Editing Talk:2598: Graphic Designers

Jump to: navigation, search
Ambox notice.png Please sign your posts with ~~~~

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 45: Line 45:
 
|}
 
|}
 
:It looks like Randall used ''mostly'' 10-degree spots (two were not), in fact actually even more restricted to the combination of 20-degree spots ''plus'' the 30-degree ones, and nothing at all in the whole 'Blue>Red'-dominant segment. I rounded some to the nearest degree, but my initial figures were all no more than 4x10<sup>-13</sup> away from whole numbers, which is probably just the level of precision achievable with my ad-hoc calculations. I really ought to check that I've not reflected or rotated or otherwise messed up the hue calculation but I feel sure that the basic idea is correct. It shouldn't change the 'interesting coincidences', but could revise ''where'' the pattern actually lies.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.223|172.69.79.223]] 22:03, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
 
:It looks like Randall used ''mostly'' 10-degree spots (two were not), in fact actually even more restricted to the combination of 20-degree spots ''plus'' the 30-degree ones, and nothing at all in the whole 'Blue>Red'-dominant segment. I rounded some to the nearest degree, but my initial figures were all no more than 4x10<sup>-13</sup> away from whole numbers, which is probably just the level of precision achievable with my ad-hoc calculations. I really ought to check that I've not reflected or rotated or otherwise messed up the hue calculation but I feel sure that the basic idea is correct. It shouldn't change the 'interesting coincidences', but could revise ''where'' the pattern actually lies.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.223|172.69.79.223]] 22:03, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
::He missed the ancient geek joke though.  He should have just filled all shapes with #FFFFF2-#FFFFFF, in one bit increments, so that ALL surfaces would appear white to the human eye, but still be different.[[User:Seebert|Seebert]] ([[User talk:Seebert|talk]]) 16:04, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 
  
 
Hey! Now that the saturated version is in, I note that the windows aren't included in the list of colours! I suspect each window frame matches each window ledge (which ARE mentioned for their angle). Looks to me like the left window is about the same pink as the front of the window seat, and the right window is the same tan as the left wall. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 23:15, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
 
Hey! Now that the saturated version is in, I note that the windows aren't included in the list of colours! I suspect each window frame matches each window ledge (which ARE mentioned for their angle). Looks to me like the left window is about the same pink as the front of the window seat, and the right window is the same tan as the left wall. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 23:15, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Please note that all contributions to explain xkcd may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see explain xkcd:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)

Templates used on this page: