sure that the white paper appeared to be the exact same color in each photo. Once you have accomplished this you should be safe comparing any pictures that were taken in the box to each other, as long all the conditions where the same from pic to pic, distance to subject, angle of photo, etc. If you wanted to compare pictures that you took in your box with someone else, the other person would have to do the same thing with the exact same white paper in their box. If the color that they get is different then yours then you need to calculate the difference when comparing pictures with each other. For example. If the test you performed showed that the white paper is say red-250, green-252, blue 254 and your friend is showing that the same white paper is red-251, g-253, b-255 in their box. Because of the cameras or software, that you are both using, are different. So since your friends data shows up 1 value higher in each of the red, green, and blue categories you need to take this into consideration when comparing pictures to your friend. Although I think that a card with white, grey and black on it may give you a more accurate balance. If you are not taking a picture inside a controlled environment like a black box, then you need to hold up a white/grey/black card in each picture. Since you know the color of this white card you can use this white color to balance these photos once you have put them into your software. Anyone else that wanted to compare there pictures with yours would have to perform the same process with the exact same color Balancing card that you used. I will try to demonstrate all of this in future posts. Hope this helped and was not too confusing.

I am not comparing the pictures to each other, I am only seeing if the color that appears on the surface of the crystal matches the color of the background to see if the crystal has color. Are you providing any citation to what you are saying about this or have you provided any examples, facts, studies, etc. that support any of your comments? I am trying to demonstrate and prove or disprove my ideas. Are you going to show any proof of what you are saying here? Just because identifying species by color has not been done before does not mean it is not possible. So it is OK if Mike or yourself expresses an opinion, about an observation that was made, but it is not OK for me to do it? Any way like I said I went off topic, for one paragraph, but I am not going back there.

Hello Thank you for the link "ajb" I have read it over several times and I am going to try to figure out how I can apply any of this to what I am doing. It may take me a little time because my mind does not think scientifically, but any suggestion that you have I would appreciate. For a while the only thing in the world that I could think of that may be truly transparent was glass, but from what I new, glass was man made so I did not really consider glass to be a factor in my ideas. But what never popped into my mind was quartz (Si02). Now that you have given me something that may actually be transparent, in nature, it has opened up many new problems for me to try to solve. The first thing that I want to do is find out if quartz is actually transparent. In these pictures below, I have found pictures that all have a true black back ground at red-0, green 0, blue 0. I have compared the blackest color of each crystal to the color of there back ground. On all of these crystals red was the most prevalent color. In the second picture there was no green or blue present, only red. I did not realize until after I tested them that the 2 crystals that had similar colors were different then the one that had a r-7, g-0, b-0. There may be 2 different types of crystals here, maybe one is smokey quartz. I think that this would be a much better test if all of the pictures of the crystals were taken in a light box to defuse any direct light, but from this test it appears that quartz actually does have a little color and is not truly transparent. Another thing that I wanted to explain a bit further on, which relates to some of your earlier questions, is that there are many species that may share a certain color with each other,say for instance, there may be a bird that shares a color of blue with a fish. Even though the bird may share this same BLUE color range as the fish, the bird may have pink and yellow markings with green eyes and a purple legs. Where the fish has grey markings with white eyes. So even if there is a certain color that may overlap in 2 different animals the chances are that all of the colors from each species will not match with each other. This may sound confusing but the more different colors a species has the harder it would be to match all of those same colors to a different animal. In the case were were an orange sweet potato may share a similar orange color to a carrot. The potato will have an additional, outside skin, color and the carrot will have an additional, stem color, so even though the oranges might match the other colors will not. Mike I wanted to share some observation that I have made that your comments reminded me of. I did not have much time to respond to you yesterday. I know that these comments are taking this off topic, but I will get right back on the topic after. I have observed that people get smaller the closer to the equator the live. There was even a recent discovery of some hobbit people that were only like 3 feet tall that lived in the equator and many giant skeletons have been found in I think Iceland which is at the top of the world. The only problem I have with this is the Inuit (Eskimo) people are very small. Maybe it is because not long ago they migrated there from Asia. I don't know. The other observation that I have made is that there is a chain of islands in the Philippines, near the equator, where there population of woman being born is much higher then men, some cases 7 woman to every one man. There are many other islands at the same distance from the equator, in the Philippines and Asia, that have almost identical conditions but the woman to man ratios are normal. So what is it about these Visayan islands that produce so many females? These islands are some of the most poorest islands in the Philippines and the local population live on a small amount of seafood, large amount of fruit and a huge amount of rice. When I say huge I really mean it. Even the rest of Asia jokes at how much rice Visayan people can eat. Any way this unique diet is the only thing that I can see that is different from the people of the Visayas and the rest of the Philippines Islands and the rest Asia. Ok Take Care

