I am told that we find primary colours more attractive. Certainly children do. I have a personal love of muted, understated colours. I have been doing more on colour recently and have noticed that primary/strong colours seems to excite more interest.
I'm like Flamez when it comes to a love for color. I think the theory behind the primary color attraction is that those are natural colors, and ones we are used to seeing on a daily basis. I do think overtime we find colors that make us comfortable - be it wild, funky colors, rainbows, or rich, warm tones.
@jannaellen Do you think that colour is actually a personal experience then? Or are we all in agreement about the nature of it. Interesting point, because you and I seem to be seeing two sides of the same colours... In the droplet pic anyway.
Its not a bad thing, just not something I understand...
@netkonnexion
Netkonnexion, there is a huge amount of biological research to support several aspects on colour and mood and attraction etc.
There are several things that can be considered when you cross the paths of colour and attraction and emotion.
In very young babies, they actively seek out human faces rather than colours., there is a huge amount of evidence supporting this even in newborns. A babies first need is to be fed and loved.. Even when shown pictures of bright objects against pictures of faces, they will show an active attraction towards the faces. When presented with contrasting colours, black & white or bright colours, they still will find the picture of the face more attractive. (Attractive means spending more time visually looking at the picture of the face). This all happens at a subcortical level.
Newborns eyesight is not perfect, it takes time to develop the cortical and synaptic links. Depth perception also develops later and the last area to mature is the frontal cortext.
Right I need to reduce the biology a bit here or I will get carried away.
So, back to bright toys and colours and attractiveness.. When a baby is presented with a new big bright toy by its primary care giver, the care giver is generally smiling.. The baby thinks , they are smiling, i should smile.. Pavlovs behaviour theory is coming to play here.
Babies learn by what is taught to them, emotionally and physically. If they are taught that bright bold things are good happy things, then the chances are they will continue to think that way, its a classical form of behaviourism.
Most adults from a certain age range, would naturally prefer softer shades, as they never had bright toys.. You will find the younger members will love the brighter ones more then the older members.. By Old I dont mean old, I would average a guess at over 35.. but that is a guess.
This upper age group grew up with playing with people rather than toys.. Please no one twist that statement.. It was about football, ball games etc.. Not bright toys.. So bright colours will not produce as much excitement in them as it was never ingrained at an earlier age.
Equally I am sure that if you posted a photo with an Atari concept, or ps2 or xbox, you would get a huge response (Who's betting someone does that idea now within a few days to get the love). Most guys from the age of 45 and under grew up on video games and have a huge love for them, and realistically they have hardly any bright or bold colours.. I would put money on any photo under that theme getting more views than one that is bright and bold in colour.. (Now someone really will do a game photo for attention)..
I think that summarises it lol I have rambled far too much and I could go into this in huge detail, but it would bore the life out of everyone ;o)
@michelleyoung - that's really interesting. I never thought about it like that. Wonder what it says about me then. I'm only just getting into brighter colours aged 22, since coming to uni. Before then I'd almost always go for paler tones, maybe because I used to read loads (before studying took over) and I guess books aren't really vibrant.
@wormentude Rachael, I too was a book worm, and still am. Bold bright colours literally do nothing for me. I prefer calmer warmer tones as well :o) Similar to the colours of old pages in books ;o)
@michelleyoung@wormentude - interesting. Less book reading these days may contribute to more colour sensitivity. Our biological wiring apart, we live in a world of images with a great deal of cultural input from both text and the visual media. We may be reading less books. My observation is that is not 'less reading' in general. Reading actual numbers of words may not have changed, just the media where we are doing our reading has changed - screens not books I think. This is based on a professional observation after working in a library for the last 11 years.
Michelle, I think your observation that people bought up with bright colour toys might find the bright colours more stimulating is a good argument. The same could be said of cultural memes. In China the colour red is a strong symbol of luck and togetherness. In Europe it has suggestive almost sexual overtones and definately has bullish cultural imperatives. These are cultural in nature, and the historical and regional difference demonstrates a cultural not biological imperative.
However, I am still wondering if our tastes for different types of colours change - for whatever reason. In my question I was positing that we become more sophisticated and so are more sensative to muted or more subtle colours as our artisic inclinations develop. I sense this in myself - this sensitivity to more subtle tones and shades. Is this a general thing? Or am I basing my observations on insufficient data?
One further observation. I have been struck on this project by the number of "favs" picked by sunsets. They all have one thing in common... orange, muted yellows and tonal browns mixed with declining light intensity. My post here... http://365project.org/netkonnexion/365/2011-05-04
is interesting because the colour of the thumbnail attracted at least one comment as a pull to see the image. I think this is because it is something we all share. We have a collective wish for it to be a nice day tomorrow which is what predictably happens after a red sky sunset. There could be an evolutionary mechanism for establishing the bio-wiring in this case. Good days make survival more likely... On the other hand photographic competition judges ofter mutter ONABS... "Oh not another bl**dy sunset" when one comes up in competitions. So has thier artisic sophistication taken them past our rather primative response to the red sky colours?
