About the Subjective Complementary Colors-English-Gustav Theodor Fechner

7/29/2019 About the Subjective Complementary Colors-English-Gustav Theodor Fechner.

1/25

About the subjective complementary colors,of GT Fechner.

About the subject of this paper is already so much has been written, and even more

recently have several physicists (Lehot, plateau, Osann, Pohlmann; Chevreul 1) , thelatter treatise but not come to my face) is the same adopted with such zeal that onemight suspect the same is exhausted by now should show the following criticallighting that we have come through this new investigations more backward thanforward in the same knowledge as a whole.

1) Lesot in Froriep Nat's no. 12 of the XXVIII. Band, or my Repertor. ofPhys. II, p 228 - Plateau in this. Ann. XXXII, S 543, XXXVIII, 626 S (moredetail in the first Abhandl.Ann et de chim de phys LVIII, p..339 ) - Osann in

this. Ann. XXVII, p 694; XXXVII, p 287, XLII, p 72 - Pohlmannthis. Ann. XXXVII, p 319

Apart from this, I believe that we rather than stand at all at the beginning at the endof our knowledge of the whole subject, and it is expected from a continuation of thisessay, I will provide in the future, seen that until now not even the not-manoeuvrableelements that are important in a same theory, have been determined or evenobserved. I myself hope to share some useful posts in this UPHOLSTERY; far way to

be able to exhaust the subject on my part.

First section.

On the question whether the so-called by the contrast colors are objective in

nature.

Prof. Osann thinks of those hitherto considered subjective in nature,complementary colors, which at the same time with other colors, in the sameneighborhood, appear, called colors, to have demonstrated by the contrast that they

are objective in nature. The repetition of his, presented in this UPHOLSTERY,experiments, however just lets me find the most decisive evidence to the contrary.

If the reflection is in the manner specified by him in these annals, XXVII, pp.694 a , lying on colored paper, white disk in a wrong hand made sheet of windowglass looks, but without application of Pappschirmes, you see, in fact, the image thewhite disk with the complementary color nuances of the pad, but the trial judges aswell asProf. Osann admits in this form nothing about the subjective or objectivenature of the complementary color, because the eye sees at the same time also thecolor of the paper with the mirror image of the white disk. By consultation ofPappschirmes after byProf. Osann manner specified but the attempt would really optfor the completely objective nature, when really. even now - asProf. Osann claimed


2/25

that it was the case - the complementary color of the paper appeared on the mirrorimage of the white disk. Meanwhile, I gave this attempt after repeated recurrencefollowing result:

I also see through the hole in the Pappschirmes the mirrored on the glass panelpainting of the white disc under the, VII, Volume XX p 695 stated, circumstances

with incident direct sun light (which it is necessary if you ever want a certain tint ofthe picture can decide sure) clearly colored, but never otherwise than greenish orreddish, and regardless of the color of the underlying colored paper. Instead ofsaying, I see it eithergreenish orreddish, however, is more accurate to say I see bothshades simultaneously in mixture alongside one another, but it can be all too easy for

the eye more on one or the other coloring reflect 2) . This coloration due to the factthat, from the rear surface of greenish glass window (whichProf. Osannhas appliedthe same to me) reflectedimage from begreiflichem reason, even greenish. The lightreflected at the front surface, white se picture will be reddish due to the contrast with

this greenish image, and therefore it mixes the greenish with the Reddish not uniform,because the shadow points, which are always more or less available due to smallirregularities of the paper , can not coincide completely with the two images. Wherethe image is now a shady, are the other its complementary light.

2) Operates with only one verbreitetem bright daylight, is displayed instead ofrather indistinct reddish purple or violet, and this color is changing as little withthe change of the base.

That this explanation is the correct one, is evident from the following experiments:

Keeps to a very narrow strip of white paper with a bar of ordinary window glass, soit is the perceive quite separate from the back surface and the reflected from the frontsurface image of the same at a suitable position of the eye and paper, or at least theedges of the two images highly superimposed anticipation. As you can see becausethe picture what the back face is at its anticipatory parts clear greenish the picturewhat the front surface are clearly red. Similarly, access to Osann 's experiments, thelight-giving parts of both images above each other out in their shadows into it, and

thus bring the mixture of green and red out what I've always seen in this experiment. If the wayProfessor Osann really, when he stepped back so far that the hole in thePappschirmes seemed satisfied completely with the white disk, have not seen it, thecomplementary color of the pad, that experiment would still prove nothing,whenProf. Osann just before the mirror image of the colored backing had to seen (Imyself, however after only greenish and reddish seen in this case), because thesensation of subjective complementary color, once it is produced in the eye, like stillexists, even if its causal is removed, including the following remarkable Evidencewill offer. But of course assuredProf. Osann that they also perceive the

complementary color when youstart equalto that seen in distance through the holewhere no reflection of colored paper comes in the eye. Others may decide thatcontradiction between us. Certain it is that my eye for complementary colors of


3/25

subjective perception is so sensitive that his judgments probably some weight can beattached. Even have my hearers, with whom I repeated the experiment, just the sameas I can find.

The above-mentioned experiments on production of complementary colors bydouble reflection can do with equal success with others, as greenish-colored glasses,

and choose those that are slightly more colored than normal window glass without itdue to excessive coloring even to to swallow a lot of light, and thus to prevent thevisibility of the rear image, so the phenomena are so conspicuous. The reflectedimage of the posterior surface of the document (all shady places of the back imageso) it holds, for example, before such a glass with a paper publication so seems verynice and clean stained with the complementary color of the glass. If you hold againsta black paper with white dots or trains on the glass so the screen appears reversedfrom thefront surface reflected back the image train or colored points of thecomplementary color. They convinced themselves very well of this opposition, if one

sticks a white piece of paper on which there are some black dots on a black paper,and, for example, reflected in a pale orange glass. If the blue image of the black dotson the top is so is also a blue ribbon at the picture of the white paperbelow visiblefrom spilling over the edge of the blue image on the orange stems.

All these attempts to win exceptional in beauty and clarity, and you get one of thebest ways to generate complementary colors by contrast, if we allow the brightly

colored glass occupy the back with mirror film 3) , thereby increasing the reflection ofobjective color of the background surface, thus also the appearance of subjectivecomplementary colors on the front face exceptionally wins. It has so to say a twin

spar for complementary colors at a mirror of this kind as bright objects for the sameare particularly good: a needle, a narrow strip of white paper, as dark: the bars of thewindow cross with bright sky the background, very beautiful but a black sliver paper,glued on a bright window.

3) One can easily bring this assignment even if you amalganiert a strong pieceof tin foil with mercury, and pushes the glass out. To make an attempt to

prepare the same, you need only the colored glass plate on a mercury surface toapply.

Poggendorff's Annal. Vol XLIV. Brings you such a mirror out at the opening of the shutter of a dark room, andraises means of the same image of the sun in the room, so you can show theappearance of these complementary colors to the double image of a greater number oflisteners at the same time.

Regarding amendments concerned, theProfessor Osann of his earlier experimentsin these Annals, Vol XXXVII, pp. 294, tells, they can just as little in favor of anobjective nature of the colors by contrast, regarded as the earlier attempt, because inall these experiments, the color, the complement which occurs simultaneously to the

eye is always present in either the reflective or the color of the glass, with which theattempt is made. They are just variations of the experiment withoutPappschirm that

proves nothing in itself, but not amendments of the trial, with Pappschirm.


