The "Whatever Theory" Identifying The World...

[Strange]

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.

 

And the way to do this is the exact opposite of what you are doing.

 

Imagine you have a friend who says that all seashells are white. You walk along a beach and he picks up a shell and says, "see, white." Then he picks up another, "white," and another, "white." When you pick up a yellow one, he says "no, the first thing that needs to be done is to show that all shells are white."

 

This is what you are doing. To test your idea, you should look for cases where the colours of different species match (in the same photograph, if you insist). If you can't find any examples, then this does provide some support for your argument. Finding examples of the same species that do match does nothing to support your argument (and is, as I said originally, just stating the obvious).

 

However, as there is a reason for the colouration of most species, then your idea will fail this test and so will have to be rejected.

[whatever theory]

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

[Strange]

You might be interested in this Wikipedia article which covers some of the reasons for animals having colours, and some of the historical ideas people have had for the reasons:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_coloration

[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.

Edited June 17, 2015 by whatever theory

[whatever theory]

I need to revise a statement I made earlier. I just double checked the numbers and I mis-interpreted some information.

My comment was:

 

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.

The information was that there is 40,000 pixels per square inch.

Sorry for the mix up.

[tar]

whatever theory,

 

Important here, is to understand why you are calling a particular pixel, THE color of the species. How do you choose this pixel, and how many other unique pixels are there, in the same picture, that you have not chosen?

 

One way, for you to proceed would be to think of each number between 0 and 255 as being a different character in a "Base Byte" (base 256) number system. And you are dealing with a three digit number in this system. Each of these numbers could be converted to base 10 and wind up being a number between 0 and 16,777,215. The numbers would not be numerically "next to" each other, as a digit in the red place would would be worth x65536, and a digit in the green place would be worth x256 and a digit in the blue place, would be worth 1, but conceptually you could think of each pixel you find, in a picture of a species as a particular number, between 0 and 16,777,215. Then the question would be, how many different, unique numbers, between 0 and 16,777,215 are to be found in the picture, and is there a way to determine which of these unique numbers, should represent the species in question, such that, if a second person, should take a picture of this same species, identify the rgb values of every pixel in the picture and run the same procedure on this different set of pixels, they will come up with the exact number between 0 and 16,777,215, as you did on the first.

 

Regards, TAR

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Whatever Theory

 

Today I came across some yellow leaves from the same tree. Although slightly different. They all come from the same plant.

The green leaves are from a completely different plant.

The background reference is again white printer paper.

 

I wondered whether the leaves could help with these error bars ( namely the extremes of difference possible on the same plant type. Same colour )

 

Also you might be able to get a gist of how useful this Colour Coding might be .

 

Something I have been thinking , might be useful in this research is. nearly all trees have green leaves . You look across the countryside here in the U.k. Everything is Green many slightly different tones , but green . Maybe Green would make a good base reference , at least in the plant kingdom. Just a thought .

 

If you want me to keep my eyes open for anything , say Rocks. Of different colours. Let me know . I go out and about on Geology trips every month.

 

Mike

 

pic follows :-

 

Example of greens in English countryside. Me by a canal 10 mins up the road.

 

:-

 

.

.

Woman in a memorial poppy field just down the road in Cornwall , in the Lost Gardens of Helligan, nr Mevagissy. Looks a bit like a Monet picture. Goodness! , 'it's so beautiful ' , down here in the South West of England. I think we entered Paradise by the back door, by accident .

 

Now you have the RGB Red poppies, Green leaves, Blue skies , ref White Clouds .

 

.

 

Mike

Edited June 17, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[whatever theory]

Thanks for the advice Tar. You have hit on a big problem that I have been having all along. Testing each pixel, the way I am, is very time consuming and testing all of the pixels in a picture could take forever, but I am certain that the technology already exist for a simple computer program to be built that could easily test all the pixels in on picture. Maybe there is already a way to do this. The other problem that I have is with the RGB scale itself. To me it seems that if you add any white, grey or black to any of the almost 17 million colors that you would get a new color that did not already appear in the scale. So By adding a white, black and grey to the RBG scale should widen the possibilities. I would really like to know what you think about these things.

The way I usually pick colors are as follows. I try to pick colors or shades of a color that are dominant in the pictures, I stay away from areas where these colors transition to another color and I stay away from shadows and reflections. I also try to find areas that appear to be under the same lighting and angle conditions.

I like what you are saying about using a scale from 0 to 16,777,215, instead of the current way, but I do not understand the formula to convert the numbers over.