Thank you for all of your comments I have had color on my mind a lot lately and I have not realized what you said here until you said it. I think that what may be obvious to some may be not be so obvious to others. So good job and thank you for seeing the importance enough in your idea to post it. Maybe once (if) we have all of the worlds data, your theory will be able to be proved. Once proved then maybe an answer for why this is will be able to be found based on the data. We are the same Mike, we are both here just stating the obvious. I can take constructive criticism and that is why I joined this sight. I knew I was going to get some here, but there was a certain member that kept badgering me and making jokes at my expense. Like in the real world some one can only take so much before they snap. So sorry if I offended anyone here including the person that was badgering me. I hope that we can get past it and move on a bit more civilly. I like it and your are right the word Genetic should possibly be removed. We will let the rest have their say on the matter, but I like it. Thanks My friend, for the life of me I can not figure out what this means. Can you please translate it to an easier way that I can understand it. Sorry but I just can not wrap my head around it. Thanks for the info. Does the solid have color to it. I think you are right. Lighting conditions play a huge part in the colors that appear in pictures. I light meter could be built into this application which would help calculate light along with the other conditions to synchronize all of your photos. I think that no matter what, you would also have to hold up a grey/black/white card in front of the lens in each picture. This grey card would have to be the exact same color as all of the others that are participating in the research. For instance when you buy this smart phone application it would come with one of these grey cards and all of them would be the same exact colors. Maybe one day the software programmers would find a way to eliminate the need of a balancing grey card, but I think that this will work until that day. If the subject is small enough, then everyone can just make a cardboard "black box" and take there pictures at a certain distance form the object in the box. All of these pictures should be in the same conditions and after calculating your cameras flash intensity, you could easily then compare them to each other or with someone else without the need of a grey card present. Ok thanks again