4/25

Prof. Osann but cherishes the view that colored glasses, the addition of color to thefront surface reflect light, which they pass through. This view, however, is differentwhen my eye does not lie entirely, certainly wrong. His proof is as follows: "If youhold a colored glass against a black background, or you take a on one side blackenedglass, and holding it in such a way that the colored side is the eye faces, and at the

same time is, on which the light falls, one sees the glass or blackened on the back sidecolored complementary. "

But I must absolutely deny the accuracy of this fact. Blacken one a colored, it wasbright or dark-colored, glass along its entire rear surface with a black varnish, whichthe reflection is removed from this rear surface, the front surface appears at all almostentirely black in reflected light, but little significant, nuance which one perceives, iscertainly one of the ordinary, not the complementary color of the glass.

I here about not mistaken, proves the consistency of my audience about the nuancesof such glass, which I presented to them without putting them in advance of its coloraccordingly.It was a bright green glass, which appeared deep black color after beingberfirnissung. A light yellow glass appeared dark yellow brown afterberfirnissung. If you hold a light colored glass instead of black it only against a

black background, while you look at it in the reflected light, so stands out even theordinary color of the glass with great certainty; disputed because here also reflected

by the second surface light which has lost the double passage through the glass of thecomplementary rays by absorption, reaches the eye.

The Osann 'cal information would be inexplicable if not to make the attempt at akind, really (and very understandable) hervortrte the complementary color. Indeed,ifonly a stainblackens at the back of a brightly colored glass, you see, in fact, the

black spot when viewed in reflected light, especially if you let the white light of anovercast sky are reflected in the fact clearly nuanced with the complementary color ofthe glass , preferably at the edges of the reason that now, to make the contrast withthe actual color of the glass, which appears in the vicinity of the black spotclaims. However, this complementary color disappears, so to obscure the radius ofthe black spot that from the actual color of the glass nothing is visible, as it is not

perceived in very dark-colored glasses that show in the reflected light of anysignificant staining, because the eye going on here the sensation of contrast.

An experiment in which one can fairly obvious convince the Ungrunde the Osann'between views is the following: One on firnise one half of a brightly colored glass

black, but leave the other free, and look in this glass of the mirror image of, a windowstrip of black paper glued. If you hold the glass so that the mirror image of theungefirnisten surface is reflected back, you see, as stated, a nice double image, withcomplementary colors, but one caused by a slight modification in the slope of theglass that the mirror image varnished on the surface appears, then immediately oneimage, and at the same time both colors disappeared, it seems a pure black image in a

pure white ground, namely the wofern Papierstreifchens a background of white sky isovercast.

When I come through these trials by Osann to have refuted supponierte objective


5/25

complementary color of the color glasses on her first surface sufficiently think so Ithink it is not yet on the other hand for experimental decide whether they have the

same color they show in transmitted light, at the first surface by diffusing reflection(except in the specular reflection nothing to offer contributes peculiar color of the

body) to any significant degree. For though they be led Term ate the color of a

blackened on the rear surface glass often probably recognize is able, it could still bedue to the reflection from the back surface can not be completely eliminated by theblack varnish, as the blackest body still reflect a non-negligible portion light, and somust of course light, which by virtue of two-time passage adopted by the glass itscolor, while narrow the reflected light from the first surface.

I want to keep this in fact for the most probable because of that residue of stainingwhich is still perceived by the black berfirnisung is, the more clearly, the brighterthe glass, and very dark-colored glasses can itself without varnish nothing moreidentify by means of the color reflected light, they appear, put on black paper, as one

might have also noticed the light, so black that you really can not guess their color. The view that one has to consider a priori on the subject is likely to be thattransparent colored material appears at all colored in reflected light in the same wayas they appear at the smallest thickness in the through. For here have the sameabsorption as you have reason to believe that the scattered light from the body, whichare their color is only set back from a small depth, it is able to express it, which isexpressed on the light passing through the first thin layer . The known effects ofseveral colored liquids (litmus, sap green, etc) agree with this. Also, the experiments

by whichProf. Osann generated through the colored glasses complementary

coloredshadows seeks to vindicate an objective nature, we have delivered in therepetition only evidence against such. To provide with convenience experiments onthese shadows, I have the shutter of a dark room two square openings of 6 par-inchside, whose centers are at a distance of nearly 2 feet of each other, can be horizontallyattached side by side, provided with joints at the top and lower edges to partly opaqueslider to decrease or occlusion of the lumen, some color glasses can slidehorizontally. In an opening to push a color glass one, the other is allowed to invadethe daylight, and the latter reduced by the opaque slider so far to the complementaryshades shown stained with the maximum intensity. One can always bring such

formative meaning that the intensity of its color the color of the adjacent objectivelight intensity to yield nothing. Ever, this requires that the daily shelle opening issmaller than the colored. Not only coincides with this simple device, the appearanceof the colored shadows exquisitely, some truly gorgeous out, but it can also by it inhis power, by changing the size ratio of the two lumens, the ratio of the dark andstaining intensity of both modify shadows hire experiments on the complementarycolors by contrast with it, which are of the same importance for the theory, and towhich I shall return in a future continuation of these investigations. I believe that adevice of this type should be in every optical room. Where the locality such is not

allowed to install, they would. In one, in a similar way as a camera obscura can attachfurnished, black box

Also, apart from the advantages that the device described here given for the easier


6/25

and safer amendment of the experiments, it deserves necessarily in preference to theusually applied where one is two candles in a dark room, one of which is coveredwith a color glass, partly because the light of the candle when it is not very intense,will greatly weakened by color glasses, but mainly because it is reddish yellow initself and thereby the appearance complicated.

In fact, when one lumen in the shutter with the opaque slider fully closes and anordinary candle in the room is, the of her thrown, illuminated by the second, dulyreduced, open lumens of daylight shadow appears even without application colors ofglass (even at very overcast, no appreciable help directly supplying blue sky)

beautiful blue, and also the shadow of the candle-lit yellow. You still covered also theday lumens with a blue glass, this phenomenon is exceedingly beautiful. But it coversreverse the opening with a pale reddish-yellow glass, so when the whole lumen isrelated to the coloring very unimpressive, but it reduces the covered with the yellowglass lumens more and more, the illuminated him shades now takes even a blue-green

color on, which firstly proves that even in the case where both shade with black lightsare illuminated, which can be a (strongly stained) appear the other colored

complementary 4) , and secondly, that in this case the color of the candle able tooutweigh that of the pale red-yellow glass. If one uses instead of pale red-yellowglass on a dark rotgelbes so then reverses the appearance by the now illuminated bythe candle shade turns complementary.

4) More directly, you convince yourself of this interesting result, in the viewstill make even some attempts that I'm here, in that it closes one of two lumenswith bright, the other with a dark glass of the same color.

The proof is the Professor Osann for the objective nature of the complementaryshadow color is the (this Ann. XLII p. 73) that, when illuminated by the flame of theundyed light shade through a cardboard tube so considering that he alone is satisfiesthe field, the same is equally colored seen, as when seen without it.

The trial itself is undoubtedly correct, but does not prove, what to prove, but inapplying some modifications to the contrary. I guess after the colored shadows have

already been created and viewed with the naked uge, the inwardly blackenedcardboard tube from one eye (of course, the other must be closed) and set it to thecomplementary shades, I think also the color remain unchanged to see. But this isalso the case if I color glass take away during continuing through vision of theopening or take leave, and even then, if the color glass with a very different, of itselfalmost complementary in relation to the first colored, reversed. Only if, after anychange of this type, the tube is withdrawn from the eye, so that it can be affected bythe new contrast, the shadow of a transition that is striking highly appears in thearrangements required by the new color glass, complementary color . This means

there is an actual inclination of the complementary color, once it has been producedin mind, persist even after cessation of their Causal yet.

Behaves quite differently colored lens shade. Namely one looks through the black


7/25

tube on this shadow and change the colors of glass so you can see the changesimmediately to the corresponding change in color of the shadow. But it takes thecolor glass completely gone, so now through both openings of natural light, so goesthe same moment the objective color under illumination currently in the

complementary about 5) , which only a special case of those complementary colors,

incidentally, of which the following section will be discussed.5) This complementary color is now much less intense and much more volatilethan that which appears when the colors during the opening is covered byseeing through the tube completely, with darkened Watched shadows. Thefollowing comparisons further.

've Cited herein attempts not only myself very often and repeatedly on different

days with quite constant success, but also because of the eye-catching Boy, what theyoffer, and to be sure that it is not self-deception or a peculiarity of my visual organwhile in Games should be, the same at different times from nine to ten other people,let size largely independent of each other, hire, where the meaning and intent of theseexperiments was largely unheard of. I left through the blackened tube for one or theother shade look, while I exchanged or removed, or (compare the experiments below)the color glass to the opening, the opening completely closed, and asked them aboutthe type of color they perceive believed. A single one among them, the littlesusceptibility to subjective complementary colors also revealed in other experiments,stated the following: He could if he put the tube in front of the eye, ever perceive anylegally certain coloration on complementary shade when it equal to those had

previously appeared clearly , and the shadows seemed to him, as well as the colorglass was changed while keeping the tube in front of the eye, gray, without speakinghe dared, of a decided coloring. If on the other hand, he looked through the tube tothe objective colored shade, so it seemed the same for removal of color glass (orcomplete closing of the opening) just to brighten or darken, though he clearly saw acomplementary color. The details of all othervoting against my own surprise withregard to both shade and most carefully in all respects consistent with those that Ihave recorded up to my own observations, and resembled nothing of amazement that

some of the extreme when they when withdrawing (on complementary shadedirected) tube transforms saw the color of her eyes suddenly, after I had the colorsreversed glass before.

No less conclusive against Osann , as everything stated above, it is that if you canalready rather through the tube to the complementary shades, as we covered theopening with the colors of glass, it initially no longer get the impression of thecomplementary color is equal. On the contrary, if in this case, staining seen (whichwill be the case when incident not too much white light through the other opening orwill have the same fully closed), it is the objective color of the color glass itself,which is the reason further from the following will result.

One must incidentally all these experiments use a inwardly blackened tube,


8/25

otherwise the objective sunlight in the area of the observed shadow spot is the sameno means duly held by the eye, but rather it easily happens that the lower end of thetube, especially something from the complementary shade maintained, reflected astrong reflection of, scattered from objects and walls of the dark room, objectivecolor displays, and then the continuance of the complementary color in the shade

being viewed through the tube has nothing remarkable anyway. By this repulse scattering experienced by the light colors in dark rooms, andthereby also to some extent must obtain the complementary colored shade (only thatthe subjective impression prevails), the following is prima facie explained by veryabnormal appearance.

After having looked at the complementary shade to the naked eye before you takethe tube and look at it through the same, where is led ate the complementary termimpression is still seem to persist. It now closes while this is taking, has the openingthrough which the light is incident, as does the persistence, of course he is muchdarker, once the objective color of the glass in with what the other opening iscovered. That this coloring is really of objective quality (was imperceptiblydispersive reflexion of the light colors in the shadows inside, where it earlier due tooverbidding by daylight herrhrend), results from the following modification of thetrial.

You cover it a both holes with a color glass and close the other completely. Thesimple shadow, what now are the colors of glass, still shows, both by my own

judgment, as the judgment Mehrerer I asked about some of the, by the contrast withthe surrounding colors of lighting required, nuance, though much less distinct, than

when you allow a reasonable amount of daylight 6) . However, considering now thatshadow through the blackened tube, he immediately takes significantly the ink of thecolor glass itself, and this is, as noted above, also be the case if you take the tuberather on the eye than one that opening covered with glass colors, you will also beseen during the Hinblicks on these shadows through the tube, the color of the lenses,so the other one covers the opening partly by the change in color of the shadowcorrectly. It carries this color quite the character of an objective. In one case, the viewthrough the tube to the objective actually shadows, the colors opening closescompletely, the color of the shadow is just as with the removal of the color glass inthe complementary color on, of course under heavy obscuration.

6) This is explained very well the fact that no objective white light more findsitself in holding of daylight to which the decomposition into a subjective

perceived and not perceived part could go on. The perceived color of rest canonly come from the inner light generation in mind (see the next section) haveoriginated. It is, as you can see, this way even the impression of objective colorlight that falls into scattered in the shadow outbid.

Prof. Osann refers to experiments with a monochromatic light (this Ann. Vol XLIIp. 73), which should speak for the objective nature of complementary shadow


9/25

color. But these attempts have delivered to me only the other hand results fromhomogeneous illuminated by the yellow light shade generally unmistakablycomplementary (eg, green, red, though probably somewhat modified by yellow) ofthat color, covered with a glass colors, assumed, by which it was produced, thoughthe yellow light rays not contained by the complementary nature of these coloring.

As for the much-talked-blue shade arrives that we can often happen outdoors or inrooms under the influence of sky light and a second light, usually from a candle orthe setting sun, arise, andPohlmann asked made the special object of his treatise, ascan not think of denying that this is also a Blue in the case where light illuminates thesky really blue one of two shadow me objective could have a share in his coloring, iteven seems to understand this by itself. Another question is to what extent thisobjective Blue much is the appearance that his influence at all noticeable , and if not,regardless of the same, this coloration also arise from mere subjective education inthe circumstances where they show themselves, could .

In my view, Mr.Pohlmann the merit of his hard-working, and just right, albeit toolittle modified observations and experiments containing treatise thereby reducing thathe draws general conclusions from these observations, as they admit, by thus withoutrestriction wants to prove that "only a light kind, which was blue in itself, could

produce such effects."

A sorgfllige repetition and modification of his attempts has made me rather drawthe conclusions:

a) that under the influence of candlelight, or even a red-yellow light, it certainly did

not require the involvement of an objective blue light, to cause the formation of theblue shadows and explain, and that really, when interacting candle light and sky light,the former the have predominant influence on the phenomenon.

b) But that, however, as blue in the presence of an objectively red and yellow light,no need to create a blue and yellow shade, it reversed in the presence of objectively

blue sky light and no red-yellow light needed any thing, to create both shadows.

c) That all discussions and attemptsPohlmann's not prove what they are supposedto prove, with the exception of the single observation, which concerns the generationof blue and yellow shadows by illumination from different climes.

First place, I must repeat that I have also received a very nice blue when I leftilluminate the shadow that a candle in the dark room threw from that penetratesthrough an opening, daylight in very overcast conditions and even with dense snow-filled air . Hr.Pohlmann , however, investigated this, earlier made by Goethe to rebutthrow by (XXXVII, p 328), he asserts, the gray of the overcast sky was basically but

blue, because of the passage of the blue rays through clouds could not produce thesame change. But if we supponierte this blue overcast sky but completely gray withdirect observation appears, a priori, how can we expect him to contribute to theapparent blue shadow? One can certainly say: only by the contrast with the russet ofcandlelight is the blue clear: but it is indeed very reason to prove independent of thiscontrast effect of the blue, for if we take the contrast to help once, it need a


10/25

special blue not because of the contrast demonstrably yes (according to theexperiments with the colors of glasses) is sufficient, even in the white light to bring tolight the blue.

