What do you think?
Rate this book
Interaction of Color
Josef Albers’s Interaction of Color is a masterwork in twentieth-century art education. Conceived as a handbook and teaching aid for artists, instructors, and students, this timeless book presents Albers’s unique ideas of color experimentation in a way that is valuable to specialists as well as to a larger audience.
Originally published by Yale University Press in 1963 as a limited silkscreen edition with 150 color plates, Interaction of Color first appeared in paperback in 1971, featuring ten representative color studies chosen by Albers. The paperback has remained in print ever since and is one of the most influential resources on color for countless readers.
This new paperback edition presents a significantly expanded selection of more than thirty color studies alongside Albers’s original unabridged text, demonstrating such principles as color relativity, intensity, and temperature; vibrating and vanishing boundaries; and the illusions of transparency and reversed grounds. Now available in a larger format and with enhanced production values, this expanded edition celebrates the unique authority of Albers’s contribution to color theory and brings the artist’s iconic study to an eager new generation of readers.
Originally published by Yale University Press in 1963 as a limited silkscreen edition with 150 color plates, Interaction of Color first appeared in paperback in 1971, featuring ten representative color studies chosen by Albers. The paperback has remained in print ever since and is one of the most influential resources on color for countless readers.
This new paperback edition presents a significantly expanded selection of more than thirty color studies alongside Albers’s original unabridged text, demonstrating such principles as color relativity, intensity, and temperature; vibrating and vanishing boundaries; and the illusions of transparency and reversed grounds. Now available in a larger format and with enhanced production values, this expanded edition celebrates the unique authority of Albers’s contribution to color theory and brings the artist’s iconic study to an eager new generation of readers.
160 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1971
807 people are currently reading
41282 people want to read
About the author
Josef Albers
78 books110 followersSimple geometric patterns of various colors characterize works, such as the series Homage to the Square (1950-1959), of German-born American painter Josef Albers.
This artist and educator in Europe and the United States formed the basis of modern programs of the 20th century.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josef_A...
This artist and educator in Europe and the United States formed the basis of modern programs of the 20th century.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josef_A...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 264 reviews
July 9, 2018
Excellent color theory reference. Highly recommended for anyone in graphic, applied, and fine arts. Much might seem intuitive to a sensitive and attuned individual, but there are exercises that clarify concepts that seem impossible and/or counterintuitive. Engaging and examples are provided to illustrate the concepts.
"A strong challenge to a class is to work with 3 or 4 given colors selected by a teacher or student. This and a continued use of disliked colors will teach that preference and dislike--as in life so with color --usually result from prejudices, from lack of experience and insight."
"A strong challenge to a class is to work with 3 or 4 given colors selected by a teacher or student. This and a continued use of disliked colors will teach that preference and dislike--as in life so with color --usually result from prejudices, from lack of experience and insight."
April 6, 2013
The book definitely inspires readers to think more deeply about color, and there are ideas that I found valuable. But overall, it's hard to say that I really got anything from Interaction of Color. There isn't much concrete information that you feel like you're learning and could use. A lot of it is composed of specific examples, but not a helpful base of ideas that one can use to jump into thought and practice with.
Also, it's very text heavy, which is weird for a book about color. There are examples in the back with accompanying paragraphs, which I honestly found more helpful than the main text, which can feel cluttered and boring. Many examples want you to go out and use color paper. I'd much rather have the book give me the examples itself.
Recommend if you're intrigued.
Also, it's very text heavy, which is weird for a book about color. There are examples in the back with accompanying paragraphs, which I honestly found more helpful than the main text, which can feel cluttered and boring. Many examples want you to go out and use color paper. I'd much rather have the book give me the examples itself.
Recommend if you're intrigued.
May 4, 2016
One of the paintings in the series Abstract, by Clare Rojas.
March 30, 2025
This book is magic!
Reading Rebecca Solnit's essay about Ives Klein’s blue in A Field Guide to Getting Lost made my hungry for even more colour and it reminded me that this book was waiting for me to read. I was lucky.
Josef Albers explains that colours are just like sounds: They make sense only when you combine them. Albers explains how it works and it’s stunning: The combination can makes colours look very different. Moreover, we combine colours not only on paper or canvas; we combine just as well in our heads, consciously or unconsciously! He says:
Josef Albers wrote this book as a concise colour course, but it reads as a fascinating essay just as well. Albers claims and I agree:
Albers suggests using coloured sheets of paper, cut in various forms and laid in various combinations, to illustrate his theory and encourage students to discover by themselves colour dynamics. The dazzling illustrations make this book enjoyable even without having to cut coloured sheets of paper. You can even skip the theory part and just enjoy the illustrations. You’ll be amazed!
Cyndi Lauper once sang: ‘I see your true colours’. I thought about this song while reading this book. Now I realize seeing true colours is almost impossible. Albers write:
This book is literally an eyeopener! I’ll never look at colours in the same way again!
Reading Rebecca Solnit's essay about Ives Klein’s blue in A Field Guide to Getting Lost made my hungry for even more colour and it reminded me that this book was waiting for me to read. I was lucky.