Hello again. For the sake of science, I will try to continue. I really do not mind any questions or comments as long as they are worded politely. If It seems like I am stating facts, then I am sorry. I am only stating my opinions and trying to show what I have already observed. If you challenge my opinion either with your opinion or with known facts, I will be happy to entertain these comments and will try to change my opinions if I am proved wrong. I would like to make this a fun, happy place and if this idea is correct and we can all come together to solve it, then I think the benefits would be a good thing for everyone. If it is wrong then we have all still learned something and there is no harm done. I will try to answer all of your questions "ajb" and thank you for posting them. Please keep in mind that I am only answering them the best that I can, I may be wrong and I am not trying to act like a "know it all". I am already using this technique to identify natural pearls, but before I try to identify it I try to perform a series of tests to make sure that it is indeed a pearl. If this was a rock or a plastic bead then trying to identify its species would be pointless. The same would be true if you wanted to identify say a species of carrot. You would want to make sure that your subjects were all carrots before you tried this test. If you had a computer app that could determine the species, there would have to be categories for each type of thing in nature. For instance, Food then vegetables then carrots. So you would have to know a little about what you are trying to test and you would want to do any usual test that you would normally do to make sure that it was a carrot, smell, taste, etc. I know, but I am going to try my hardest to show this, with as many picture presentations and info, as it takes. If it takes 100 full pages of picture presentations then that is the length that I will go to show it. I am my own biggest critic and I am always trying to disprove this to myself and trying to learn new ways to fix problems. I do try to take as many of my own pictures as I can, in a controlled environment, although I have not showed many of these yet. The pictures that I do use from the net, I try to find pictures that the subjects appear to be in the same lighting conditions. Observing that the lighting conditions are the same, one can assume that all of the other conditions, camera, photographer, distance from subjects should be the same in each photo as well. Even though you are taking data from many different pictures, but can not reliably test the pictures to one another, seeing that species share the exact same colors, in the same picture, should show that it does not matter what the conditions are, the species colors will still match. I do not understand what "error bars" are? Can you please explain? Thanks I will try my best to prove (justify) or disprove these ideas. If the science community can one day see its potential then that should justify the further expansion of this project. The beautiful thing about it is that it should not cost any money to create. I will do my initial part to try to justify its further research. Once (if) the science community wants to develop it, software could easily be designed and after all of the color balancing issues are worked out, you would have the first version of this, then the science community (from this site) could easily go around and photograph everything if their environment. It would not take too many people to start this, just a few. Maybe the first version is very basic and can not identify everything. But once you have a basic App then people will want to buy that App. Now you have maybe millions of people all over the world that can take pictures of new things in their area. After a while you may have everything in the world identified on the one program. With the knowledge, from the folks in this site, we could build this for free. Of course maybe the best examples of minerals sharing the same colors are gold and silver. Unfortunately I think minerals maybe one of the most challenging things to find out if my idea applies to them. Although we all own jewelry we do not usually know the origin or what other metals where mixed with it and what ratios they were mixed. The only way, I can see, to compare the colors of minerals is to actually get a sample from different mines around the world and compare them. Can you please explain the difference between CO2 and SiO2 and what you have observed about them? Thanx How many people do you know that owns and know how to operate a spectroscopy machine. I do not know anyone that owns one. How many people do you know that own and can operate a smart phone? Although this technology exist it is impractical for the average human. After all these spectroscopy machines are basing their information on a simple photograph as well. One of the problems with them is that you can not see the photo that these machines are taking. Also using this kind of technology would defiantly be very expensive to conduct all of these tests and you would have to get the elephants to sit still, inside the laboratory, while the scientist tried to get a good spectroscopy image. May be tricky... Thanks for the advice I will try to remember it in the future. I hope I have helped answer your questions, please feel free to disagree or to ask more questions. I will try not to go much deeper, in this idea, until I feel like everybody is up to speed.

Facts??? I posted this in the speculations. I am trying to explain a technique, but there are no facts. I have introduced this to the science world for them to figure out if it is fact or fiction. Without being even given the opportunity to fully explain my techniques and with almost no suggestions of how to improve my technique or what ways to better anything, I am in no way any wiser for posting here. Any way let this thread be a reminder to anyone that wants to post any new ideas in this forum, in the future. I am going to find another place to post my ideas. Thank you Bye Bye

You have explained nothing of the sort. I have yet to see anything that you wrote that was not rude and all of your posts here appear to me to be "word salad" which I thought was against the rules. And if I am wrong, I already said I will admit it, if anyone can show me my errors. There is no reason to attack people because you do not like there ideas. If science can not have an open mind about new ideas then where is one to turn to, for help? The others that have had legitimate concerns, I have tried to answer all of their questions and just because some here might think I am wrong, about certain things, does not make me wrong. Everybody has the right to their own opinions and I am trying to explain mine. If you can not figure out any way in your life where this technique could help you then, I feel sorry for you, for not having an imagination. But it sounds like you know everything already, so you can probably take one glance at anything in nature and tell immediately what the exact species is. Right???

Wow "Strange" I do not really know how to respond to your last comments. I guess maybe I am presenting my ideas in the wrong place. Maybe I will just keep my opinions to myself from now on.