That way, the sky is in fact appear gray and not blue (where the silver-white colorseen through mist sun), but also (another shares is explained very well from the

known property of the misty vapors, the white light not only undismantled pass after)undismantled on all sides to disperse where yes us the sky on the horizon appearsmuch whitish, as to the zenith to.May it be that blue rays just like on a clear passunder an overcast sky to our eyes, so much diffused white light mixed with them butin the first case as in that the impression of the blue void it, and the presence of thesame to the naked eye any matter is by now only delivers to the blue, which iscontained in the white light anyway one, no longer eligible growth, so that what cannot be done through the blue in white light alone, just as for little. our eye throughwhich, the imperceptible growth of blue white light is increased can be

made.Pohlmannitself uses (p. 329 of his treatise) lapsing of the effect of the blue inwhite light beigemengtem to explain why we at noon outdoors no see blue shadows,

but then it asks the simple consequence of making even more of the action, the graysky blue admixed law.

As for the experiments Hr.Pohlmann's concerned, it is first and foremost anattempt, after which the shadow created by the light from the sky, composed of a

candle is blue, even if it is through a blackened tube. considered 7) to assess to what Isaid about the insistence of the anticipated subjective impression in mind. Myself, hegave the following result: For a bright blue sky, I created a beautiful blue shade

through an opening in the dark room (which I so far reduced until the blue emergedmost clearly), and asked by one in the room candle.I now see through the blackenedtube on the shade, after I had previously seen him with the naked eye, it seemed tome, however, still persist in accordance with the ancients, the blue.I took but the tubein front of the eye, while the candle was hidden, and pointed it at the now grayappearing, shadows cast by the opening so took this when I now uncovered thecandle, instead of a blue rather an unmistakable red and yellow Nuance, which until Itook the tube from the eye, or directed to the Community border between the twoshadows, so that the eye could be affected by the red and yellow with direct light of

the candle, turned to blue. The emergence of this russet explained according to theabove notified of attempts by the (very pale greenish, bordered gray colored) walls ofthe room scattered reflected light of the candle. It has this attempt by the most directthat under these circumstances the objective Sky Blue has no part in the phenomenon,since both objective rather reddish yellow lights are actually here.

7) By a similar experiment also believes Eckermann Goethe in his famous talkswith its subjective view of the generation of the blue of the shadows to haverefuted, as we see, wrongly.

Even less conclusive following experiment isPohlmann's (this Ann Vol XXXVII,


11/25

p.327).: generates one means of day-and candles light a blue and yellow shades nextto each other and establishes held before the eye tube on the outline of the shadow, sothat the whole area at the moment, where you can put out the light, yellow, half of theoverlooked field of blue, the other half in the candle light flashes white, the wholearea turns at the moment where you can extinguish the candle light, blue. - In fact,

you could just as well prove that the atmosphere will bear an objectively red, yellow,green or any color at all to the colored shadow all over analogous experiments. If,namely, the attempt in the dark room, for example by means of a green glass (whichreplaced the candles) and daylight to that a green and red shadows fall next to eachother, and considers both the border, then through a tube in moment when you takeaway or hidden, the whole, only half red, half green, red field to meet with the greenglass, I tops against the daylight, then the entire field filled with green. Other lensesoffer represents analog successes, depending on the circumstances of the

brightness, but soon more soon always appear less clear in the observed manner.

The success of these experiments can be explained with regard to the testsmentioned above by me so: I look through the tube on the border of green and red (orapplying the candle: the yellow and blue) shadow, and now eliminated the greenobjective ( or yellow) light, as the complementary colored half seem to retain theircolor due to the inertia of the subjective sensation, the color of the colored lens inabout half, but the complement is, just like the green color of a paper, if it is belowthe eye leaving, leaves her red complement to it. But to erase the daylight, so one halfof the visual field appears now by the direct incidence of green as before, the other bythe scattered from the walls etc it falling green, which now no longer goes out in

daylight colored. Trying toPohlmann , S. 327, as the full confirmation of his view notifies serving,can be explained by the purely subjective aspects of complementary afterimages.

Not more than the previous experiments also demonstrates the, treasury found torepeat myself quite right, attempt (p. 335), after which the shadow that throws

burning phosphorus, appears blue in illumination by daylight. Proving he is to beprovided when the light appears white phosphorus than that of candles, hence thecontrast with the yellow or russet could not be considered here. Only the light of the

burning phosphorus is nothing less than white, and the best proof that superfluous

enough yellow rays contained therein to produce a blue complement, is that when thewhole darkened room two shadow that of a a wax candle, and the other is cast from

burning phosphorus, the illuminated shadow of the former decidedly bluish, the latterappears yellowish, an attempt which I have several times repeated with equalsuccess. The burning phosphorus rotgelbes there is even more light than thecandle. One way, already seen with the naked eye, a yellow shade on the light of the

burning phosphorus (Pohlmann itself does not dare to call it almost white), and if itconsiders directly even white appears as an ordinary candle light, it follows yetentirely not that it really therefore contains relatively less yellow than that, and that

the light coming from itobjects must also appear less yellow when illuminated withordinary candles. It occurs, for a case, as it seems hitherto neglected, fact intoconsideration, namely, that each color light when it is intense, makes an impression


12/25

on the eye, the white of the very approaches. It was very striking to me this forcertain, in the continuation of these investigations communicated to detect attempts,where I looked at the sun directly through color glasses. Scarcely had to recognize thenuance of the glass in such a way in the sun, while this lively showed on the sunimage, which was produced by the same glasses on a faced white board when I

covered a small opening in the dark room with such a glass. . All these attempts I here against Mr.Pohlmann have mentioned prove now onlythat, when the sky light with candle lightinteracts, and the production of the blueshadow mainly from the latter, as the predominantly colored, goes out, however

proves the experiencePohlmann's , which the production of yellow and blue shadowsby illumination from different sides cardinal hits (page 338), rightly, that where thereis an overriding yellow light is present, the objective of the blue sky itself can be acause for generating a complementary shade.For observations on this point, the twoopenings in the loading of the dark room splendidly opportunity dar. If one side of the

sky blue, the other is covered with whitish clouds, so is the shadow that the openinglocated on the former side illuminated, decided blue , the others decided yellow. Notwithout interest I have the changes in the color of the shadow track of which in thedark room, from day to day, depending on the changes of the sky, darboten, andalways had to guess correctly to be held staining conditions on which side of the skywas more blue. By sufficient removal of the shade-capturing white board from thetwo openings (including my very long optical Rooms opportunity presents) was ingeneral the equality of staining of both shadow restore, by then, how easy it is evidentthe rays noticeably from the same , just get two openings opposite sky area to the

table. This also can be a blue and yellow shadows create that one light gloomy room letsin blue sky merely by a single round opening of a few square inches in it, namely,when the opening is located so that direct sun rays can pass through. You start this ona white board, they form a bright spot on the panel, with his zertreut reflected whitelight now illuminates the shadow that the same time penetrating through the opening

blue sky light of some are one body, while the latter is light at the same time shadethat is formed from the former light, illuminated. The illuminated by the white sunshade screen is yellow, the other blue.