Do you have a formula to do this?

 

Thanks for the pictures Mike. Our brains must be on the same wavelength. I have been thinking for the last couple of days that leaves are good to test, because there are so many different species abundant and most of them are green. Also they are small enough to photograph in my black box.

I have tested your pictures below.

In the first picture all of the leaves posses a certain color except one.

If you notice it appears that all of the leaves that share the same color died around the same time based on their appearance. If you compare them to the one that did not match them, it appears that this unique leaf died later then the rest.

So the brings us to another question. Do species colors stay the same within the same species at the same rate, as they decompose. If so this could be any easy way to identify how long it has been since a species died.

I have been trying to show the same thing in the pearl world. Pearls fade over time, so to me it seems that their shells should fade at the same rate, which if true may help figure out when any given pearl was harvested.

I am doing an experiment with a pearl that I recently found while diving. I photographed the pearl in its shell when I found it. I am going to take a picture of this same pearl and shell every month for one year. At the end of the year I will compare its color to its shell and then compare these colors it had when I originally found it.

 

The next picture I matched the same green color from the 2 oak trees to each other and I matched the color of the grass to each other also. It was very easy to match the color of the trees and the grass to each other, but I was unable to find the color of the trees in the grass and visa versa.

 

The next picture I matched the colors of the poppies to each other and also matched the color of the poppies stems to each other.

 

Thanks for the pictures and your ideas. I really appreciate your effort

[tar]

whatever theory,

 

 

"To me it seems that if you add any white, grey or black to any of the almost 17 million colors that you would get a new color that did not already appear in the scale. So By adding a white, black and grey to the RBG scale should widen the possibilities. I would really like to know what you think about these things."

 

In my work, we used the terms tint and shade. The tint was the particular mix or ratio of cyan to yellow, to magenta toner. The shade, was how light or dark this tint was. To darken the shade, but keep the same tint, you added black toner. To lighten the shade, but keep the same tint, you took equal parts of each of the three colored toners away, to let the white of the paper come through.

A similar thing happens with your RGB scale. For instance R122 G143 B95 has a very similar tint, or color to R132 G153 B105 but is a lighter shade of that color, because we added light R10 G10 B10. Remember the RGB scale is light, and it is additive color. If you add equal parts of the three, you are lightening the picture. Any time you see all three numbers the same, you are looking at a shade of gray. R10, G10, B10 will look almost black, because its just a little bit of light, but its just a little bit of "white" light, and has all the visible wavelengths in it. R128 G128, B128 is a middle gray, and R255 G255 B255 is the lightest gray there is, which we call white. So in the RGB system you can think of black as very little white light, and white as a whole bunch of white light and gray as some amount of white light in between very little and a whole bunch.

Red light is the wavelengths of light toward the infrared, Blue light is the wavelengths of visible light, toward the ultraviolet and green light is the wavelengths in the middle. A prism or a rainbow will show that white light is made of these component wavelengths.

 

So it seems to me, that you are more interested in identifying the tint, or color of the species, then the shade. Although you have been concerned with the shade, as in the different shades of coffee, that can describe the skin color of various races of humans.

 

So,a tint is a whole set of balanced (a certain "ratio") RGB values, so it would be difficult to say that just one number describes the whole set. Unless you want to go with your present method of sampling an area that is neither too dark or too "washed out" by white light. Here, I would say you could take 10 samples, add up the 10 red numbers and divide by 10, add the 10 green and divide by 10 and the 10 blues and divide by ten. This would give you an exact number (round to whole numbers), that you could probably duplicate by taking an other 10 samples and averaging them in the same manner. If this works, you can then try 8 samples, and 5 samples and 3 samples and see how many samples you need to take to get "the same" number. Perhaps you have already done this by mentally averaging each of the colors' numbers as you sample, until you feel you have a number that is in the middle of the R range for R and in the middle of the G range, for G and in the middle of the B range, for B. Then, do the same for a completely different picture of the same species, and see if the resultant number is the same.

 

Regards, TAR

Edited June 18, 2015 by tar

[whatever theory]

Hello Tar

Thank you for explaining, in depth, the RGB color scale. I am still having a hard time comprehending everything that you said, not because of your words, but by the complexity of the meaning.

I think I have figured out what you mean by find an average color, and I have tried to do this in the following picture, but I would like you to tell me if what I did was exactly what you meant.

I found 10 colors from one bird and then found the same 10 colors on the other bird. I added up all of the different values and divided them by 10.

[whatever theory]

Hello Tar

I was wondering if you might know why the number 256 is used on the RGB scale? Why not 250 or 300? It seems to me that if this number was 1,000 or even 10,000 it would give much more choices of colors. Do you think this is possible?

Below I have taken a picture of wild flowers and tested 2 colors from 3 different species of purple flowers and 3 different species of yellow flowers.

I have matched the same 2 shades of purple and yellow to both of the same species, but was not able to find these same shades of purple and yellow on species other then their species.

The colored circles on the picture correspond to the same color dots below the picture

Edited June 20, 2015 by whatever theory

[Klaynos]

256 is used as it is easy to represent in binary.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

 

The number 256 has a special place in computer use . 255 is the maximum value of a memory of one byte .

 

Namely. 11111111 most early computers worked with Bytes as one byte of memory, had 8 bits ( 0 or a 1) .

 

The American standard code for information interchange ( ASCII ) was coined to represent most of the letters, numbers , type writer strokes of a

Qwerty keyboard

 

It became a multiple of computer memory and early microchip function .

 

Mike

[tar]

whatever theory,

 

You said: "I found 10 colors from one bird and then found the same 10 colors on the other bird. I added up all of the different values and divided them by 10."

 

My idea was to find the average color of 10 sample readings, which is what you did, in exactly the manner I was thinking...except you then found these same 10 colors in another bird. You were not suppose to look for those 10 colors. You were supposed to take 10 random samples from the other bird, average them in the same manner, and see if you got the same RGB value you did the first time.

 

Mike and Klaynos are right about the 256. Eight bits of binary (on and off) and you can count to 255. Counting 0 that is 256 values. Computers work in these eight bit "words" called bytes.

 

24bit color is three bytes describing each pixel. 8bits for Red, 8bits for Green and 8 bits for Yellow.

 

What is interesting to me since I was born and raised before digital things, was that everything was analog. That is like a sweep second hand, there was not a "click" into the next position, but the hand was visualized as in constant motion. When you say "why not 250 or 300" the answer is in the divisions chosen for the analog to digital conversion of the level of "red" or "how much" red wavelength light, was entering the sensor. A digital camera has CCDs that have a maximum voltage output and a minimum voltage output. Color filters are arranged in such a fashion as red light shines on a CCD that then outputs a voltage. The voltage goes through a circuit that decides if that particular voltage is above half max or below (so to speak) and then the amount over can be split in half again, or if it did not reach the halfway mark, the halfway mark between min and halfway can be tested (as to above or below). If the first test is that the voltage is over half, the most significant digit of the byte becomes 1???????. So the 256 is a somewhat arbitrary division of the analogue and continuous amount of Red (green, blue) light entering the camera into a digital number (ones and zeroes.) A circuit could easily be designed to break any analog range of values into whatever number of divisions, you wanted (if you had an electrical/electronic engineer at your disposal.) Cameras and monitiors are engineered to understand each other and the way human beings sense color, in the sense that the monitor reproduces approximately the levels of red, green and blue light, the camera was subject to. Engineers and designers have found that our personal equipment can not really notice the difference between R172 G103 B47 and R171 G102 and B46 (maybe a little darker a shade, but a similar tint, and not enough difference to be sure it was different) so 256 divisions of an analog signal is sufficient, in this case.

 

In your studies, the most accurate way to go about it, would be to shine sunlight on the object and get an analog reading of all the wavelengths that are absorbed, all the wavelengths that are reflected and all the wavelengths that are refracted or scattered or prismed, or even outright emmitted (ie. fireflies, jellyfish etc.) But, you have to proceed with the standards that are already set in the industry, knowing that you are not "seeing" infrared or ultraviolet, and knowing you are looking at a limited and engineered 0 to 255 digital number for each analog level. Also know that the red cones in our eyes activate across a whole range of frequencies that peak in the range called red and the Green cones activate in a whole range of frequencies of light, that peak in the color we call green, but that there is overlap. Additionally know that we "see" yellow, yet we have no yellow cones. If our red cones, and green cones are excited equally and our blue cones hardly at all...we see yellow.

 

Regards, TAR

Edited June 20, 2015 by tar

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

The attached pictures, illustrate how we as active social humans , even in sport use ' colour ' as identifiers.