Hello "ajb" thanks for your comments. I will do my best to try to answer them. Different species may share the same colors or color ranges this is true. If you wanted to compare the different, unique colors of different strains of carrots, you would want to make sure that they are all indeed carrots before you tested them. For instance you would not want to compare a carrot with a sweet potato just because they appear to be the same color. If colors do match closely to another strain/species then possibly they are already related or maybe it is the same strain that has not yet evolved its own particular color. If an animal recently migrated to a new area how long would it take before its color started to change? I do not have all of the answers. The natural world is huge and I can never figure all of this out by myself. If you are interested in participating in the progress of this because you see some possible value, I will try to do as much as I can as well. Yes I have been criticized for using photographs already, but I can not see any other way of doing this kind of research then with photos. I can not physically take pictures of all things in nature, so I have to take pictures off of the internet to use. If one day science can see value in this, then a team of photographers could scourer the earth and take controlled photographs of everything in the natural world. Sorry to disagree with you, but I do not think that matching RGB values is meaningless when matching colors of species that are all in the same picture, although you are right in that there may be some room for error in certain instances, such as shadows. That is why I try to pick pictures that both subjects appear to be in the same conditions inside the picture. I do agree however, that with the techniques above that show how to compare pictures to one another, there is a chance of error. That is why it would be important to take all of the photos for this research in a controlled environment if you were trying to compare photos to each other and build a data base of the natural world. You are right again it is no surprise, but seeing the similarities in animals should show that these similarities run threw the entire natural world even with things that are not living. Figuring out the different ways that these similarities, in nature, can benefit man and figuring out ways of testing, proving and using these similarities may be what is surprising. I don't know.... I guess the ultimate aim for this is to have a smart phone computer app or computer software that can instantly identify anything in the natural world, from a picture. Because I am not a scientist I can not pretend to be one. I am just a simple person that is here to try to learn and benefit from the science community. If you have any suggestions, questions or any advice I would really appreciate it. Thanks

Below You will notice that there is a red dot on each of the native people in the first picture. This dot represents an area on each person that is the exact same color as the others from there tribe. Next to the picture you will notice the sample of this color along with its numeric value. Each picture was done the same way and you can see that each of these different native tribes share a unique color among there tribe. In this next picture I have taken a picture of a man and woman and there child. I set one of the parents sample color to 50% Opacity, which will combine the 2 colors of the parents equally into one new color which is the exact color of there child. In these next pictures I have matched the same color from one animal, to the other, of the same species/breeds. In this next picture I have done the same technique as above. The mother Donkey combined with the father Zebra gives the exact color of their baby Zonkey. In these last pictures I have tried to show that there is more to matching species color then by only the skin or coat. In this picture I have matched the eye color, lip color, and nose color from the same species. I hope this presentation helps answer some of the comments I have made in my previous posts. Please feel free to ask any questions. Thanks

