Tetrachromacy: The Woman with Super Human Vision

originally posted by: Serdgiam
a reply to: NoRulesAllowed

Yeah, that was all kind of the point of my post!

She doesn't see much difference between the pics and neither do I. Yet, the experience itself is quite a bit different (supposedly).

Its really quite interesting, with a tinge of irony in that I could recreate the pictures and also claim 'That is how my world looks.'

That said, I looked again on a more capable monitor, and could see the difference in the monkey pic. A tablet screen at the lowest brightness possible isnt that great for color reproduction. The others still look about the same though.

That topic actually led me to research color blindness yesterday for some hours, this sure is a VERY interesting subject.

We could assume that while you and other "color-blind" people have one less cone that you are indeed able to perceive MORE differences in the pic which looks more or less "mono-chromatic" to me, simply because YOUR brain is trained to see those differences with only two cones. Don't know.

But WHAT I know is that if that lady has indeed a fourth one, means she can literally perceive colors we can NOT...that this is literally "un-imaginable"...and I don't think her art could convey this since her art of course also can only work with those colors we know. (I would probably have the same problem "explaining" colors such as red or green to you, I am not even sure whether it can be explained at all).

originally posted by: NoRulesAllowed
That topic actually led me to research color blindness yesterday for some hours, this sure is a VERY interesting subject.

We could assume that while you and other "color-blind" people have one less cone that you are indeed able to perceive MORE differences in the pic which looks more or less "mono-chromatic" to me, simply because YOUR brain is trained to see those differences with only two cones. Don't know.

But WHAT I know is that if that lady has indeed a fourth one, means she can literally perceive colors we can NOT...that this is literally "un-imaginable"...and I don't think her art could convey this since her art of course also can only work with those colors we know. (I would probably have the same problem "explaining" colors such as red or green to you, I am not even sure whether it can be explained at all).

It really is interesting, because we are limited to our own frame of reference in many ways. We can expand on something like this, but even then we interpret the end result in our own way. The raw data itself may be able to even quantify the differences. While that is still quite cool, the actual firsthand experience is out of our grasp.

I didn't even get tested for color blindness until middle school or so. The only issue I ran into was when I was younger and learning all the color recognition lessons. Even then, as long as I could compare I could get the right color. Meaning, if you asked me to pick green from a pile of crayons, there was no noticeable difference between me and any other kid. But, if you were to hold up that green crayon on its own and ask what color it is.. I would still probably say green. However, something like a dark green would get a stumble. Without a comparison, I could only say its either green or brown. I also have the same issues between blue and purple.

During the 'dot' tests they administer though, I could flat out not see some of the shapes/paths. My only assurance they were actually there were the people around me. Conversely, in those images as well as some of other images, I was able to point out some shapes that the people around me couldn't see. Of course, the response was simply that they weren't there, but I couldn't be convinced of that. I was looking right at them. The issues I have with blue/purple had no evidence in the tests outside of my own claim. Its not so much that its greyscale, it just kind of blends with other specific colors.

Pretty odd stuff. In other words, we would both struggle to relate what we see to each other. But I think its a fascinating conversation.

Eta: just wanted to mention I find the reconstructed 'movie' in that link.. 'freaky' in some way I can't quite pinpoint.

a reply to: nrd101

That is what I would call witch sight or second sight, I sometimes see entities in my periphery, I've also seen auras at times.
This ability is getting better with time I think.

I wonder if this mystical ability is related to this phenomenon, maybe you change your DNA by certain spiritual techniques.
A DNA change on the physical side of things, with "etheric" hardware in the 'lightbodies' as a complement on the spiritual side of things.

Then again I might just be seeing things but I've experienced enough interesting correlations for me to not just treat it like mental illness.

a reply to: Jennyfrenzy

I would not say its supervision, supervision for me would at least entail to see in infra red or have x-ray vision or see minute things from miles away. But its a cool thing anyways. Though in certain cases I would not want to see things in more colors, just like I would not want to have Synesthesia effect on seeing certain things. Though in this case though I do believe and like even the artist in question said, you could train yourself to see more colors.

In fact its just as much a mental effect as it is a visual cortex effect, and there have been studies done were they show pictures to groups of people who never saw pictures before ie indigenous groups who have never left there forests, or islands, and what was found out that some colors they just are not able to see, generally because they never came across it in there life's or even in generations in there daily world. And on synesthesia there are people who say they can taste colors or even words, and its not really all its cracked up to be, in fact they get disoriented and uncomfortable in certain situations or places.

