Talk:Luminosity
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
How does one get from those parameters to the simplification? Can someone check the work? lysdexia 22:40, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Merge articles
If luminance and luminosity are supposed to be synonyms, shouldn't those two articles be merged? --Abdull 12:01, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Just because "luminance" is sometimes called "luminosity", that doesn't mean that "luminosity" can always be called "luminance". There are at least two different quantities involved here.
- Maybe it needs to be explained more clearly in both of these articles, as well as in the Template:SI light units which appears on both pages, and which can be edited by going there. Can you or someone else look into that? There might be differences in usage between physics and electronics and astronomy, for example, as well as differences in recommended usage over time. What are the official current recommendations of any of the multitude of standards organizations which might be involved in this? Gene Nygaard 13:15, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- There are at least five different meanings of the two words between the two pages (although some are not spelled out clearly). The two words are only synonymous for some of those meanings, so merging the pages is out of the question. BTW. I have renamed the "SI light units" chart. The units described are specifically for photometry. They do not encompass all of the meanings of luminance and luminosity.--Srleffler 06:53, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
- Luminosity in particle physics/scattering is certainly different from luminance. If the astronomical parts of the articles are merged, the particle physics part should certainly be kept under "luminosity". HEL 22:46, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
- You're replying to a very old comment. There is no current proposal to merge anything here.--Srleffler 05:51, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Classification of stars according to luminosity
Hi I wanted an article on the subject I have mentioned but I could not find it. Could you please find an article on the above—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.142.94.106 (talk • contribs) 05:49, May 19, 2006.
- Try Category:Stars by luminosity class.--Srleffler 05:54, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Usage in HSL
Glennchan says: "please cite sources- the additional information is contradictory; read the luminosity and HSL wikipedia pages." OK, I'll try for some sources. But I don't see what the contradiction is that you see. Can you clarify? Dicklyon 01:32, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
- Never mind. I think I see the point that lightness is not the same as luma, even if Photoshop's terminology did influence both. Dicklyon 01:41, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Definition of lightness in color science in case you are interested
Glennchan 08:16, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] What does the L in HSL color space stand for?
Why don't we move this information into the HSL color space page, not this one. I think the only relevant info here would be that the "L" in HSL color space is called different things.
As far as the correct name / what L stands for... I do not know. Since in common usage various L words are used, it is useful to point that out. If there is some authority for naming conventions, then please add that information and cite that authority (i.e. like how SI handles standard units and nomenclature for science/physics).
In a slightly different vein, you can point out that the "L" in HSL has nothing to do with the color science definitions of luminance, lightness, etc. There's no connection with color science there. Glennchan 04:27, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- Well, all I can cite for now is that books calling it hue-saturation-lightness are much more common, at least before 2000, than those calling it hue-saturation-and-luminance. The idiosynchratic max-min thing is clearly unrelated to anything from color science. We can defer the confusion to the HSL page if you prefer. Dicklyon 06:02, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Apparent, visible, total, bolometric, luminosity and magnitude
I tried to clarify this more, but please check and see if I got it right. The proliferation of terms here is confusing and could maybe use more work. Dicklyon 19:36, 27 February 2007 (UTC)