I am not an artist. More of a technocrat really. So these sorts of questions are more by way of enquiry into the nature of art than an analysis of bio-imperatives. It seems to me that art transcends the wiring. Colour sophistication really does seem to move us away from bright colours and pre-wired conceptions of colour despite our cultural colour heratage if the judges observation is correct.
@netkonnexion
Finally I get 5 mins to be able to reply to you.. I do apologise for the delay in response.
I believe, looking from a psychological / biological perspective that people use association with what they view, for example, sunsets gain positive reactions, simply because they make people feel calm and relaxed. Its the association of what people are viewing to their internal processing of their feelings.
As a hypnotherapist, I often find that when working with clients, and when they are asked to think of somewhere calm and relaxing, they generally visualise being on a beach, not just in regards to what they visualise, but taking into consideration their other senses, they can hear the waves, they can smell the salt etc.. All in all giving a relaxed feeling.
People are drawn visually to what makes them feel good.. That feel good feeling is firstly and logically triggered by the visual impact, and then it tunes into the other senses as well. So many people see a beach scene, of a calm warm sky or a gorgeous ocean and think I wish I was there.. They want to feel what they can see in that photo.
In regards to the sophistication and sensitivity.. I am sure thats all in regards to the 'attentional spotlight' of neurology. Most of us on 365 uploaded a photo to start off with, which we thought was very good.. Now when we look back, through our groth and development, most would think, 'omg did i think that was good'. Our attentional spotlight becomes more focused.. Pardon the puns here..
When we first start out in photography, we have little idea, what actually makes a good photo good, what makes a half decent photo ok, and what makes another not so good.. But as our learning develops, we become more intuned with the detail and content. The same goes with any other subject we learn and develop.
I know when I first started out with psychology, what I thought was a good assignment several years ago, I would think is pretty poor now. My attention to content, methodology and design has become more fine tuned..
So I do agree with you in regards to the development of sophistication on subtle tones etc.. But I do feel that this is present on any given subject, that anyone spends a significant amount of time and energy learning.
I think that sophistication, then shows us the difference between 'not another bloody sunset' and a 'Wow thats an amazing sunset'
Actually, I have thought hard on this one, you are right. I am guessing that colour sophistication is a part of the normal learning response. We probably do start out with a wired response and go from there. 'Nurture' inevitably encompasses nature - in other words we learn from a position entrenched in our genetics.
I confess to have become more attuned to the issues and appreciations of art over the last 7 years since actively engaging in photography. I have taken lots of photos all my life. But now I am actively pursuing the art of it rather than the capture of it my appreciation of colour and art is growing. Tho' I will never be an artist I fear. I have a great awe of the creativity and art in so many of the shots on this site. I find it humbling.
@netkonnexion Oh you are so welcome. I love discussions like this. It brings into play everything I have studied.. Looking at biology, neurology & psychology.. All of which are my passion :o)
@michelleyoung - I know how you feel. As you get older it seems the interesting things in life, discussions like these, tend to go away. I miss them. I am passionate about things biological and environmental too. I am particularly interested in the evolutionary angle. Hence my comments here about nature vs. nurture etc, I love to have space to sound off. Grin...
Keep your eye open on these pages. I like to pose questions. So look out for more of the same!
@netkonnexion
Net, if I dont notice any of these 'deeper' type of discussions, just tag me into one. I actually have a brief amount of time to catch up on 365 on any given day, so I can miss a lot of stuff that the volume drowns out.
I love intelligent conversations.. As like yourself, I am passionate on several topics, and If I can add any input to some, I will gladly ramble :o)
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
Please don't include me in multiple replies. Thanks.
Its not a bad thing, just not something I understand...
@netkonnexion right. I'll bear that in mind, thank you.
Netkonnexion, there is a huge amount of biological research to support several aspects on colour and mood and attraction etc.
There are several things that can be considered when you cross the paths of colour and attraction and emotion.
In very young babies, they actively seek out human faces rather than colours., there is a huge amount of evidence supporting this even in newborns. A babies first need is to be fed and loved.. Even when shown pictures of bright objects against pictures of faces, they will show an active attraction towards the faces. When presented with contrasting colours, black & white or bright colours, they still will find the picture of the face more attractive. (Attractive means spending more time visually looking at the picture of the face). This all happens at a subcortical level.
Newborns eyesight is not perfect, it takes time to develop the cortical and synaptic links. Depth perception also develops later and the last area to mature is the frontal cortext.
Right I need to reduce the biology a bit here or I will get carried away.
So, back to bright toys and colours and attractiveness.. When a baby is presented with a new big bright toy by its primary care giver, the care giver is generally smiling.. The baby thinks , they are smiling, i should smile.. Pavlovs behaviour theory is coming to play here.
Babies learn by what is taught to them, emotionally and physically. If they are taught that bright bold things are good happy things, then the chances are they will continue to think that way, its a classical form of behaviourism.
Most adults from a certain age range, would naturally prefer softer shades, as they never had bright toys.. You will find the younger members will love the brighter ones more then the older members.. By Old I dont mean old, I would average a guess at over 35.. but that is a guess.