Josef Albers explains that colours are just like sounds: They make sense only when you combine them. Albers explains how it works and it’s stunning: The combination can makes colours look very different. Moreover, we combine colours not only on paper or canvas; we combine just as well in our heads, consciously or unconsciously! He says:
‘The purpose of most of our colour studies is to prove that colour is the most relative medium in art, that we almost never perceive what colour is physically.’p.71
Josef Albers wrote this book as a concise colour course, but it reads as a fascinating essay just as well. Albers claims and I agree:
‘Good teaching is more a giving of right questions than a giving of right answers.’ p.70
Albers suggests using coloured sheets of paper, cut in various forms and laid in various combinations, to illustrate his theory and encourage students to discover by themselves colour dynamics. The dazzling illustrations make this book enjoyable even without having to cut coloured sheets of paper. You can even skip the theory part and just enjoy the illustrations. You’ll be amazed!
Cyndi Lauper once sang: ‘I see your true colours’. I thought about this song while reading this book. Now I realize seeing true colours is almost impossible. Albers write:
‘He who claims to see colour independent of their illusionary changes fools only himself, and no one else.’ p.23
This book is literally an eyeopener! I’ll never look at colours in the same way again!
February 23, 2014
Of course, I was introduced to the Interaction of Color in art school in the latter 1970s. This is one of the most important works on color theory. I would go so far as to call it mind-altering as it will have some bearing on any work you do after reading it. If you are a young artist, please consider this necessary reading. If you are older, it will be stimulating to your work. I know I should reread it.
March 24, 2023
I can't say I followed everything here, however, the purpose would be to stimulate a reading of the concept of Colour and to encourage analysis of our associations with Colour. A curious little read, left me with more questions than answers.
August 27, 2021
You're probably going to need assistance for this book
Josef Albers findings are not related to psychology or cultural values of colors, but they are about techniques and how human eye perceives color. Grasping all there is in this book without help of an instructor is going to be hell of difficult. I have the Fourth printing, 1972 version, which you can find in archive.org
The latest Yale University edition might be more suitable for new students, and they have designed an iPad exclusive app for it which can be helpful too.
I would not recommend this book. Mr. Albers has done an excellent job and his findings has revolutionized the design curriculum, but you probably have learned some of it from different sources by now, and you can find several useful videos on YouTube that teach you what you need to know from this book. Also, there is a complementary PDF from Dick Nelson that was far more easy to grasp and with similar trial and error approach that Josef Albers used.
https://dicknelsoncolor.com/class-han...
Josef Albers findings are not related to psychology or cultural values of colors, but they are about techniques and how human eye perceives color. Grasping all there is in this book without help of an instructor is going to be hell of difficult. I have the Fourth printing, 1972 version, which you can find in archive.org
The latest Yale University edition might be more suitable for new students, and they have designed an iPad exclusive app for it which can be helpful too.
I would not recommend this book. Mr. Albers has done an excellent job and his findings has revolutionized the design curriculum, but you probably have learned some of it from different sources by now, and you can find several useful videos on YouTube that teach you what you need to know from this book. Also, there is a complementary PDF from Dick Nelson that was far more easy to grasp and with similar trial and error approach that Josef Albers used.
https://dicknelsoncolor.com/class-han...
July 8, 2020
Although Albers is the genius of color, his writing is beige. Even informative/expository writings can be entertaining.
April 27, 2024
Najhutnejšia a pre mňa i najpodnetnejšia kniha o téme, ktorú ťažko zachytiť slovami, keďže sa venuje tomu najrelatívnejšieho zrakového vnemu- farbe. Žiadne vágne teórie, "iba" cvičenia v pozorovaní jednotlivých farebných situácií. Nabáda k citlivejšiemu vnímaniu a následnej analýze a je skvelým pomocníkom pre učiteľov i študentov výtvarných umení
December 27, 2017
I may not be smart enough to get all this, but I really liked the parts about how certain colors together can make us see things differently--even if the change is slight.
September 23, 2020
I learned a lot. This made me feel like I was back in undergrad, and I miss the way it feels to learn about things outside of my regular scope of thought. There were many times throughout this novel that I had to look away or stop reading because I was so dumbfounded by the new information I was learning. Our brains are really something else.
July 29, 2020
Fascinating collection of essays discussing the theories of color, especially color relativity.
March 10, 2022
Renklerin kullanımını ve kullanılma şekillerine göre yarattığı etkiyi uygulamalı örneklerle anlatan "Interaction of Color", tasarımla ilgilenenlerin mutlaka göz atması gereken güzel bir eser. Kısa gibi gözükse de detaylı inceleme gerektiren örnekleriyle adeta bir deneyim yaratan kitap, özellikle renk kullanımı içeren tasarım süreçlerinde defalarca ele alınacak kaynaklardan biri.
08.03.2022
Londra, Birleşik Krallık
Alp Turgut
08.03.2022
Londra, Birleşik Krallık
Alp Turgut
December 15, 2014
Really cool exploration of color theory from 1963. Still relevant and still engaging. The prose is written in a concise, almost poetic way, and very easy to read. The plates look great, but my only complaint is that in the 50th anniversary edition they should have reorganized the book so you didn't have to keep flipping to the back to see the color plates.
January 18, 2022
värvivõlu! kõikidele, keda huvitavad värvid ja optilised illusioonid. mul läks kuidagi tagurpidi selle raamatuga: tegin osasid praktilisi harjutusi juba 7–8 aastat tagasi, nüüd lõpuks sain teooria ka sinna kõrvale.