 

Notice the various colour flags , and sails , identified the different yachts in yesterday's arrival of competing sailors as they stoped over at Torquay , during the cross Ocean race from Spain to France to Ireland , to England , in the :-

 

" La Solitaire de Figaro - Eric Bompard Cashemire ". yacht race

 

 

 

We seem to use colour as a major identifier , . so do Plants, Animals, Minerals etc . This proposed colour classification system , could prove to be interesting , as well as very colourful !

 

Notice this spectacular finish off Torquay harbour shows , the three competing winners ( green , blue and red )

 

 

This was the more dignified colourful start :-

 

 

Mike

Edited June 20, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[whatever theory]

Thank you Klaynos, Mike and Tar for explaining why the number 256 is used.

It is good to know the basics of how the scale works.

I have some pictures to post but all of the tool icons(quotes, pictures, smiley faces, etc.) are gone. Any one else having this problem here?

Thanks

[MonDie]

Wow long thread!

Color might be used as a hybridization barrier.

 

WT, recently diverged species may have overlapping territory, a *hybrid zone*, but it's maladaptive to make hybrid offspring because of *reduced hybrid viability*. Because each species is adapting to its new environment, a hybrid offspring is adapted to neither environment. To top it off, hybrids are often sterile. Consequently, individuals will have better reproductive success if they don't waste time courting or mating the other species, a situation which may lead to hybridization barriers. Color probably often serves as one such barrier. For example, suppose one species is more brown, so its females start picking browner males to avoid hybridization, hence the browner males get more mates, hence that species gradually becomes browner. That would be color serving as a prezygotic barrier to hybridization.

 

By the way, some birds see ultraviolet light.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Thank you Klaynos, Mike and Tar for explaining why the number 256 is used.

It is good to know the basics of how the scale works.

I have some pictures to post but all of the tool icons(quotes, pictures, smiley faces, etc.) are gone. Any one else having this problem here?

Thanks

.

 

 

See if these pink flowers in my garden post ok. And see if the colour is reasonably consistent from flower head to flower head?

.

 

Mike

[whatever theory]

Thanks Mike it seems like everything is back to normal on this site now. Hope you had fun at the boat races. Pretty cool how the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place winners were red, green, and blue. It is nice to see them showing their support.

 

Tar about your comment

 

 

In your studies, the most accurate way to go about it, would be to shine sunlight on the object and get an analog reading of all the wavelengths that are absorbed, all the wavelengths that are reflected and all the wavelengths that are refracted or scattered or prismed, or even outright emmitted (ie. fireflies, jellyfish etc.) But, you have to proceed with the standards that are already set in the industry, knowing that you are not "seeing" infrared or ultraviolet, and knowing you are looking at a limited and engineered 0 to 255 digital number for each analog level.

I believe that taking pictures in a controlled environment, such as inside a closed box, is a good way to take many pictures and compare them to each other, but taking pictures outside this box in normal conditions, will create different results. What I am thinking is that we would need to start off by limiting the amount of differences in the conditions. For instance we may have to do as you suggest and only take them in the sun. What are all of the different factors that need to be considered. For example I think that the sun's rays have different spectrum at different times of the day. Also I was wondering if the light could have different spectrum's if it was in different locations but still the same time of day???

I understand now what you are saying about trying to find an average color between the same species. I will try to do this and I will post the results when finished.

 

Thanks Mondie for your comments.

I was wondering if there is any hybrid species, that are known, that are not sterile? It seems like nature would not be able to evolve into new species if these offspring could not reproduce. Why if a mule that is a cross between a horse and a donkey is sterile but, a labor/doodle, cross between a Poodle and a Labrador, is not sterile? What makes a hybrid a hybrid and not just a mixed breed?

 

I tested the pink from the open flowers and also the pink from the flowers that had not yet opened in your picture Mike. Thanks

I am going to try to show how deep this color code runs threw nature, it is not just the surface (Fur, hair, feathers, eyes, etc.) that these colors match, but it goes far below the surface.

In this picture I have taken a random color from each picture to show the different shades of different game birds.

1. Turkey, 2. Goose, 3. Barbary Duck (Muscovy), 4. Guinea fowl, 5.
Mallard, 6. Poussin, (Cornish Rock Game hen/baby cornish X), 7. Quail,
8. Partridge, 9. Pigeon squab, 10. Pheasant, 11. Chicken, 12.
Aylesbury duck (pekin)

 

Here I have done the same thing with different kinds of eggs. Since eggs have been bred by man there may be more difference in color variety between same species then wild birds. For instance how a mixed breed dog will have different colored babies when a wild dog will usually have the same colored babies.