But yes there is a link between the actual visual cortex and makeup of the eye and the mental aspect of actually seeing. Even in something so simple, well you can tell as the TV, well at least for the older generations they may get it. If they were to think back to when all shows were in black and white, that to had an effect on the minds watching it literally dimmed the world around them and certain things they did not pick up not because the eye could not physically pick up, so if they continually saw something on the TV in a certain color if they were to look at that object in real life it sort of lost its luster and was not as colorful or bright.

I believe it was do merely to not only a childhood of seeing things in a certain aspect but expecting it to be a certain aspect, because they had no mental capacity for it the world was more black and white and you never even noticed it or thought about it, but when color TV came into the picture even everyday things started to become more bright and colorful. It even effected the way people saw the world or were thinking on a mass scale to certain degrees. Though now a days that would be lost on the populations of today. And generally people do not think of such things as color or sound or taste as being there own dimension, but they are literally that.

So yes like the person in the link says there is some training involved, and if she did not train herself through her art to see more colors then she would not be able to see them even if she had Dichromat. Its like everything else in life the more you do it the better you get at it, and the less you do it the more it fades away. Like the old saying goes, use it or lose it. Its pretty much an aspect of everything in life.

a reply to: NoRulesAllowed
Ya exactly. How would you see something you have no concept for? The answer is you wouldn't. And if you were the only person in the world that would be able to see some other color that is not even on the spectrum, well you would not be able to prove it, or show it to anybody because they would not be able to see it.

I think she may be able to see more colors, but they are still on the same color spectrum, there was a thread around here some time ago about how human faces look like if they were taken in ultra violet and if you could see in ultra violet what you would see would be a bit different. And lets just say things look different from a true different spectrum and its not always more pretty.

Here I found the thread.
Link

I wish I had magic eyes.
Oh well two different coloured eyes will have to do .
Awesome thread op.
A shade of what is to come in our evolution maybe.

I think if you are an artist you slightly exaggerate the shades you see and bring them out in order to create a painting. I would of created a similar tree painting as that lady but I don't think I see more colours I have just been trained to see more and with every painting I do I get better at doing it.

If you ask a child what colour is the grass they will answer green but they havn't been taught how to SEE. We only teach them basic colours and how to answer a question with one word answers.

I pointed to a cloud and asked my partner what colour is it? He replied instantly "grey."
I said reaaallly look! can you see other slight colours?

After a longer period of cloud gazing he pointed out that it was actually more purple than grey, with the edges dipped in dark blue and a slight pinkish hue on top.

Colour science is actually very interesting. However the science is mixed with popular misconceptions.

While she certainly could have the mutation to cause an extra variant of cone cells, (almost invariably women because they are XX, and so can allow for such extra populations of cells with the magic of X-inactivation.)

This however doesn't necessarily mean she can perceive wavelengths that fall outside the normal human spectrum. Mostly because the human lens blocks ultraviolet radiation. The only way to fix that is to remove the lens (which is done during cataract surgery).

It also doesn't necessarily mean that she can perceive different colours that fall within the normal human spectrum. This is because of the wiring of the optic nerve, after eons of evolution, has probably allowed for only trichromatic ("normal") vision. So the comparison between "colour blind" dichromatic with "normal" trichromatic vision doesn't really apply.

So yes, this is an interesting case, but the interpretation as "super human" is rather misleading. If you were a major genetics nerd, you could even argue that this is just a less common form of "colour blindness" (again another misleading term).

a reply to: alexball

I'm not an anatomist of human visual systems, but I think you are probably right. Color is normally caused by diffraction of light. What we call colors are certain wavelengths of light that are reflected from textured surfaces that trap parts of the visible spectrum because of their texture at a molecular level.

The extra cone that Ms. Antico has is probably increasing her sensitivity to this textural diffraction so that she is sensitive to colors that are very weakly bouncing off objects, but which are still effectively blocked for most of us.

I suspect that these colors are still within the normal visual spectrum.

From an artistic standpoint, I don't see that much of a difference in hers and some other artists out there. A simple image search for co lorful artists brings up a myriad of similar paintings to hers. It's not uncommon to paint that way.

But, the fact that she actually sees things looking that way is extraordinary of course.

originally posted by: galadofwarthethird
a reply to: Jennyfrenzy
So yes like the person in the link says there is some training involved, and if she did not train herself through her art to see more colors then she would not be able to see them even if she had Dichromat. Its like everything else in life the more you do it the better you get at it, and the less you do it the more it fades away. Like the old saying goes, use it or lose it. Its pretty much an aspect of everything in life.

I agree with the training part of that. But some people seem to have natural abilities that will never dissappeae or fade away... Me for instance, when i was drawing those parrots sitting on a branch grooming one another, it was the second drawing i had done in about 8 or 9 years .... Im not old either (i was born in the 90s!)... Didnt do much drawing before that particularly either :/ just comes naturally from a peacefull heart. Worrying youve lost a skill is a garuanteed way to make it harder to attain. Not beleving in limitations and ignoring negative expectations from others is vital to your success or failure.

originally posted by: Aleister
The human brain is surely capable of seeing such colors, it's just that most of us don't do it all the time like this woman does. There are certain religious substances in native cultures, or so I've heard and read, that cause colors to show up like this, so if the brain is capable of it in those situations then maybe a legal substance will eventually be invented and marketed. It would be interesting to visit a major art museum with her type of vision, for example.

I believe it is more the retina that does all the magic - we have 100 million rods and cones that make up each retina. The rods detect light intensity., while cones are designed to be sensitive to one of three frequencies of light (red, green, blue). With other creatures, they have another cone sensitive to UV light. There's a theory that this would be perceived as purple/deep violet for us.

Since the blood capillary supply to our eyes goes above the retina, absorbing the right substances would act as a color filter. This is used for medical tests. Ducks and geese use tiny droplets of oil on top of each cone to make their eyes go beyond tetrachromacy. That way, they can tell the difference between salt, fresh and marsh water.

Well, this explains why I'm always pointing to sunsets and telling people, LOOK! Look at how gorgeous that is! and they look at me like I'm delusional.

You mean most people see red, blue and yellow plus a lot of grays and there's no nuance? I'm looking at the hill outside my house and there's dozens of shades of brownish red to yellow to yellow green to medium green to dark green to gray-blue moss on everything.

How is it possible this isn't the norm, when paint colors are available for all these nuanced differences?

What seems most anomalous at least to me is that sometimes colors shimmer with an opalescent effect; to me that feels like something in my neurological system working at extremes of the visual ability, like the way bugs see UV colors in flowers. The only artist I've seen to capture this is Monet and this new guy:

ton dubbeldam

a reply to: Jennyfrenzy

It isn't surprising that her daughter is color blind. Tetrachomatic vision results from a rare matching of recessive genes related to color blindness.

And it can only be a female that has it, if memory serves correct.

Beautiful paintings. I like the trees....if she is doing it in a somewhat realistic manner to what she sees, she is seeing colors radiating from the edge of things. Maybe not "aura", but more diffraction or something.

I would almost say that I wouldn't believe that but since it is a physical morphosis of the eye cones (4 versus 3 everyone else has) I would say that's an amazing difference. Why do only females have this difference?

a reply to: Asktheanimals

Good post, but I think it was the absinthe.

a reply to: NoRulesAllowed

But WHAT I know is that if that lady has indeed a fourth one, means she can literally perceive colors we can NOT...that this is literally "un-imaginable"...and I don't think her art could convey this since her art of course also can only work with those colors we know.

Stars and a flag to Ms Frenzy for bringing up a wonderful subject for discussion, but I have some questions regarding the painter's claim.

1. I can't see what a tetrachrome sees, so if her painting is an accurate image of what she sees, shouldn't I see in it exactly the same colours and shades as in the photograph?
   
   
2. I am able to see differences in colour between her painting of a tree and a photo of the same tree, but in each case the colours I see are familiar to me. Is she seeing the same colours I, a trichrome, see, but in different combinations? That isn't tetrachromacy as I understand it.
   
   
3. As many have already pointed out, some of her colour schemes are very like those of the Fauvists, and her use of violet and indigo to indicate shadows is very similar to what was done by people like van Gogh, Gauguin and Manet. I decline to believe in a sudden outbreak of tetrachromacy in nineteenth-century France, so I am inclined to suspect that the lady is having us on.

Good sales spiel, though; the art market is tough to crack. These days, you need a 'concept'.