November 11, 2023
Gamechanger, actually
June 22, 2023
FAVORITE QUOTE
"A good teacher is more a giving of right questions than a giving of right answers"
Colour theory is not just a part of art and science, but also a part of psychology and basic human behaviour
WHAT WORKED FOR ME?
I like the originality of the book as the author presented the new experience of the students who experimented and invented questions on the existence and mixing of the colours. The author also familiarises the readers with unpopular but interesting color systems which you may research deeper by yourself.
SOME TROUBLES I SENSED
You may need to flip back pages to understand the text as some images printed in the beginning which directs the whole content of the book.
Why? Read this book.
I read the old edition but, this book keeps revising. Thus, I have no idea what more added in the latest edition.
WHO CAN READ THIS BOOK?
Language is simple and little bit scientific but understandable. This book is suitable for those readers, designers and psychologists who are interested to know about colour more than an art or science.
"A good teacher is more a giving of right questions than a giving of right answers"
Colour theory is not just a part of art and science, but also a part of psychology and basic human behaviour
WHAT WORKED FOR ME?
I like the originality of the book as the author presented the new experience of the students who experimented and invented questions on the existence and mixing of the colours. The author also familiarises the readers with unpopular but interesting color systems which you may research deeper by yourself.
SOME TROUBLES I SENSED
You may need to flip back pages to understand the text as some images printed in the beginning which directs the whole content of the book.
Why? Read this book.
I read the old edition but, this book keeps revising. Thus, I have no idea what more added in the latest edition.
WHO CAN READ THIS BOOK?
Language is simple and little bit scientific but understandable. This book is suitable for those readers, designers and psychologists who are interested to know about colour more than an art or science.
April 26, 2015
色彩互動學 -Interaction of Colors
這本書分為兩大部分，前半部描述如何透過色彩互動與實驗來玩弄客觀條件下的色彩，使其主觀感受與客觀條件產生差異，除了提到一些色彩理論與法則，如彩度、明度、灰階，在某些條件固定下，能操作的變形有哪些，作者還擅長用其他藝術來比喻觀看色彩：
『在樂曲中，如果只聽到單一樂音，我們就聽不到音樂。聽到音樂的先決條件是，聽出介於樂音與樂音之間的東西，它們的位置與留白。』
『寫作時，懂得拼字不代表能理解一首詩。』
『同樣的，能一一辨識畫中的色彩也不等同於敏銳的觀看能力，也不代表能理解色彩在畫中的作用。』
我們關注的是看見，色彩和色彩之間發生了什麼事，正如康丁斯坦(Kandingsky)所謂閱讀藝術的方式，重點不是讀到甚麼，而是如何讀。
書中談到的互動比較偏向創造，實驗，玩的意味，透過色彩彼此之間的影響，被影響，消褪，凸顯，融入，溢出，展示不同效果，而後半部則是對於前半部各種實驗命題的實作展示。像是使用色紙、不透明紙的交疊，面積大小控制，層次，色彩來操作這些命題實驗，再透過實驗結果來得出關於色彩理論的重要發現與結論。如減色：如何讓兩種不同的顏色看起來只剩下一種，或者如何讓四種顏色看起來像是三種，得出混色的結果會受到母色含量的比例影響與其他結論。抑或其實同一個顏色在不同背景下，觀看者會因為其母色明度的差異，讓同一顏色被看成兩種不同顏色。
其實我覺得講述色彩互動，很難透過平面文字書籍產生共鳴，因為將文字轉換為圖像，需經過認知消耗，且違背直覺，正所謂”A picture is worth a thousand words.” 。看前半段有點辛苦，但到了後半段就一切豁然開朗。因為後面就是搭配優異的實驗作品。
這本書很有趣，有別於以往色彩學教科書，而且充滿創造性的命題，我覺得對設計人士還滿有幫助的，至少知道為了要讓使用者有相同的主觀感受，不同深淺背景下，前景使用的顏色，就不應該再要求一定要客觀條件相同，反而是應該針對母色而進行微調，讓人感覺即使是不同背景，但主體主觀看起來是相同的。哈！不過我看完，第一個想法竟然不是設計師可以用，而是可以讓小朋友玩色紙，來進行這一連串實驗。總之，設計師值得一看，就算不看理論，光學習作者是怎麼看待色彩的這些觀點，也就值得拉。
這本書分為兩大部分，前半部描述如何透過色彩互動與實驗來玩弄客觀條件下的色彩，使其主觀感受與客觀條件產生差異，除了提到一些色彩理論與法則，如彩度、明度、灰階，在某些條件固定下，能操作的變形有哪些，作者還擅長用其他藝術來比喻觀看色彩：
『在樂曲中，如果只聽到單一樂音，我們就聽不到音樂。聽到音樂的先決條件是，聽出介於樂音與樂音之間的東西，它們的位置與留白。』
『寫作時，懂得拼字不代表能理解一首詩。』
『同樣的，能一一辨識畫中的色彩也不等同於敏銳的觀看能力，也不代表能理解色彩在畫中的作用。』
我們關注的是看見，色彩和色彩之間發生了什麼事，正如康丁斯坦(Kandingsky)所謂閱讀藝術的方式，重點不是讀到甚麼，而是如何讀。
書中談到的互動比較偏向創造，實驗，玩的意味，透過色彩彼此之間的影響，被影響，消褪，凸顯，融入，溢出，展示不同效果，而後半部則是對於前半部各種實驗命題的實作展示。像是使用色紙、不透明紙的交疊，面積大小控制，層次，色彩來操作這些命題實驗，再透過實驗結果來得出關於色彩理論的重要發現與結論。如減色：如何讓兩種不同的顏色看起來只剩下一種，或者如何讓四種顏色看起來像是三種，得出混色的結果會受到母色含量的比例影響與其他結論。抑或其實同一個顏色在不同背景下，觀看者會因為其母色明度的差異，讓同一顏色被看成兩種不同顏色。
其實我覺得講述色彩互動，很難透過平面文字書籍產生共鳴，因為將文字轉換為圖像，需經過認知消耗，且違背直覺，正所謂”A picture is worth a thousand words.” 。看前半段有點辛苦，但到了後半段就一切豁然開朗。因為後面就是搭配優異的實驗作品。
這本書很有趣，有別於以往色彩學教科書，而且充滿創造性的命題，我覺得對設計人士還滿有幫助的，至少知道為了要讓使用者有相同的主觀感受，不同深淺背景下，前景使用的顏色，就不應該再要求一定要客觀條件相同，反而是應該針對母色而進行微調，讓人感覺即使是不同背景，但主體主觀看起來是相同的。哈！不過我看完，第一個想法竟然不是設計師可以用，而是可以讓小朋友玩色紙，來進行這一連串實驗。總之，設計師值得一看，就算不看理論，光學習作者是怎麼看待色彩的這些觀點，也就值得拉。
December 23, 2023