 

In this picture I have compared the color between Beef, Pork and Lamb.

 

 

I know that in none of these pictures have I compared these species to it's same species, but I can only do so much with each picture. In a future presentation I will try to show the similarities between these species, now that I have shown the differences. Thanks again

Edited June 23, 2015 by whatever theory

[whatever theory]

 

 

You might have a problem identifying a species of hermit crab by the color of its shell, for instance.

Tar, I just realized that you said "hermit" crab. I will try to find some pictures of them.

It is hard to find pictures of different species of crabs in the same picture, but I will keep trying to find better pictures.

The first picture below, is of 3 different species, each of the middle 3 pictures are all the same species that share a common color and the last picture is also the same species that still share the same color, after being cooked.

Edited June 24, 2015 by whatever theory

[tar]

Whatever Theory,

 

You asked:

"What are all of the different factors that need to be considered"

 

I think the primary consideration is the type of light (made up of what frequencies) you are shining on the subject. Being that very few of the species that you have shown so far actually emit visible light, ALL of the visible light, coming off the subject, is reflected sunlight, or if you take a picture in a box, the specifications of your flashbulb, or LED array, or whatever, would have to be taken into consideration. I am not sure how to best handle this, but probably, if you take the same species under different lighting conditions, with the same camera, you could get an idea of how the numbers would change or what patterns would become evident.

 

But the way light is absorbed or reflected, refracted or passed through, changes, sometimes according to the surface characteristics of the subject. Maybe for instance, you would get a different number if the meat was cut with a very sharp knife, or pulled apart, or if the surface of the object was wet with morning dew, or dried out from a prolonged drought. Some baseline standards, should probably be set, to your satisfaction, around three or four reference items. Like a certain type of Cherry, a certain type of banana and a certain type of blueberry, that you could photograph in varied conditions, and see how the conditions affected the numbers. Also you could get a greyscale (a precisely printed grey reference made by Kodak for instance) that you could photograph under various lighting conditions, and see how the light affects your numbers.

 

Regards, TAR

Second type of issue you have not yet fully described: How are you going to handle it when a species has more than one color associated with it? For instance, with the crabs you sampled, one species had a blue on its legs that you did not sample.

Edited June 25, 2015 by tar

[whatever theory]

Thanks for your suggestions Tar

 

 

Some baseline standards, should probably be set, to your satisfaction, around three or four reference items. Like a certain type of Cherry, a certain type of banana and a certain type of blueberry, that you could photograph in varied conditions, and see how the conditions affected the numbers.

It is funny how sometimes the obvious thing to do is not so obvious until someone else suggests it.

I will try to take many pictures of the same object under many different lighting conditions and compare them to see what happens.

 

 

Second type of issue you have not yet fully described: How are you going to handle it when a species has more than one color associated with it? For instance, with the crabs you sampled, one species had a blue on its legs that you did not sample.

I think it is good to have a second or third color to test when comparing species. The more different colors you can compare the more accurate your results should be. Sometimes I do compare all different colors, but it just depends on how much energy I have that day. I will try to compare more different colors in the future.

 

Here is some links to some sites that talk about how color can be used to diagnose different medical conditions:

http://www.pyroenergen.com/articles11/tongue-color-disease.htm

http://www.webmd.com/skin-problems-and-treatments/guide/skin-problems-treatments-diagnosis-tests

http://altmedicine.about.com/library/weekly/bl_TongueDiagnosis.htm

http://www.rightdiagnosis.com/sym/stool_color.htm

 

I found some pictures of Hermit crabs, but I could not find any that had different species in the same picture.

I only tested one color in each photo, just to show a simple example of a color that was common, to a particular species.

[Lagoon Island Pearls]

 

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.

 

I have been a contributor at the forum listed in the quote since 2009. The forum is an informal discussion group administrated by a retail group. While some scientific dissusion occurs on a range of topics, it's largely based around fashion, marketing and identification concerns.

 

There is no collaboration or endorsement. In fact, the OP injected oneself into an important thread: http://www.pearl-guide.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2032 claiming to be in possession of rare nautilus pearls which were being prepared for market. Red flags of suspicion quickly arose and examination of the posted photographs clearly revealed pearls from endangered (CITES) Tridacna gigas aka Giant clams.