If there are two openings in the loading of a dark room at some distance from eachother, vertically one above the other, anbrchte so would (judging by the trials of thesame color glasses) probably even the different degrees of blue of the sky, whichtakes place at different levels, to make known to the uneven coloring of the shadows,and is perhaps to this circumstance, with concurrence of some other provisions of thecolored shadows, with their pursuit, I'm still employed, can establish a cyanometer. Ingeneral, the color shade of the Chromometrie likely to be of importance. Directexperiments on this subject I have reserved for the result.

Everything about the colors by the contrast with previous Discussed how one seesnothing what our knowledge of the same positive advanced, but only serves to makethe unnecessarily crazy earlier position in which we found ourselves in relation to


13/25

that again. How little we are above the laws of this phenomenon even aware wouldalso evident from the fact that until now has not yet explained why under certaincircumstances by the contrast of the colors are not noticeably, among others, whileother times with an objective force obtrude. Looking at a black or white paper (or inaddition) color paper (or vice versa) in ordinary daylight, then you rarely perceive a

clear staining by the contrast; why but that is a black shadow appears sounmistakably subjective complementary addition to a lens color. Also noted above byme complementary color phenomena, which are obtained by double reflection fromthe front and rear surface of a light colored glass, assert themselves with objectiveforce, while a black or white stripe, lying on a colored paper, in an ordinary occupiedglass mirror considered, as little as under direct observation tends to show a clearcolor appearance. This difference is due to the strong emphasis that the passage of thecomplementary colors, a certain ratio of the two lights is essential, and the apparatusof the two openings in the dark room is the best opportunity to make experiments

about this. What emerges from such experiments, I will, along with other thingsbelonging here, share in the continuation of this investigation.

Casually may still following, be as I think of others not recorded until now, way tocreate a complementary subjective coloring, mentioned that grips very consistent anddecided to place my eyes. If I slightly sideways turn a blind eye, so I created a doubleimage of any consideration white object, so the image in the pressed eye (appearseither the right or left, always red, the other is always green. From my listeners,which I had to repeat this experiment, several found the same; others might not noticeit, as ever, the sensitivity to the subjective perception of colors is very different in

different people, and, it seems, is not just a peculiarity of the strongest eyes.

Second section.

On the declaration of complementary colors, which are produced by a given

color perception.

BothLehotasplateau , as Osann have been carried out their experiments to theconclusion that the earlier explanation of these colors, which, according to their

perception, by contrast, the same extended absence will the eye less sensitive byprolonged viewing of a color as susceptible to this be, inadequate. The first twoobservers substitute her view that these colors arise from an opposite conclusion,which the retina becomes voluntarily after the cessation of directimpressions. However, apart from the fact that one sees not right (not to the, ideas ofemanation, nor the wave theory), to what extent complementary colors, a ratio of theopposition will have to each other, I also consider to experience reasons, the old viewas yet for the more satisfactory .

The tests, which are raised against it, and for the new view, are the following:

1) If, after a solid red field looked, the eyes of a black bottom turns, one sees agreen field, but the color's Dusky attracts (Lehot). - The complementary coloremerges not only when the paper is colored on a white ground, but if it is black and


14/25

the colored paper is pulled away after prolonged viewing. In the latter case, thecomplementary color is not displayed with the brightness as in the former, but alwayswith such an intensity that it can be clearly perceived ( Osann ).

In these experiments now, they say, where, after viewing the color spot, directed theeye on a black ground, so no white light coming into the eye, in which the subjective

decomposition into a perceived and not perceived part might be right therefore mustbe (at least accordingplateau andLehotdevelop independently), the complementarycolor in mind.

Against this the following must be answered: We know of no black base, whichwould be able to throw back no white light. On the blackest body we can distinguishthe bumps with ease yet, evidence for a non-uniform, repulse, which it has held. Italso let the blackest surface that can gain, fall in dark room through a hole in thewindow shutter direct sunlight, it is the spot that this illuminated on the surface,appear lights without comparison, than the environment, which is not the could be thecase if the black yet would be able to throw back a considerable amount of light.

That one is so truly empowered that derive appearing on a black background-imagefrom the subjective decomposition of him yet remitted white light, it is clear from thefact the you have his attention has not addressed that in the cited experiments, theafterimage really darkerthan the rest of the black ground appears as an in-depth, nuanced with the complementary color black so that it so just so, as if thewhite light of what the black ground everywhere still throws back into low grade, atthe site of the afterimage, really had lost a decisive share of light color rays. Thereverse is the case when the observation of objective color spot was not, as before,geschhe on black, but white on before the eyes of him to set up on the black

background. In this case, the complementary afterimage appears brighterthan theblack ground on which you look at it, which is very well explained by the previousview when one considers that the white base weaken the sensitivity for all of thecolor stain only for certain color rays must.

2) final proof for the newer view seems following fact: One sees the random colorsperfectly in the most complete darkness, so even when no light rays are present whichcould cause the sensation of the complementary color (plateau ).

Plateau here refers to attempts where, after consideration of objective color, theeye closes or oriented in the completely darkened room, a dark room. In fact, thesubjective afterimage shows here, usually not immediately clear from the closing ofthe eye, where, brought forth by the closure itself, restlessness , as well as acomplication with the initial continuance of an objective impression to blur the eyethe subjective afterimage or seems to pick up, but probably after the eye is held stillfor some time.

I myself will add yet another to this experience, the same asPlateau's experimentseems to prove. You sit in the apertured charging dark room a monochromatic

lamp 8) , tops the hole with a yellow glass, and watch for a while through this holewith eyes firmly fixed on it for the sky. The primary yellow color impression which


15/25

granted the yellow port calls a complementary violet forth, which really is, afterrejection of the Loche, on a white board, which is standing in the dark room, onlyilluminated by the homogeneous yellow light, with perfect is clarity itself, even if it isnow completely closes the hole in the store, that's not the yellow glass (colored non-homogeneous) some strange light let through.

8) I used to quite simply a saucer full of cotton, which is rubbed thoroughlywith saline and then moistened with alcohol. The yellow flame or admixed,foreign-rays are absorbed by a yellow glass. Is obtained with this apparatus amuch larger amount of light than the air by means of a wick, which is oftendesirable in large weakness of this light.

To provide these experiences in their proper light, is necessary before to take a lookat the subjective side of vision.

It can not be denied that in mind also independent of external light influences thedevelopment of light, or rather can take place of the sensation of light. Each hit in theeye, where we see sparks fly, the pressure figuresPurkinje's and so many otherfantasies that we can produce by setting the closed eye in certain abnormal

conditions, teach this 9) . Yeah with a little attention will be found even that when youclose your eyes, it is also in a very dark room, with no way to interfere with the eye inits natural conditions, but neither an absolute nor uniform darkness in the same exists,

but that the darkness or formless light dust light haze permeated as it shows, or at

least in my mind there is plenty enough.Purkinje expressed here about significantway: it floating in the dark chaos of weak light, which can incidentally be groupedinto manifold pieces. Common ground can not be assumed that in these cases anobjective light matter in the eye is working, but the same organic energy or power ofthe eye, which, you usually againstresponding to the stimulus of the external light-agent, produces the sensation of normal vision or with this feeling even coincide, isalso capable of some other wayfrom the inside to be stimulated, so the appearance ofthe light-chaos calm in the closed eye teaches that it is stimulated to some degree ofresistance itself. Each different color sensation now requires a different way of action

or reaction of the eye, for when the eye perceives only with and through his reactionof light, this reaction can not be the same for the different sensations.

9) The presumption Osann's this Ann. Bd XXXXII p.74) that these phenomenaare of the same origin as the Phosphorescenzerscheinungen by insolation want

probably not be easy to agree with someone inclined.The other hand, speakingreasons seem to me to be very darzubieten of itself to the same need to find adiscussion here.

That said, the behavior of the eye can be displayed as regards the formation ofcomplementary colors: The retina we incompetent to the places where they had a


16/25

long experience a certain color impression or expressed a certain color reaction forsome time afterwards to respond to the Causal these colors, whereas the more capableto express those color reactions as to which it was inactive in respect of which it hasrested, incidentally, is the Causal, which aims to stimulate the eye for color, in or outof eye, thereby explains very well in line with the previous view, as capable in itself

to light development, yes always some light evolving eye even when no external lightis more penetrating in the same, but can develop the complementary colors.

It is therefore on this view to share one eye selbsttig developed light (or rather oneof Interior from excited sensation of light) on the appearance of complementarycolors like to admit and have to admit, only one is this light development not only asa general caused by the previous have to consider primary impression, but found to

be stable in the eye, and, depending on the organic assets to be only increased ordecreased to the same development, strengthened or depleted by previous peace orstrong objective coercion.

In accordance with this is that even in the closed eye, appearing the complementaryafterimage of a colored objects, one has seen on a black background darker than therest of the bottom of the eye in the strongest terms. The phenomenon behaves just asif disassembled just as in this case, the inner light in a perceived and not perceived

part, as the outward with an open mind. While the afterimage shows itself darkened,showing at the same time in the environment, a clarification, as it is usually not felt inthe quiet eye closed, proving that the well-rested by previous observation of the black

part of the retina at least in relative sensitivity for the inner light , or if you want to

express it differently, has to ability to develop inner light, won 10) . I see in fact a not

quite know how the new view, which seeks to explain the complementary colors by amere positive development of light sensation after previous other light sensation andfatigue of the eye does not order to set a principle of explanation, could be expectedin this experiment something other than just reversed a bright image in dark colorsremaining basically the eye. The new view by the fact that white, viewed on black,does not reflect a white afterimage, set in contradiction with itself is, for if onconsideration of a composite red, a green and consideration of a compound green ared self in the eye developed afterimage follows, as requested but probably theconsequence to assume that a composition of red and green di white, giving as an

afterimage, a composition of Green and Red, di and white, should, however, weperceive a dark afterimage (which according to the older view by fatigue of the eyeforall the color rays is understandable). You can this service does not reply that redand green in her, connecting to White might express a peculiar inhibitory effect inregard to the independent development of their images on one another, because wesee so otherwise, that the afterimage of a composite color always behave as acomposition of the afterimages of the simple colors, but what White has over othercolors composition ahead?

10) If you object to a white color, has considered taking on a black ground, isshown in the closed eye of the complementary afterimage for obvious reason,

brighter than the rest of the bottom of the eye, which is in fact now tired of all


17/25

color rays.

Incidentally, it may well be added to these discussions, that in the complementaryafterimages and the inner light of the eye portion of the phenomenon has even in

cases where this is left open by the ability of the reaction against the inner and outerof the Causative light at the same time always grows and declines. Since the innerlight, however, is always considerably weaker than the outer, which the brightday. granted, even if only by a black ground, as is common ground that at thecomplimentary colors which are generated in offnem eye in daylight, mainly to takeinto consideration.

3) If you have looked at a red object, and then his eyes focused on a yellowbackground, or if you have looked at a green object and the eyes focused on a blueground, one is the former case, a beautiful yellowish green, the latter case a beautifulviolet afterimage see, but the reason the former case there is no green, no red for thelatter case provides complementary color that the eye must therefore be formedindependently (plateau in theAnnal de et de chim phys T.LVIII p... 352).

Any difficulty to explain this test to the older view, should vanish if someconsidered that all the colors we use, in addition to their peculiar colors of light alsomore or admixed less white light included, partly to the resistance present in the eyeinner light takes consideration. The complementary color of the color patch, whicharises from this, mixed with the peculiar color of the ground.

4) Consider a red box and a green box that are next to each other on a blackground, about l minute so that it turns around the second l (denoted by a black dot)center of one, then the other field considered. The after-image, which is apparent

from the superposition of the two individual afterimages closes the eyes, appears 11) ,black (plateau ,Annal. 386 de chim), et de phys T.LVIII p..

11) In addition to this (middle) Nachbilde found two others with thecomplementary colors of the fields colored, which stem from the fact thatwhile a button is pinned and his image now is the axis point of the retina, theother box at the same time on one side of the retina throws his image.

From this experiment drawsplateau to the conclusion that two subjective colorsthat are complementary to each other give, Black, what it is a proof that they reallyhave an opposite nature as the objective colors when they are complementary,together give white .

It stands to now that this attempt basically just another form of which is where toequal a composition has been considered from two complementary colors, namely

white, and a dark afterimage gets what is understood by the old view ofyourself. Direct the falsity of itplateau's conclusion that if one turns the color fields,resulting,Plateau's way to white, rather than blackhas considered reason, then the


18/25

image, which is apparent from the superposition of the two afterimages, brighterthanthe rest because of the eye is, in turn, is a direct consequence of the old view.

5) Consider a sufficiently long time a small piece of red paper on a black ground,and then set my eyes on a large piece of the same red paper so is the space that theimage of the little paper assumes blackish appear without admixture of red,

(plateau ). EvenProf. Osann (these Annals, Vol XXXVII, p 292) has spoken out against theno less strange conclusion that theplateau for this to be completely correct trialsdraws, namely, that the subjective color impressions destroy the complementaryobjective impressions, and has the correct explanation where the test. Thegroundlessness of that circuit again shows the way the amendment of the experiment,where the piece of colored paper on white . instead on a black ground considered

before the eye is directed to the same color base The subjective spot nowappears whitish, instead of blackish.

6) When you have fixed a red box, and gaze up against a white ground turns, yousee a gray box, but that small, just as big or bigger than the red box appears,depending on the white paper, which you look, closer to the eye, in the same or largerdistances is the same as the red box. - We now put a round red box on a white ground,and after you have fixed it long with a single eye, this one closer eye of the red disc,one is on the latter, a second (smaller) red disk of far less see darker coloration, andthis second disc will be the smaller, the more the eye of the first approaches. If,instead, the eye of the red disk to approach the same distance, we see that discsurrounded by a green edge (Lehot).

First of stuff to discuss the experiment itself, yet little is interesting enough, and, asit seems known. It is undisputed that the reduction or enlargement, which experiencesthe subjective afterimage by approximation or removal of the ground on which youlook at it from the eye, or the eye of reason, but apparently, it itself remains the same,

but it covers the first case a relatively small, the second a relatively larger part of theimage of the subsurface. The image of the substrate to which the eye plays a larger orsmaller part of the retina and, depending on the approximation distance. By virtue ofthe deception of our judgment but that leaves the ground at different distances appear

to us the same, we now relate the change in size to that actually unchangedpermanent afterimage.

Lehotnow believes that if when approaching the red disk of the fixing eye, thesmaller subjective disc on the same bright or whitish appearing as the objective edge,this could only be due that an independently developed in the eye complementarycolor for objective color to add and White to put it together, whereas under the

previous view of the subjective color of the smaller disc rather would appear darkerthan the objective edge.

