Skip to main content

making faces :: something in my eye

if you thought that merely trying out a version of every option available to me in the sci/art colour categories was going to be sufficient to quell my desire to figure out where i might fit into the seasonal spectrum, you clearly haven't met me. [which is entirely possible, since i haven't met most of the people who come by these parts.] seeing as i'm not an expert, i wanted to push further to see what i could actually observe about my own colouring [and that of those around me, since i've been randomly draping things around dom and snapping pictures of different parts of his face as well as asking him to apply filters to said photos for me to review them.

one of the great things about modern computer technology is that it can allow you to do things like split an image into pixels so that you can view it not as a whole, but as the sum of its parts. so i thought that it might be an interesting idea to try actually pulling my face apart [not literally] to look at what it's really made of. that idea is key, by the way, to understanding how sci/art analysis works. the colours that harmonise with you are not accidental, they are colours that are already part of your skin, hair and eyes, it's just that you can't consciously perceive them. the world would be difficult to navigate if we could see everything broken into the entire range of light waves that comprises it. essentially, everything would be reduced to a meaningless mosaic. instead, our eyes have adapted to interpret wavelengths in a way that allows us to make sense of them. however, we are still aware of the different colours that make up everything we see, which is why some combinations will always strike us as harmonious. we're hard-wired that way.

as it turns out, analysing skin is of limited use, since you really can't see the kind of detail that you would need to properly judge undertone and because things can get screwed up by the presence of shadows or, say, if you have a random cat hair that you didn't notice that messes everything up and makes it look like you have a weird stripe of colour restricted to one part of your cheek. 

however, it is very interesting to look at pixelated images of eyes. because there are many colours in the iris that are more easily perceived when an image is divided to show them. even without applying a pixel filter, it's interesting just to look at a high resolution photo of your eye. you're likely to be surprised at what you find.

i'll give you a look at mine as a case in point.

from a normal viewing distance, my eyes are either blue or grey. i've always said that they were blue, but the fact is that they're pale enough that the colour is determined more by what's around them than anything else, which really means that they're grey. the one thing that most people can agree on is that they are completely cool in tone, as very light eyes tend to be. icy. like a lot of people with pale eyes, i have a darker ring at the outside of my iris. in my case, that ring is pronounced on the outer sides and a little softer on the inner sides, so it's not a perfect ring. again, that's not particularly uncommon- it's actually rarer to see someone who has a perfectly even ring around the iris.


if you look at a picture of my eye isolated, though, things get a little weird. first of all, there are a couple of noticeable golden brown spots. again, this isn't uncommon. lots of people have flecks of different colour in their eyes and some of them have quite remarkable spots that are visible even in passing. but what's more curious is that the overall "cool" effect of my eyes completely disappears. it's like a cool blue-grey eye that someone spilled their tea on. [i'm really trying to avoid thinking of the term "urine-stained" when i look at the close-up.] there's a definite yellowy cast to the entire iris, save for the pupil.

closer

closer still
with dom's help, i isolated a couple of sections of my iris, ones that i felt comprised all the colours found in the iris. if you'd like to try this yourself, just find a friend with photoshop. virtually any camera will take an adequate photo if you get it close enough and applying the pixel filter only takes a few seconds.



split up in this way, you can see more of a "map" of all the colours. you can get a better perspective on how a yellow tone permeates everything. there's no shade you'd really call blue, or at least nothing you'd call an unmixed blue and nothing that shows as a pure grey either. instead, you have a spectrum of muted aqua to sage green to mousy grey, all of which look like they're seen through a veil of smog. the other interesting thing is that it's not a particularly light grouping of colours. despite the fact that my eyes look pale, there aren't a lot of icy or pastel shades mixed in there at all. they're medium.

so what does this all mean? am i not blue or grey-eyed after all? well, yes and no. since my eyes look grey or blue to most people, of course that would be my correct eye colour description. however, when choosing what colours i put on and around my face, i'm going to want to consider the colours that are hiding beneath. because even if we can't claim to see them at a casual glance, we are aware of them and we do react to them.

in terms of finding my proper season, i'd say that this now categorically excludes the purely cool seasons of true winter and true summer. there is too much warmth going on in there for it to be an easy fit. [if you've been following this series of posts, you might remember that i didn't feel a true winter palette worked on me anyway, but true summer was actually the best of the three summers.] if we accept my judgment that i'm not exclusively warm toned, then we've effectively eliminated all of the "true" seasons. but is that cast over my iris more of a spring yellow or autumn gold? summer soft or winter bright? that, folks, is about as far as we can get just looking at eyes, but it's a good start.

please feel free to spend the next hour staring at photos of your eyes and come back to post comments about what surprising things you see!

Comments

Hah, what a discovery :-) I am going to do a little super zooming myself I think... although I think my eyes will still look brown, even from up close.
Kate MacDonald said…
I definitely recommend doing a close up to find out! You might be surprised that even though your eyes look brown, there are a lot of other colours hiding in there.

as long as you're here, why not read more?

don't speak

you might think that it sounds dramatic, but linguistic genocide is something that happens. people in power will go to great lengths to eradicate certain languages, not just for the sheer joy of making the world a lesser place, but as a way of beating down the culture that's associated with it. language has a unique reciprocal bond with culture, and every group that has attempted to break down another has recognised that forbidding a cultural group from communicating in their own language is an extremely effective way to tear apart their culture.

there are lots [and lots and lots and lots] of examples of this sort of thing, some successful, some not, but far too many to cover in one blog post. however, i thought it was worth looking at some languages that have been the subjects of active repression, and what the political consequences of that have been.

devastation :: the native north american languages :: it should come as no surprise that the largest genocide in history [by a ma…

losers?

just a short time ago, i waxed prosaic about trump supporters who felt betrayed by their candidate pursuing in office the exact things that he said he would. short version: i have no sympathy.

today is a bit different. in the wake of america's bombing of a syrian air strip, in response to a chemical weapons attack by the syrian government, my facebook and twitter feeds were peppered with plaintive shades of "we believed you". these are the people who heard trump say that he wanted the united states to step back and focus on defending its own. indeed, trump did say such things, over and over; america cannot be the policeman of the world. even arch-liberal cynics like me had to admit that this was a refreshing argument to hear from someone outside the paul family, and, could easily have been turned into trump's greatest argument against hillary clinton. [he chose to go another way, which also worked.]

trump also said, repeatedly, that america needed to invest heavily …

long division

after the united states election last year, there were the usual calls for the country to unite behind the new president. that never happens anymore, because, since george w. bush scored a victory in 2004, having launched the country into a war in iraq for no reason, the people on the losing side of a presidential election have been pretty bloody angry about it. democrats hated bush 43. republicans really hated obama. democrats really hate trump.

it didn't help that trump didn't make the typical conciliatory gestures like including a couple of members of the opposite party in his cabinet, or encouraging his party to proceed slowly with contentious legislation. barack obama arguably wasted at least two and as many as six years of his tenure as president trying to play peacemaker before he felt sufficiently safe to just say "screw you guys" and start governing around the ridiculous congress he was forced to deal with. not-giving-a-shit obama was the best president in …