 Hume follows Hutcheson in regarding the idea of beauty as analogous to a Lockean secondary quality, and so follows Hutcheson in holding beauty to be subjective, having no existence outside of the mind that contemplates it (Hume 1757 [1987, 230]). But Hume reckons more directly than Hutcheson does with the price such a subjectivism exacts, namely, its apparent inconsistency with our practice of counting some judgments of beauty as correct and others as incorrect. This reckoning starts with the observation that the subjectivity of colors is no barrier to our counting some color judgments correct and some incorrect. Anyone who has the idea of redness can recognize the conditions under which we count an object as veridically manifesting redness, namely, “its appearance in day-light to the eye of a man in health” (Hume 1757 [1987, 233–234]). Similarly, Hume holds that anyone with the idea of beauty can recognize the conditions under which we count an object as veridically manifesting beauty (Hume 1757 [1987, 233–234]). These conditions are the appearance of beauty to those (1) whose taste is delicate (Hume 1757 [1987, 234–237]), (2) who have practiced (Hume 1757 [1987, 237–238]), (3) who have made certain comparisons (Hume 1757 [1987, 238]), (4) who lack prejudice (Hume 1757 [1987, 239–240]), and (5) whose understanding is sound (Hume 1757 [1987, 240–241]). Conditions (1), (2), and (5) are evidently supposed to guarantee that the object is grasped as having all and only the aesthetically relevant properties it has, whereas conditions (3) and (4) are evidently supposed to guarantee that a properly calibrated sentiment arises from the object as grasped. In sum, we take an object’s beauty to appear as it is, according to Hume, when and only when the right sentiment arises from the object rightly grasped.