But now everyone will easily convince you that it really appears as if the test with

the red disc on black, on a white ground instead makes you, and you can see on closerinspection one easily, as easily explained according to the old view of both cases arethe first in that the eye is merely tired in the area of image retention by the white for


19/25

all color rays in Nachbilde even for certain color rays, while in has rested the secondcase in the area of image retention for all colors rays in Nachbilde itself but isexhausted for certain.

Incidentally I will remember even the following interesting fact here. If you look ata candle flame or any colored object, which is to provide an after-able from a greater

distance than the obvious visual range, so the afterimage in the closed eye will thenappear to be smaller than the object; greater contrast when this is from a smallerdistance than the obvious visual distance, looked. So the closed eye judged the sizechanges experienced by the afterimage depending on the distance of the object,rather, as the open eye seem the changes in the apparent size of the object itself,

because the objects are, by virtue of us have become a habit Association of thejudgment with the sensation at different when looked at not too long intervals, alwaysthe same size to keep, though of course her picture in mind here occupies a differentspace. In the closed eye we miss the circumstances which guide our judgment in this

case, and there remains only the sensation of space occupied by the image on theretina, where an involuntary comparison of its size takes place with the size that theimage when viewing the object obtained from the apparent visual distance.

7)plateau thinks he can pull from his experiments the conclusion that can beobjectively a color one oscillatory state of the retina occurring by the original feelingonly continues to exist for a while, then of himself over into the complementary,which he is led Term ate an opposite state of retina attaches; these complementarysensation but not disappear by a continuous weakening, but with alternations ofweakening and revival, so may go the oscillation itself to the re-entry of the original

direct impression. This view I want to leave now before nor refuted as a whole, provided in the

principal facts which lead to a very different view, will be contained only in thecontinuation of these experiments. In the meantime I will still notice the following:

What, first and foremost to, but right fromplateau arrives asserted, fact that thecomplementary afterimage of a color, or a black or white spot, during his time in theeye, gently several times alternately disappear and come forth again, as it stems froma , the nature of the phenomenon quite strange, off circumstance forth on which one

has not been addressed his attention. Each movement of the eye or eyelids scheduledthe afterimage to disappear, even a movement of the rest of the body, ever soEverything, it seems that disturbs the uniformity of the vascular and nervousinfluence on the eye. You can bring any not too intense afterimage white or blackobjects currently to disappear or diminish significantly if you are a single blow withthe eyelids over his eyes away, or the eyes currently rapidly turns sideways, eitherwith or without head movement, or lively nods his head, incidentally exactly againfixed immediately after each of these movements, the former position. Even if, atfewest possible moves gehaltenem eye a vivid shock to the arms or foot downwardsor sideways does in the air, disappears or weakens the moment of impact theafterimage, but then revived in a short time at fixed gehaltenem eye. Even evengentle movements of the eye, which often occur involuntarily and unconsciously, and


20/25

are only recognized to the movement of the after-image across the field, already bringabout such a disposition to the disappearance of the after-image.

This disposition to the disappearance of the after-image through physicalmovements seen most in the bright or dark (wrongly mentioned by others, white or

black, as they are rather chosen color) afterimages that, after consideration of black

on white, or white on black arise in verbreitetem daylight, less (as it has alwaysseemed to me at least) with those produced by viewing colored objects, althougheven with these, the influence of which is perceptible.

The more it is now, I managed to get the eye when viewing an afterimage incomplete peace and uniform tension, the more I see the appearance of the alternatedisappearance and re-emergence of afterimages be mitigated. However, I do not askto deny that I have seen in the afterimages that occur on black on the viewing of

black on white, or white, even with all held motionless eye a clear disappearance andreappearance of the image at the same location of the ground more often: but who can

be sure that not a stronger, flowing to the eye, wave of blood have the appearance ofcurrently being destroyed? Moreover, sufficient if the eye only a certain amount oftime is obtained by fixing voltage in the same place, then often thesmallest, almostimperceptible movement of the eyelid, an imperceptible waving it, already outcurrently destroying the afterimage, and such small involuntary changes in the eye or

believed, in fact, in the cases of accidental disappearance to be generally aware of,although I do not deny the possibility of self-deception here.

Also, with closed eye perceives in a continuation of these investigations closer tome to be described and discussed so-called glare images that you, after havingconsidered a light flame or other very bright object on a dark ground, and mainly onthe continuation of the visual impression depend, apart voluntarily disappear often,

but I have never seen this disappearance, as if the dazzling image of movingpreviously over the dark field of time (as it was moving from the same out), whichimplies a movement of the eye itself, and it is remarkable that when you start to dealwith these experiments, it keeps hard to resist this movement, quite involuntarily, theeye turns and disappears the dazzling image, almost as if it verkrche under hiseyebrows arch, but occurs in new fixation of the eye out again. For the observation ofthe different phases of this fact is very disturbing appearance. In continuation of these

experiments, however, this drawback has been completely lost on me by itself, orperhaps in consequence of repeated strong effort to get fixed in the eye, the dazzlingimage now remains unmoved in mind are, and since this is the case, I have at myalmost countless attempts so never noticed the disappearance of the same (except forthe finite).

By the way, is in this circumstance that the gentle involuntary rotations of the eyedraw a disappearance of dazzling images to be a little difficult explaining Royal, for

by violentvoluntary movements of the eye or body I bring dazzling images not as thedisappearance (hardly weaken) been able as the weaker afterimages that you, theviewing of white or black objects seen on a white ground or black respectively, inverbreitetem daylight with open eye.


21/25

I will remember this occasion equal to yet another circumstance which may be theintensity of the images or glare images respectively of substantialinfluence. Consider, for example, a window frame against bright skyreason to. According to the conclusion of the eyes you will by virtue of the durationof the visual impression, the dark cross with bright discs still behold a short time, but

soon it will turn into a bright cross with dark windows. Now if this is alreadybeginning to move into obscurity (or even earlier), one pub currently the livelyeyelids together, and then let them back quickly, or open the eyes also probablycurrently a little. At the moment of interaction Kneipens the phenomenon iscompletely obscure, but flash at the moment of easing the bright window-frame withrenewed splendor, and one repeats the alternating co pubs and re slacking severaltimes at short intervals in a row, the cross can be almost blindingly bright. You canalso by this means in cases where the afterimage of the window Cross at the outsetnot clearly wants to show (as in the case of an excited little or little irritable eyes

often) bring the same to light. With a little attention you will notice the way that theafterimage Although eclipsed during the assembly Kneipens, but does not disappear,and that in this case every time the cross dark, the windows appear bright, while theestate of the eyelids held the inverse relationship. In general, the luminosity is inthese experiments, not pure white, the dark not pure black but color, a (long beenknown for dazzling images) color change to show how even the after-images of blackand white objects, which, as I in the continuation of these investigations will seek toshow results from the unequal behavior of the different color rays in the phenomenonof afterimages.

In connection with the foregoing undisputed is also the following experience: If Ihad seen directly or through a color glass in the sun, and thereby resulting glareimage was long gone in the calmly held eye, appeared but long afterwards each timeat the moment, where I eyes closed, or when I opened it, but only a nondescriptafterimage out again. I still have traces of this appearance days after I saw the sun,

perceived.