This upper age group grew up with playing with people rather than toys.. Please no one twist that statement.. It was about football, ball games etc.. Not bright toys.. So bright colours will not produce as much excitement in them as it was never ingrained at an earlier age.
Equally I am sure that if you posted a photo with an Atari concept, or ps2 or xbox, you would get a huge response (Who's betting someone does that idea now within a few days to get the love). Most guys from the age of 45 and under grew up on video games and have a huge love for them, and realistically they have hardly any bright or bold colours.. I would put money on any photo under that theme getting more views than one that is bright and bold in colour.. (Now someone really will do a game photo for attention)..
I think that summarises it lol I have rambled far too much and I could go into this in huge detail, but it would bore the life out of everyone ;o)
Michelle, I think your observation that people bought up with bright colour toys might find the bright colours more stimulating is a good argument. The same could be said of cultural memes. In China the colour red is a strong symbol of luck and togetherness. In Europe it has suggestive almost sexual overtones and definately has bullish cultural imperatives. These are cultural in nature, and the historical and regional difference demonstrates a cultural not biological imperative.
However, I am still wondering if our tastes for different types of colours change - for whatever reason. In my question I was positing that we become more sophisticated and so are more sensative to muted or more subtle colours as our artisic inclinations develop. I sense this in myself - this sensitivity to more subtle tones and shades. Is this a general thing? Or am I basing my observations on insufficient data?
One further observation. I have been struck on this project by the number of "favs" picked by sunsets. They all have one thing in common... orange, muted yellows and tonal browns mixed with declining light intensity. My post here... http://365project.org/netkonnexion/365/2011-05-04
is interesting because the colour of the thumbnail attracted at least one comment as a pull to see the image. I think this is because it is something we all share. We have a collective wish for it to be a nice day tomorrow which is what predictably happens after a red sky sunset. There could be an evolutionary mechanism for establishing the bio-wiring in this case. Good days make survival more likely... On the other hand photographic competition judges ofter mutter ONABS... "Oh not another bl**dy sunset" when one comes up in competitions. So has thier artisic sophistication taken them past our rather primative response to the red sky colours?
I am not an artist. More of a technocrat really. So these sorts of questions are more by way of enquiry into the nature of art than an analysis of bio-imperatives. It seems to me that art transcends the wiring. Colour sophistication really does seem to move us away from bright colours and pre-wired conceptions of colour despite our cultural colour heratage if the judges observation is correct.
What do you think?
Finally I get 5 mins to be able to reply to you.. I do apologise for the delay in response.
I believe, looking from a psychological / biological perspective that people use association with what they view, for example, sunsets gain positive reactions, simply because they make people feel calm and relaxed. Its the association of what people are viewing to their internal processing of their feelings.
As a hypnotherapist, I often find that when working with clients, and when they are asked to think of somewhere calm and relaxing, they generally visualise being on a beach, not just in regards to what they visualise, but taking into consideration their other senses, they can hear the waves, they can smell the salt etc.. All in all giving a relaxed feeling.
People are drawn visually to what makes them feel good.. That feel good feeling is firstly and logically triggered by the visual impact, and then it tunes into the other senses as well. So many people see a beach scene, of a calm warm sky or a gorgeous ocean and think I wish I was there.. They want to feel what they can see in that photo.
In regards to the sophistication and sensitivity.. I am sure thats all in regards to the 'attentional spotlight' of neurology. Most of us on 365 uploaded a photo to start off with, which we thought was very good.. Now when we look back, through our groth and development, most would think, 'omg did i think that was good'. Our attentional spotlight becomes more focused.. Pardon the puns here..
When we first start out in photography, we have little idea, what actually makes a good photo good, what makes a half decent photo ok, and what makes another not so good.. But as our learning develops, we become more intuned with the detail and content. The same goes with any other subject we learn and develop.
I know when I first started out with psychology, what I thought was a good assignment several years ago, I would think is pretty poor now. My attention to content, methodology and design has become more fine tuned..
So I do agree with you in regards to the development of sophistication on subtle tones etc.. But I do feel that this is present on any given subject, that anyone spends a significant amount of time and energy learning.
I think that sophistication, then shows us the difference between 'not another bloody sunset' and a 'Wow thats an amazing sunset'
Just some thoughts :o)
I confess to have become more attuned to the issues and appreciations of art over the last 7 years since actively engaging in photography. I have taken lots of photos all my life. But now I am actively pursuing the art of it rather than the capture of it my appreciation of colour and art is growing. Tho' I will never be an artist I fear. I have a great awe of the creativity and art in so many of the shots on this site. I find it humbling.
Thanks for your insight.
I have really enjoyed this discussion Net, so thank you :o)
There will always be a huge debate between Nature & Nurture, which of course they both overlap, both needing each other ;o)
Keep your eye open on these pages. I like to pose questions. So look out for more of the same!
Net, if I dont notice any of these 'deeper' type of discussions, just tag me into one. I actually have a brief amount of time to catch up on 365 on any given day, so I can miss a lot of stuff that the volume drowns out.
I love intelligent conversations.. As like yourself, I am passionate on several topics, and If I can add any input to some, I will gladly ramble :o)