I really love Albers’ approach to writing this book, it’s both accessibly theoretical and emphasizes that perception of color is a personal and individual experience. eventually started to skim the chapters since it’s oriented toward a classroom setting, but the demonstrations in the “plates and commentary” section were amazing
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
September 17, 2009
not so much a lecture as it is poetry. My silly graphic arts prof. for my graduate certificates couldn't think of a book to read for the class. I guess instead of being polite, I should have mentioned this.
February 5, 2014
50+ years after its release, this still WOWS. Every color exercise brings a new concept forward. There's an interactive app, too. Combines moving color plates, text and audio for a full surround-sound experience. This book is a gem!
read-in-2019
November 23, 2019Colors are way too complicated for me to be allowed to use it without much more study, clearly.
August 1, 2022
Don't buy for Kindle
It's not formatted and figures are not displayed properly (they show up as squares). Just get the paperback and forget this one exists.
It's not formatted and figures are not displayed properly (they show up as squares). Just get the paperback and forget this one exists.
July 23, 2020
(I only gave this 4 out of 5 because I'm a little too dumb for it.)
Two big problems inside the mind, neither of which I really understand.
'Binding' which I think is working out what objects are which, and 'Combination' which is about creating the matrix-like world-view which our little homunculus sits inside while riding the body around.
All of this started because I like Louise Sugdens painting style and because I like Dazzle Patterns on ships, and so I began a small investigation into colour, in particular, into colour and mass/shape...
After all, it’s only trying to understand how colour works, and how that combines with our sensation and understanding of mass.. how hard can it be?
Answer - INFINITELY HARD, for the very question opens the doorway to a crystalline dungeon of PRISMATIC MYSTERIES.
The search has taken me through Neurobiology (We Know It When We See It by Richard Masland), Ship Camouflage in WWI (Dazzle - disguise and disruption in war and art by James Taylor), and a deep cut into colour as used by artists (Interaction of Colour by Josef Albers).
We can also possibly add 'Through the Language Glass' by Guy Deushter, about a mild Sapier-Whorff effect in language and colour.
IS COLOUR THE MOST RELATIVE SENSE?
or just the most obviously relative?
So many scientists, art teachers, philosophers, messing around with coloured thread, coloured sheets of paper, swatches of colour, showing them to people of different nations, in classrooms, in laboratories, to rabbits while a hole has been drilled in their skulls to let the electrodes in, sailing around looking for rare islanders so you can show them the colours and write down what they say. More flags, shining lights, patterns of shade and texture.
Albers would remind us that our understanding of all these colours is massively shaped by context, types of light, (electric, dawn, dusk, passing clouds, albedo), by the arrangement of colours around and within each other, one colour on another, next to another, torn edges, straight edges, curly shapes, blocky shapes, texture on flat and so on and so on, so that he might regard these neurologists and cultural analysts running around as quite mad and pointless.
ALBERS - The most curious and unique of the minds I have witnessed through text. A man with the very tight, intense, highly disciplined brain of a laboratory scientist, a careful, systematic and procedural method to his teaching (learning about colour is *not about self-expression!*). And yet, with the least scientific aim and probably the greatest scepticism towards the systemising, totalising goal of science.
Albers is learning and teaching his students, through the medium of relentless attention and careful systematic analysis, about something he believes is very, very, highly relative. Fluid within perception and within the mind, to the extent that considering colour outside of its context, as an isolated quality, I think to him that would be utterly insane, since that is something it can never be.