 

Subsequently, the OP claimed the same gibberish being peddled in this thread, insomuch as suggesting "a child can do it". Several attempts were made to reason with the individual, but each time met with hyperbole, ad hominum or nonsensical assertions. The administrators removed the entire portion and admonished them to not attempt to solicit sales or derail threads again. The OP re-opened a new thread in the Natural Pearls section, but failed to provide supporting documentation at any level, no less as applied to natural pearl identification. Hence the thread was moved to "Other", much like this thread.

 

Or maybe just yet another example of apophenia.

 

Agreed. Whatever this is purported to be, it lacks terms of reference, methodology, controls or targeted initatives.

 

Genetic Color Code (GCC)? That is so ludicrous as to be amusing.

 

Rather than being a wet blanket, I'll contribute to this thread in a meaningful yet informal way. Likewise raise or respond to questions and/or report ongoing collaborative studies in the appropriate sections of this forum.

 

No single color is exclusive to the extracrystalline structure in any species of mollusk shell or pearl. Natural pearls can be any color for any reason. Multiple pearls of disimilar color may be present in a single specimen. However, it is reasonable to suggest some colors are predominantly expressed in known species.

 

A year or so ago, I started a thread: http://www.pearl-guide.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8308. By no means a scientific method, my effort was to initiate a little hands on fun, that an average person might learn better judgement when identifying pearl origins.

 

Unlike the OP's confirmation bias selecting a single pixel, my method employed the image on the whole. Mosaics were subjectively constructed as to remove background, shadows etc. From these images, a color palette is generated. Side by side, these palettes may be compared. In a prepared quiz, the greater number of particpants were largely accurate in their guesses.

 

Color matching with an RGB graphical interface is little more than paint store technology and it's limitations have been known for decades.

 

 

Dave

[swansont]

 

I have been a contributor at the forum listed in the quote since 2009. The forum is an informal discussion group administrated by a retail group. While some scientific dissusion occurs on a range of topics, it's largely based around fashion, marketing and identification concerns.

 

There is no collaboration or endorsement. In fact, the OP injected oneself into an important thread: http://www.pearl-guide.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2032 claiming to be in possession of rare nautilus pearls which were being prepared for market. Red flags of suspicion quickly arose and examination of the posted photographs clearly revealed pearls from endangered (CITES) Tridacna gigas aka Giant clams.

 

Subsequently, the OP claimed the same gibberish being peddled in this thread, insomuch as suggesting "a child can do it". Several attempts were made to reason with the individual, but each time met with hyperbole, ad hominum or nonsensical assertions. The administrators removed the entire portion and admonished them to not attempt to solicit sales or derail threads again. The OP re-opened a new thread in the Natural Pearls section, but failed to provide supporting documentation at any level, no less as applied to natural pearl identification. Hence the thread was moved to "Other", much like this thread.

 

!

Moderator Note

 

The posting history at another site is of zero interest or relevance here.

 

Please continue with the discussion of the topic (which would not include responses to this note)

 

[tar]

Whatever Theory,

 

Additional help in categorizing species by their colors might be had, by thinking about the molecular structure of amolecule, that produces a color, usually by absorbing the wavelengths of light that you don't see.

 

Mineral colors, or colors characteristic of certain metals, can be seen by looking at the Wiki page on Borax bead testing (nice chart of the colors produced by certain metals in the oxidizing and reducing parts of the flame). My paste didn't work, but you can search "bead test".

 

These mineral colors might be important when thinking about why certain shells and pearls and the like are certain colors, as the trace minerals in clear calcium might be responsible.

 

On the organic side, chromophores are probably the key, as early on in the evolutionary trek, plants developed ways of getting energy from the Sun, by absorbing certain ultraviolet and visible light frequencies and thusly changing the electron bonds in the particular carbon chains that absorbed these wavelengths. Carbon based life, is based on carbon, after all, and animals eat and breath the carbon and carbon compounds that life before, fixed, so understanding pigments and dyes in terms of the wavelengths they absorb is important. That is why I talked about the complementary colors. If an object is absorbing primarily green wavelengths, its reflecting the magenta wavelengths and if you see green, that means the plant is using, or absorbing the red and blue wavelengths, so they probably have chromophores that absorb red and blue, and possibly some ultraviolet energy. that we are not built to notice is missing.

 

Regards, TAR

that species have developed reasons to show certain colors is probably an offshoot of chromophores that originally were purposed to get energy from the Sun.

it is probably not an accident that hemoglobin is in red blood, and iron in the borax bead test shows red in the oxidizing part of the flame, and a heme is a molecule with an iron atom at its core.

Edited June 25, 2015 by tar