Thank you for you comments. This may be obvious to some but for many others that are searching for answers this may not be so obvious, or I think you would see it being used much more in the world to identify natural things. I know that dog and horse breeders are aware that, the animals that they breed, usually have a certain color coat, but I believe that they are using different methods to test these colors. For instance they will hold a particular color piece of paper up next to the animal to see if it's coat color matches a different animal of the same type, But the breeders are only using this on the coat of the animal. However in my idea, there is much more to an animal then just it's coat. The actual skin color, eye color, nose color, lip color, etc. are all part of the animal and can also be matched together from the same type of species. . Although this technique could be used to easily test a certain color of a animal that has been bred by man, both in person or simply by testing a picture, animals that are being bred are like cultured flowers or cultured pearls. They are not natural in origin and so when trying to find what colors where first, in natural dogs or horses, you must go to where the horses or dogs live wild and have evolved there over a long time. Once you have those colors of the first dogs or horses you can then use this technique to find out what natural dogs/horses were bred to create the new man made breeds, then you can use this technique to match the colors from breeds to each other and find each breeds exact color range. Studying humans color is also been studied a lot but I do not think that anyone has found an exact color that is unique to a certain lineage of people yet. Please correct me if I am wrong. People are also some what cultured by man and to find the unique color found in a population of people you must also go to an area of native people that have evolved there, with no outside breeding. Same as with animals, once you have this unique color, from all of the different native people, you can use this technique to find out "all peoples" ethnic lineage. Once you have found the native people you want to test you could use DNA testing, at that point, to see if there was ever any interbreeding with other ethnic people. Once your DNA test shows that the person you are testing has indeed been bred from only people in there area you can photograph them. The color of this person you now know is natural and once you had pictures of all of the natural people, a Computer App could easily by made to calculate the ethnic lineage of all people with the simple click of your camera shutter. Sure there are other ways of testing someones ethnic lineage, but all of these way are expensive and time consuming and impractical for most people. But everyone has a smart phone these days and if you could simply take a picture of anything in the natural world and instantly be able to identify it, the benifits for this are huge. I meant there are 2 lions, 2 lizards, 2 birds, and 2 insects Thank you for your advice I will try to learn from what you are saying, and thank you for helping me guide this large ship threw uncharted waters. Yes you are right I should have not slept so much during science class and writing class... hehehe I am sure you have all seen, in Star Trek, when the doctor points, what looks like a camera, at a patient and can tell immediately what is wrong with them. With this technique I think we will all be able to do the same things soon also. I may be wrong about different strains of bacteria, fungus, cancer etc. sharing same unique colors to themselves, but what I do know is that Chinese doctors have diagnosed there patients by the color of there eyes, skin, mouth, ears, saliva, blood, etc. for thousands of years. Maybe with this technique the Chinese medical world can now compare say all of the different shades of green mucus when before they only new that green mucus meant say bacteria infection. Now based on the exact color of green they maybe able to go a step further and identify exactly what strain of bacteria. Off course all traditional means of science should first identify anything in nature, but once you know what color this natural thing is you can then use my technique in the future, which is fast and cheap, to get the results you are looking for. I will try to refer to my "idea" as such from now on. Should I change the title of this thread as well??? Also I am trying to figure out how to use quotes now and I will try not to go back and edit something that is being discussed already. You are hitting on a problem that has cursed me from day one, and that is, how to compare different pictures to one another. Although this technique works great if there is 2 of the same species in the same photograph. Because of the different lighting, photography, software, etc. conditions pictures will be very different from one another unless you follow these rules. If you physically have the objects, say 2 peanuts, you can photograph these peanuts inside a "Black Box". A black box is nothing but a card board box that you line with white paper(Example 1) Make sure that your camera is always the same distance from your subjects and use your timer and close the lid on the box before the shutter opens, so that no outside light is getting in. You are only using the flash from your camera to light the object when the photo is taken. This will ensure that all of the photos you take are taken in the exact same conditions and no outside light is distorting your photo. All the photos you take like this will be in the same conditions and you can now compare these photos to one another. If you wanted to compare your photos with mine all you would need is have an 8 megapixel Samsung smart camera and a black box and you would need to take the pictures at the same distance as me, but now many people from around the world can compare there pictures with each other. I have many tips on this technique I will be posting soon. A second way (example 2) is that is your subject are too large to be put in a box, or you just want to take a picture on the go. For this you must have a white/grey/black card present in each one of your photos. This way you can later balance everything in your photography software and begin comparing these photos to each other. I also have many tips on this technique I will share soon. A third way (example 3) of accomplishing this is to just take some pictures off of the internet. These pictures are going to be different because of the different conditions that they were taken in, so instead of comparing the actual colors (which may come close) what you need to compare is the ratios between the colors. These are 2 different pictures taken by different photographers at different times with different equipment, but the species of bird is the same in each picture and from the same geographic location. Again this is the basic instructions and I will post more info soon on this too. Thanks for your comments and your participation.