In all these cases it is not the movement of the eyes or eyelids in itself, of which theinlet or the change of appearance depending on, but the influence of changing

light 12) . The proof of this is obtained by the fact that when one goes immediately to

intuition of window cross into a dark room, then the interaction pubs and loss ofeyelid loses its influence on the after all. Furthermore, if one considers (on previousobservation of the window cross in bright rooms) in dark room your eyes openagainst the wall, and then turn allows light in the window shade by alternatelyopening and sealing a hole and prevents back, then at completely calm Eye ofexchange specified in the appearance of the afterimage also show. This test is verystriking, you can shape the window of such cross on the wall with almost equalvividness, as in bringing reality to appearance. Even in the bright room you can livelyflash of Publication bring forth, that when you had initially covered their eyes with

their hands, these are now leaving, so that the light shines through the closed, albeitquietly held, eyelids, but is Along the pubs and deterioration of the eyelids muchmore effective in my eye. These experiments will win in the future continuation of


22/25

this essay nor in other respects interest.

12) Even through the closed eyelids namely still seems a not inconsiderableproportion of light through the bars by combining reduces to the same.

The most interesting attempt toplateau in these annals (Vol. XXXII, p 550) toconfirm its view of the oscillatory state of the retinal afterimages leads to theappearance, and Hr.Prof. Osann has not been able to reproduce (Vol. XXXVII S, 293)is, me and repeatedly succeeded without difficulty. But you will see in the future

pursuit of these investigations that he still allows other explanations.

Third section.

On the amendments of the subjective afterimage of diversity of the ground onwhich the object is viewed.

The previous thing has shown that a failure to account of the diversity that bringsthe nature of the ground in the appearance of the afterimage, has caused multiplefallacies. It has therefore seemed to me not superfluous to the creation of a safeinduction to determine the actual in this UPHOLSTERY by a sufficient amendmentof the experiments.

As objects were small areas colored paper (eg green) in size from 1 / 2 to l inch

square, square, rectangular or round, what the essence of the phenomenon does notamend. As a basic bow was white, black or colored paper. All observations weremade in verbreitetem daylight. To obtain unmoved eye in the transition from primaryimpression to Nachbilde (which is incidentally insignificant in this class of subjectivesymptoms) was the fortified on a thread object quickly pulled away from the bottomwhen viewing the afterimage should be done against the same ground on which theobject had been considered, or pushed towards another reason on the subject in thecase.

The phenomena described here are not the way to describe how they present

themselves immediately after removal of the object, but they definitely do if thecomplementary idea has received a decided preponderance over the primary. In fact,

because of the initial complication with the continuation of the primary impression(which I myself instead of fromPlateauclaimedsuccession to take both inducedthink) appears the complementary afterimage immediately after removal of the objectat the maximum of the intensity, but not until some time after so as to later, moreintense lighting was objective color. That is why even if you have considered a stainon a black ground, which afterimage (considered on the same basis) only for a shorttime even brighter than the base, and is only gradually darker. The same teaches the

already previously mentioned known attempt to fix the window where cross to closethe eye. In the first moments you can still see the bright windows with dark cross, butthey soon go into dark windows with light cross over.


23/25

Transitions are also in the subsequent compilation which, inexplicably remainedunnoticed until now clearly colored afterimages, which is on a black background, orvice versa be obtained as white objects, one of which I will act in connection withother points in the future.

I. Green object considered on a white ground.

1) afterimage on white bottom: red, brighterthan the base; these covered with aclear green certificates. The darker the color object, the brighter, but also whitish, lesscolored afterimage.

2) afterimage on blackbottom: red, brighterthan the base, but much darker thanwhen, as under no. considered l, which afterimage on a white ground, which you canconvince well, if one half-image to black can fall to half white. The darker the greenobject, the brighter the red and whitish afterimage. A not very clear green light coversthe black ground to the afterimage.

3) afterimage ongreen reason: off-white, brighter than the background; these ofelevated green.

4) afterimage on redbottom: red, lively and brighter than the ground, but notwhitish as under no. 3, where the coloration disappears, however, they in no. 4 makesa better impression.

Green II object, viewed on a black ground.

1) afterimage on white bottom: red, darker than the base, the darker the brighter theobject was. The reason for the after run well over green.

2) afterimage on blackbottom: a deeper black with red shade, the brighter theobject. The less indistinct dark ground overrun with green.

3) afterimage ongreen reason: blackish; very reason the green light and bright

4) afterimage on redreason: deep pure red, darker than the base, which appearscrowded whitish.

III. White object seen on green reason.

1) afterimage on white reason: blackish, appearing darker than the bright red

background. This test is very striking because of the strong subjective coloring of thewhole extent of the ground. When I put a little white paper fragment in the middle ofa whole green sheet of paper, and the afterimage then let it fall to the center of anequally large white sheet of paper, the whole white sheet to the after-image appears

bright red, and indeed across the entire surface evenly red except for a brighter gleamin the immediate vicinity of the afterimage, which is clearly so, the darker color wasthe objective. By the way, is this uniformity in the whole extent of the ground even incases instead, where as the same becomes covered under I. and II, only with a lessdistinct colors glow.

2) afterimage on blackbottom: green, darker than the base, which seems overrunwith clear red.

3) afterimage ongreen reason: very pure green, darker than the base, which appears


24/25

crowded whitish.

4) afterimage on redreason: blackish, or if the red is very bright due to muchadmixed white, blackish, darker than the ground, the whole reason of very purevibrant red One can, it seems, in this way the impression of a color without admixed,give white.

IV black object viewed on green reason.

1) afterimage on white reason: blinding whitish, brighter than the background. Thisis strongly colored red, which also provides a very frappanten impression.

2) afterimage on blackbottom, a very bright whitish in relation to reason, and thereason strong red overflow.

3) afterimage ongreen reason: a very bright whitish green, brighter than, blackishcrowded, reason.

4) afterimage on redreason: whitish, lighter than the base, which appears very purered.

V. Green object considered on a red background.

1) afterimage on white bottom: red, green strongly basic.

2) afterimage on blackbottom: red, overrun the base green.

3) afterimage ongreen reason: blackish or whitish, depending on the objectivegreen was brighter or darker than the red primary objective in any case with a

Nuance's Red, the reason is very pure green.

4) afterimage on redreason: pure red, lighter or darker than the base, whichappears grayish or whitish crowded, depending on the objective green darker orlighter than was the reason on which it was considered. This attempt is also verysuitable to gain the impression of pure colors.

It is clear from this compilation:

l) That the general subjective afterimage appears lighter or darker than the groundon which you look at it, depending on the object respectively darker than the groundon which one looks the same.

To have a circumstance I do not remember found noticed, even though he (veryclear at least to my eye), even at low attention and well, and 2) That at the afterimageat any time the complementary color of the afterimage, so the originally looked,developed constant falls in the perception. It is also based on this circumstance, thesuccess of III. and IV

Following these rules can be more easily predicted, as also in cases which are notincluded in the previous compilation, the phenomenon is present. For example,consider a green or red on white object, then the afterimage viewed on blue,respectively, red-blue or whitish appear shaded (by composition of the color of theimage retention of the color of the surface) and the blue ground respektiv greenish orreddish . This complementary nuances of the reason for the afterimage is also in these


25/25

cases, where one looks at the afterimage of a color on a non-complementary coloredbottom, often very clear and unmistakable, however, may also be imperceptible, if thereason is already approaching the question nuance. So I have it z . B.not been able to

perceive when I saw a green object on black and then looked at the afterimage of blueor yellow.

Documents

About the Subjective Complementary Colors-English-Gustav Theodor Fechner