Is it really the most relative of sensations? I think probably it is not, but that it is the most *observably relative* because it comes to us always alongside shape, objects and *DIVIDING LINES*, and I think the secret to the perceived relativity of colour is not that it is more relative than touch, smell or sound, but that it is more relative than objects and lines.
The mind is Binding and Combining the shapes of objects and dividing lines between things ("edge detection") all the time, and however it is doing this (we still don't really know), it seems to me that shapes, objects and lines are a lot less relative and debateable (both within the mind and beyond it) than the colours which always are sensed with and alongside them.
We might not all be seeing the same colours, and we can be certain, that in different lights and different times of day, things which register as always having the same colour in our minds, in fact have quite different colours, and that our brain is clearly fudging the issue, but *in comparison* to colour, we can be much more certain that the lines, shapes and objects we perceive, are both coherent to themselves and coherent when discussed and compared between individuals.
"That big rock, is it more yellow or green would you say?"
and never
"That big yellow-green thing, rock or sponge, would you say?"
And it is this, the evidently-relative-relativity, if you will excuse an awful phrase, which makes colour more obviously relative than sound or touch, because it lives along side and is always contrasted with, shape and line, which is very much less relative (probably more dominant, earlier maybe, in the binding & combining process).
IS THE BLUE I SEE THE SAME AS YOURS
It’s likely. If it’s not exactly the same it’s probably pretty similar, unless you are at the far end of the curve, and most crucially, as Albers would tell you, IT DOESN'T MATTER!
For colour is REALIVE and exists only relative to its context and therefore all that truly matters is if what you see as blue has the same relative relation to what you see as red green etc as everyone else which it probably does (though maybe not entirely).
COLOUR AND TIME, VISION AND TIME
While I know nothing about any of this I know even less about this part so beware, but it seems to me that vision and in particular the binding and combining of colour and form, and many colours, gives us access to a kind of island of no-time within our own minds.
As Albers would tell us, and here I'll bring in Ian McGilchrist of "The Master and His Emissary", sound is sequential, it can only happen in a row of information (though different sounds can be combined at the same time), touch is a bit less sequential, you can tough something with different bits of yourself, or be touched at once. Movement has a 'moment of movement' but is quite largely sequential, it happens in a row but vision, and the sensing of colour and shape, am I wrong in thinking that it has the least sequential elements?
McGilchrist would say that one part of the mind senses and 'sees' everything in one big burst and the other scans and sequentialises, so maybe sight, vision, has the most complex experience of time within the mind.
When I imagine the binding/combining process, I imagine something with a 'loose moment', a kind of drifting, or indistinct sense of the 'now'. The mind sees, absorbs, identifies, arranges and understands, all happening together. The big blurt of information from the all-at-once scan, the rapid sequential object scanning, the binding and combining shape colour, shade, light, fluid integration and re-integration with the imagined and re-constructed mind-state, both what 'just happened' (the part that makes us think the rabbit is still inside the hat) and the 'about to happen' (that lets tennis stars work out where the ball is *going to be*, all of this, binding and combining, looping and feeding back, continually, whenever our eyes are open.
And so, within the mechanisms of vision are many mutual but simultaneous *perceptions of time*. sequential, global, memory looking back and imagination/modelling looking forward, all happening "at once". The experience of vision is like a kind of time machine, a timeless, or looped moment within ourselves, which we can dip into and experience, slightly, a more or less time-powered moment, variations on what 'now' is.
WHY DO I GET A GIDDY FEELING WHEN PRESSING AGAINST THE EDGES OF THE IDEA?
Perhaps this presentiment of the complex nature of consciousness, vision, time, self awareness, is why when I reach certain points of Albers book, Maslands book and McGilchrists, I get a kind of giddy feeling. That feeling when you are just on the borders of a great idea, the moment before something complex, difficult and indistinct synthesises inside your mind into a coherent whole.
This might just be the borders of my own stupidity.
Or am I pressing against the edge of REALITY ITSELF????
AM I SMART ENOUGH TO UNDERSTAND THIS STUFF?
Probably not really no.
Masland is pop-sci and at the deeper end I struggle.
Albers, god damn fucking Germanic Albers. First its a book of experiments really, that you are meant to perform, and I didn't. Didn't have the right stuff, time or will. And second he writes in this bloody art-school Germanic hyper-clear style, which because it is hyper clear and has only the correct info in it
is fucking hard to get through. There is no pulse of info/blather for you brain to take a moment to recombine, instead its infoinfoinfoinfo.
Its one of the most interesting books on colour that I have ever read, but again, I found it a struggle, especially towards the end. There were effects and ideas that I found it hard to perceive, model and consider, and so I ended up somewhat, sweeping over the words in a fearful rush. Back in secondary school maths again! fuck!
COLOUR AND MASS, SHADE, SHINE, BRIGHTNESS AGGGHHHHHHH!
God fucking damn it brain, why you have to be so complex. All I wanted to understand was colour and mass.
Well, good news. Brain works out what shape and mass things are about 20 different ways at once. Edge detection and memory probably the most simple, though they exist at different ends of the binding/combining process (probably, we don't really know, and as I theorised above, 'different ends' likely doesn't make much sense in a temporarily fluid process with massive feedback loops).
Other ways - shade, light, texture, gleam, RELATIVE COLOUR. whoop de fucking do, all these things are changing massively, continually, always, depending on light, weather, perceptions, environment, background, movement between objects , movement WITHIN an object (which way will the Zebra jump - dunno as bunching muscles all fucked up by those dang stripes), and everything else.
False weathering patterns on 40k minis, showing you illusory mass one way, comic book style highlights on minis showing you mass another way, fake metal gleams in the non-metallic metal process showing you shape of imaginary metal, Blanchitsu style with decay and deep shadows, and the pale and nacreous skin which is good at showing those gothic shadows, showing you mass another way.
All somehow dealing with mass, or the delusion of mass, enhancing and re-creating the sense of 'shape' using false or simulated miniaturisations of aspects of the real(er) large scale world.
AND ALL DIFFERENT!!!
Especially when considered as different painting techniques, as in you literally need to do and think about a lot of stuff differently to employ each one.
Camouflage probably provides the key to entry to this subject but I have only read one book on it - stuff on 'Dazzle' (which seems like it didn't actually work, looked fucking cool though - raised morale, that counts!
But there are even different techniques and ideas behind kinds of camouflage. Camo for invisibility
for disruption of shape, of movement, counter-shading seems to have been invented, or re-invented by camo people (and oddly enough that is the exact opposite of a mini technique called zenithal highlighting).
Looking into the way camo destroys the understanding of mass and shape as a method for understanding how the eye and mind create and perceive mass and shape seems like a good idea.
More on this later perhaps.
SIMULATION THEORY IS FUCKING DISGUSTING
Gotta do a brief postscript in Patricks Schizophrenia Hour.
As a result of looking into this I now hate Simulation Theory even more than I did before, whic was a lot.
It’s the ultimate narcissistic , ressentiment-based conspiracy theory, except instead of being focused on governments and social systems its focused on ALL OF REALITY
It’s also clearly theology, and bad theology at that. Investigation of the detail and subtlety of the human sensing, binding and combining process and its integration into consciousness, means that believing in simulation theory means that whatever is running the simulation both carefully and exactingly created the illusion of a hyper-complex system which evolved over bazillions of years to sense and inhabit a very particular complex eco-system AND left clues behind for the enlightened to see that thhis was all made up. Just like the God of Abraham leaving dinosaur bones behind as a test of faith.
It is a vile doctrine of superiority, the product of alienation, narcissism and a high IQ.
Two big problems inside the mind, neither of which I really understand.
'Binding' which I think is working out what objects are which, and 'Combination' which is about creating the matrix-like world-view which our little homunculus sits inside while riding the body around.
All of this started because I like Louise Sugdens painting style and because I like Dazzle Patterns on ships, and so I began a small investigation into colour, in particular, into colour and mass/shape...
After all, it’s only trying to understand how colour works, and how that combines with our sensation and understanding of mass.. how hard can it be?
Answer - INFINITELY HARD, for the very question opens the doorway to a crystalline dungeon of PRISMATIC MYSTERIES.
The search has taken me through Neurobiology (We Know It When We See It by Richard Masland), Ship Camouflage in WWI (Dazzle - disguise and disruption in war and art by James Taylor), and a deep cut into colour as used by artists (Interaction of Colour by Josef Albers).
We can also possibly add 'Through the Language Glass' by Guy Deushter, about a mild Sapier-Whorff effect in language and colour.
IS COLOUR THE MOST RELATIVE SENSE?
or just the most obviously relative?
So many scientists, art teachers, philosophers, messing around with coloured thread, coloured sheets of paper, swatches of colour, showing them to people of different nations, in classrooms, in laboratories, to rabbits while a hole has been drilled in their skulls to let the electrodes in, sailing around looking for rare islanders so you can show them the colours and write down what they say. More flags, shining lights, patterns of shade and texture.
Albers would remind us that our understanding of all these colours is massively shaped by context, types of light, (electric, dawn, dusk, passing clouds, albedo), by the arrangement of colours around and within each other, one colour on another, next to another, torn edges, straight edges, curly shapes, blocky shapes, texture on flat and so on and so on, so that he might regard these neurologists and cultural analysts running around as quite mad and pointless.
ALBERS - The most curious and unique of the minds I have witnessed through text. A man with the very tight, intense, highly disciplined brain of a laboratory scientist, a careful, systematic and procedural method to his teaching (learning about colour is *not about self-expression!*). And yet, with the least scientific aim and probably the greatest scepticism towards the systemising, totalising goal of science.
Albers is learning and teaching his students, through the medium of relentless attention and careful systematic analysis, about something he believes is very, very, highly relative. Fluid within perception and within the mind, to the extent that considering colour outside of its context, as an isolated quality, I think to him that would be utterly insane, since that is something it can never be.
Is it really the most relative of sensations? I think probably it is not, but that it is the most *observably relative* because it comes to us always alongside shape, objects and *DIVIDING LINES*, and I think the secret to the perceived relativity of colour is not that it is more relative than touch, smell or sound, but that it is more relative than objects and lines.
The mind is Binding and Combining the shapes of objects and dividing lines between things ("edge detection") all the time, and however it is doing this (we still don't really know), it seems to me that shapes, objects and lines are a lot less relative and debateable (both within the mind and beyond it) than the colours which always are sensed with and alongside them.
We might not all be seeing the same colours, and we can be certain, that in different lights and different times of day, things which register as always having the same colour in our minds, in fact have quite different colours, and that our brain is clearly fudging the issue, but *in comparison* to colour, we can be much more certain that the lines, shapes and objects we perceive, are both coherent to themselves and coherent when discussed and compared between individuals.
"That big rock, is it more yellow or green would you say?"
and never
"That big yellow-green thing, rock or sponge, would you say?"
And it is this, the evidently-relative-relativity, if you will excuse an awful phrase, which makes colour more obviously relative than sound or touch, because it lives along side and is always contrasted with, shape and line, which is very much less relative (probably more dominant, earlier maybe, in the binding & combining process).
IS THE BLUE I SEE THE SAME AS YOURS
It’s likely. If it’s not exactly the same it’s probably pretty similar, unless you are at the far end of the curve, and most crucially, as Albers would tell you, IT DOESN'T MATTER!
For colour is REALIVE and exists only relative to its context and therefore all that truly matters is if what you see as blue has the same relative relation to what you see as red green etc as everyone else which it probably does (though maybe not entirely).
COLOUR AND TIME, VISION AND TIME
While I know nothing about any of this I know even less about this part so beware, but it seems to me that vision and in particular the binding and combining of colour and form, and many colours, gives us access to a kind of island of no-time within our own minds.
As Albers would tell us, and here I'll bring in Ian McGilchrist of "The Master and His Emissary", sound is sequential, it can only happen in a row of information (though different sounds can be combined at the same time), touch is a bit less sequential, you can tough something with different bits of yourself, or be touched at once. Movement has a 'moment of movement' but is quite largely sequential, it happens in a row but vision, and the sensing of colour and shape, am I wrong in thinking that it has the least sequential elements?
McGilchrist would say that one part of the mind senses and 'sees' everything in one big burst and the other scans and sequentialises, so maybe sight, vision, has the most complex experience of time within the mind.
When I imagine the binding/combining process, I imagine something with a 'loose moment', a kind of drifting, or indistinct sense of the 'now'. The mind sees, absorbs, identifies, arranges and understands, all happening together. The big blurt of information from the all-at-once scan, the rapid sequential object scanning, the binding and combining shape colour, shade, light, fluid integration and re-integration with the imagined and re-constructed mind-state, both what 'just happened' (the part that makes us think the rabbit is still inside the hat) and the 'about to happen' (that lets tennis stars work out where the ball is *going to be*, all of this, binding and combining, looping and feeding back, continually, whenever our eyes are open.
And so, within the mechanisms of vision are many mutual but simultaneous *perceptions of time*. sequential, global, memory looking back and imagination/modelling looking forward, all happening "at once". The experience of vision is like a kind of time machine, a timeless, or looped moment within ourselves, which we can dip into and experience, slightly, a more or less time-powered moment, variations on what 'now' is.
WHY DO I GET A GIDDY FEELING WHEN PRESSING AGAINST THE EDGES OF THE IDEA?
Perhaps this presentiment of the complex nature of consciousness, vision, time, self awareness, is why when I reach certain points of Albers book, Maslands book and McGilchrists, I get a kind of giddy feeling. That feeling when you are just on the borders of a great idea, the moment before something complex, difficult and indistinct synthesises inside your mind into a coherent whole.
This might just be the borders of my own stupidity.
Or am I pressing against the edge of REALITY ITSELF????
AM I SMART ENOUGH TO UNDERSTAND THIS STUFF?
Probably not really no.
Masland is pop-sci and at the deeper end I struggle.
Albers, god damn fucking Germanic Albers. First its a book of experiments really, that you are meant to perform, and I didn't. Didn't have the right stuff, time or will. And second he writes in this bloody art-school Germanic hyper-clear style, which because it is hyper clear and has only the correct info in it
is fucking hard to get through. There is no pulse of info/blather for you brain to take a moment to recombine, instead its infoinfoinfoinfo.
Its one of the most interesting books on colour that I have ever read, but again, I found it a struggle, especially towards the end. There were effects and ideas that I found it hard to perceive, model and consider, and so I ended up somewhat, sweeping over the words in a fearful rush. Back in secondary school maths again! fuck!
COLOUR AND MASS, SHADE, SHINE, BRIGHTNESS AGGGHHHHHHH!
God fucking damn it brain, why you have to be so complex. All I wanted to understand was colour and mass.
Well, good news. Brain works out what shape and mass things are about 20 different ways at once. Edge detection and memory probably the most simple, though they exist at different ends of the binding/combining process (probably, we don't really know, and as I theorised above, 'different ends' likely doesn't make much sense in a temporarily fluid process with massive feedback loops).
Other ways - shade, light, texture, gleam, RELATIVE COLOUR. whoop de fucking do, all these things are changing massively, continually, always, depending on light, weather, perceptions, environment, background, movement between objects , movement WITHIN an object (which way will the Zebra jump - dunno as bunching muscles all fucked up by those dang stripes), and everything else.
False weathering patterns on 40k minis, showing you illusory mass one way, comic book style highlights on minis showing you mass another way, fake metal gleams in the non-metallic metal process showing you shape of imaginary metal, Blanchitsu style with decay and deep shadows, and the pale and nacreous skin which is good at showing those gothic shadows, showing you mass another way.
All somehow dealing with mass, or the delusion of mass, enhancing and re-creating the sense of 'shape' using false or simulated miniaturisations of aspects of the real(er) large scale world.
AND ALL DIFFERENT!!!
Especially when considered as different painting techniques, as in you literally need to do and think about a lot of stuff differently to employ each one.
Camouflage probably provides the key to entry to this subject but I have only read one book on it - stuff on 'Dazzle' (which seems like it didn't actually work, looked fucking cool though - raised morale, that counts!
But there are even different techniques and ideas behind kinds of camouflage. Camo for invisibility
for disruption of shape, of movement, counter-shading seems to have been invented, or re-invented by camo people (and oddly enough that is the exact opposite of a mini technique called zenithal highlighting).
Looking into the way camo destroys the understanding of mass and shape as a method for understanding how the eye and mind create and perceive mass and shape seems like a good idea.
More on this later perhaps.
SIMULATION THEORY IS FUCKING DISGUSTING
Gotta do a brief postscript in Patricks Schizophrenia Hour.
As a result of looking into this I now hate Simulation Theory even more than I did before, whic was a lot.
It’s the ultimate narcissistic , ressentiment-based conspiracy theory, except instead of being focused on governments and social systems its focused on ALL OF REALITY
It’s also clearly theology, and bad theology at that. Investigation of the detail and subtlety of the human sensing, binding and combining process and its integration into consciousness, means that believing in simulation theory means that whatever is running the simulation both carefully and exactingly created the illusion of a hyper-complex system which evolved over bazillions of years to sense and inhabit a very particular complex eco-system AND left clues behind for the enlightened to see that thhis was all made up. Just like the God of Abraham leaving dinosaur bones behind as a test of faith.
It is a vile doctrine of superiority, the product of alienation, narcissism and a high IQ.
May 19, 2025
I picked up Interaction of Color partly as a designer, partly as a human trying to see more clearly. Albers doesn’t just write about color theory—he builds a meditative experience that forces you to unlearn assumptions. I'm maybe a third of the way in, and already my perception of “what I see” versus “what is” is getting shaken up.
It’s not an easy read—Albers writes sparsely, almost like a guide inviting you into experiments instead of handing you truths. The accompanying visual exercises (even in print) are surprisingly powerful. One page will show two identical colors that look completely different in context, and my brain short-circuits for a second. It’s humbling, especially coming from a UX background where we so often chase “clarity” as a design goal. This book reminds me that clarity is relational.
What I’m appreciating most is how much of this feels physical. Color here isn’t digital or hexadecimal—it’s pigment, surface, light, time. Reading it during BART commutes has made me weirdly more observant: shadows on other passengers' clothes, window reflections shifting tones.
As someone exploring how mindfulness intersects with design, Interaction of Color is grounding. It's teaching me that perception is not just cognitive—it’s lived, sensory, unstable. And that’s kind of beautiful.
Will report back once I finish. For now, it feels less like I’m reading a book and more like I’m re-training my eyes.
It’s not an easy read—Albers writes sparsely, almost like a guide inviting you into experiments instead of handing you truths. The accompanying visual exercises (even in print) are surprisingly powerful. One page will show two identical colors that look completely different in context, and my brain short-circuits for a second. It’s humbling, especially coming from a UX background where we so often chase “clarity” as a design goal. This book reminds me that clarity is relational.
What I’m appreciating most is how much of this feels physical. Color here isn’t digital or hexadecimal—it’s pigment, surface, light, time. Reading it during BART commutes has made me weirdly more observant: shadows on other passengers' clothes, window reflections shifting tones.
As someone exploring how mindfulness intersects with design, Interaction of Color is grounding. It's teaching me that perception is not just cognitive—it’s lived, sensory, unstable. And that’s kind of beautiful.
Will report back once I finish. For now, it feels less like I’m reading a book and more like I’m re-training my eyes.
Read
October 17, 2021Ok so I have been reading so many books about my university thesis so I added them all to the “read” folder just so that I won’t feel bad… that is the reality, in the summer it was so easy for me to read all day but now because I’m reading so much for university the last thing I want to do is to read another book in my free time.
Now I feel better 😜
Now I feel better 😜
August 12, 2022
Without a doubt, Interaction of Color is still an incredibly influential book when teaching color to students. Even today, the book's look at color is still engaging and radical. There is no color wheel, the terms warm and cool are not assigned to specific colors, and the juxtaposition of colors next to each other can be deceiving to the eyes. Although it would probably have a larger impact with a lecture (which can be found online) than essentially reading instructions for a teacher, it is still worthwhile. Some chapters go away from the technical instructions to rather poetic and passionate observations of color in the world around us. Looking at the plates with commentary sets forth the ideas Albers demonstrates and explains throughout like seeing after image effects to colors and shapes revealing their interactions with each other.
March 23, 2019
Pretty foundational, opened my eyes literally to color effects.
January 27, 2020
non è un saggio ma una poco interessante raccolta di esercizi da far fare in classe.
March 19, 2022
Fascinating, encouraging, and fun look at color. Makes you throw out/question everything you think you know about color which I believe is the point.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 264 reviews