Thank you for your comments Strange. I will try to do my best to answer them. My theory (idea, Hypothesis) is that same species will share same colors and color ranges that are from the same geographic location. Same species from different geographic locations may share these same colors but they may share a completely different range of colors. For instance human beings,I will try to show that humans, that live in a particular region and have evolved in these locations over a long period of time, will share the same color ranges as the rest of the people from their region. Although these people share the same color as the rest in there area they may not share the same color ranges as people who have evolved in other parts of the world. Making there color unique to their area. Along with my theory I am trying to show a Photography software technique that I am using to prove this theory. Being that the world is so huge and I can not physically take pictures of every species I will do my best to show the pattern that is present in nature and let the science community here figure out if it is real or not. You need to do (at least) the following: - Define an objective way of categorising the colour or colours of an individual organism - Define an objective way of categorising the range of colours in a group of organisms (in a location or in a species) - Define an objective way of defining the relevant characteristics of a location (whatever you think they are) - Do a large scale survey (you might want to limit this, initially, to a single species that occurs in a range of different locations) - Do a statistical analysis to show some sort of correlation between location and colour I am going to study your instructions here and try to figure out what exactly I should do, but I feel like I am planning on trying to do the above, but it will take me some time to post everything that I am trying to show. "What do you think the benefits of this idea are?" The benefits from this technique are huge. From identifying cancer and bacteria types to identifying rare medicinal plants in the depths of the amazon rain forest. Identifying a humans ethnic lineage or a new species of animal, bred from 2 existing animals. You can use this technique to identify where the food you are eating originated or to identify the many different types of natural pearls. It will enable you to do all of this and a lot more by only taking a picture. "No it doesn't. You are using random pictures taken with different cameras under different conditions and subsequently processed in unknown ways." No I am not using random pictures, I am using pictures that were each taken with 2 species of the same kind. Being that the 2 subjects are in the same photo at the same time, they are both in the same lighting conditions and photographed by the same camera etc. Although each picture is different from one another I am not comparing the pictures between each other I am only comparing the 2 subjects in each photo. For instance if you look below the picture of the lion you will notice that I have matched a color above the eye from both male and female, I put a red dot on each area I tested. Below the picture is a sample of this color along with its red, green, and blue numeric value. The blue dot, on the lions, represent the second color that I matched from one lion to the next and again the sample of the color and its values are below the pic. This technique works good for subjects that are all in the same picture but it does not work if you compare one picture to another picture, because of the different conditions. I will try to show, in a future post, how many different people can all synchronize the pictures that they are taking with each other. I believe some of the confusion is from my own wording of this sentence,"I will try to do at least one every day until I am finished with these first 6 pictures" What I should have said was "I will try to do at least one SET OF PICTURES (Lion, birds, animals, insects being one set) every day until I am finished with these first SIX SETS of pictures. I will go back and try to edit my previous post so they make more sense. Again I am sorry if the information I have provided is confusing in any way. I will try to do my best to answer any questions.

Hello Thank you Strange and Phi For All for your comments and participation. I am sorry for not posting any kind of evidence or giving any examples of my technique. I was merely trying to introduce myself and my theory. Because nature is so vast it may take many presentations for me to prove anything. Rather then doing a bunch of research before posting I feel like I would be putting myself at a disadvantage. I would rather show my research ,in real time, so that along the way the community here can help guide me in the right directions. I am no scientist and I have not spent one day in college and I just barley made it out of high school. I am willing to listen to anyone's advise. I am anonymous because I am not looking for any fame here, I am simply trying to share what I think may benefit my fellow man. I will try to answer your questions the best I can. "In general, organisms of a given species have the same colour (or colours). There are species where this is not true, and there is a huge variety in a single species: cultivated flowers for example, where there are hundreds of different coloured roses, or tulips, or ... There is no reason to think this is related to location, as far as I know.Do you mean that one species will have different colours in different locations?" Yes same species may have different colors from different locations, although species from different locations may also share the same colors, but I think that climate and diet play a huge part in what the species colors will be. If the climate, diet and all other conditions are the same in 2 areas then maybe the species there will also share the exact same colors. This theory however is directed more at the natural world. Cultivated flowers are created by man and therefor are not natural in origin. But like pearls these flowers may still share common colors with those that were bred to create them. These flowers also may share, among themselves, unique colors that are only found from the source that they were created. For instance one flower breeder may have a certain color tulip that only his farm is producing which may help identify what farm it came from. ​This technique can also be used to determine what species were chosen to produce any new species. "Or that all species in one location will have the same range of colours?" Species from the same geographic locations may have a wide range of colors that the species share, so when trying to catalog this color range it is best to get a wide variety of the same species,so that you can find the entire color range of that particular species. "Your random collection of pictures, with no explanation, doesn't help in understanding your point. (And some of those are not even living organisms.)" You are right some of these things are not living organisms so the term I have coined Genetic Color Code would not work for things like gems and minerals. Although some things are not living I believe that they still follow these same rules as the livings ones. If anyone can come up with what the term for Non-living things that follow this same color pattern please let me know. If your term works then we will start using it. "You've broadened the definition of color to include... everything, even things normally considered lacking in color (mostly because they lack the pigmentation we normally associate with color), and you're assigning importance to that." From what I have observed in nature this applies to everything in the natural world. I may be wrong and that is why I am here. If I am wrong or someone can show me my errors I would be happy to change my opinions. From what I can tell is that even natural things that lack in pigment still have some. If they were truly transparent then you would not be able to see them at all. "I'm unclear on your name for this idea as well. It seems to be rigor-free, and that's never good in science." I guess I am unclear on the name for this idea also, but as I said, I am not a scientist so maybe the community here can help with what the name should be also. Thank you Unity for your comments and for being open minded about this topic. Sometimes a little encouragement is just as good as a little advice. I decided I would start my research here with the pictures that I already posted. I will try to do at least one set of pictures (animals, insects, birds, reptiles being the first set) every day until I am finished with these first 6 sets pictures. In this technique, the same species should be taken in the same photograph, which helps ensure that the lighting, photography, etc. conditions are the same on your subjects. Once you have your picture your can use your dropper tool in your photo software to compare the colors from one object to the next. In these pictures I have matched the exact same color to both subjects, from the same species, two different times. For example there is a red dot on both of the lions, the area that this dot represents is the same color on each animal and below the picture you will notice a sample of this color along with its numeric value. There is also a blue dot on each lion which also represent the exact same color on both animals and again the colors sample and numeric values are below the pic. Each pictures was done the same way, just match the colors of the dots. This is a fast way of doing this technique and you can also use the same technique to find the entire color range, which takes a bit more time. Without making this post too long I will try to explain more about finding the entire color range in a future post. Thanx again

Hello welcome to the "Whatever Theory" thread. My theory is that same species, from same geographic locations, posses certain colors and color ranges that are unique to their particular species. I believe this to be true for everything in the natural world including, all sea life, animals and insects, people, fruit and vegetables, plants and flowers, bacteria and cancer cells and may even be true with things that do not have genetic genes such as gems and minerals. I have coined this term already as (Genetic Color Code) or (GCC), but if any one here as a better idea of what it should be called, or if a term for this already exists then please let me know. I am developing a technique using photography software, that allows you to compare colors and which will give a mathematical answer. I have developed this originally to help identify different pearl species, but I am interested in the possibilities that this technique may help humanity in many different ways and I am hoping that the science community can please help me with the many aspects of this new technique such as science, math, biology, computer software, etc. I will do my best to prove this theory and to show the many different ways that this technique may improve our lives and I will try to explain the process and the advances that I have made so fare. I am not sure if the following statement is already accepted by science, but I am going to go ahead and make it, which will hopefully help open the possibilities of the importance of color. The statement I would like to make is that, in my opinion color may be one of the only things that is consistent in the natural world and maybe the natural universe. There is nothing that does not posses it, even the most transparent creatures on earth, and no matter how many times you cut threw this natural thing the one thing that you will always find is color. If you want to preview the research and advances that I have already done on pearls please visit: http://www.pearl-guide.com/forum/showthread.php?t=9566 I may re-post some of the research that I did there, but I am going to try to go fare beyond just pearls in this thread and I will try to dive into identifying everything in nature. Maybe with the advise of the experts here, this technique will reach it's full potential and be able to help me more in the pearl world.