New study overturns 100-year-old understanding of color perception
> ...could yield more vibrant computer displays, TVs, printed materials, textiles and moreI'm sorry, how exactly? From the paper's abstract:> Consequences of this apply to color metrics that are currently used in image and video processing, color mapping, and the paint and textile industries.At best, I could imagine how computer-selected colors might be chosen differently, i.e. adding to the many ways in which gradients between two colors are computed.But I can't for the life of me imagine how computer displays might become more vibrant -- this isn't going to affect the spectrum of backlights or LCD color filters or OLED phosphors or anything as far as I can tell? E.g. in the way that Macs shifted from sRGB screens to P3 screens for their color gamuts?Similarly with paints and textiles -- this isn't going to lead to new paints or dyes.At the end of the day, colors -- whether in a movie scene or a paint chip -- are ultimately chosen by eye, not by math. So seems like the headline is making claims that can't be substantiated?Would love to know if I'm missing something here.