Hey you're the creator! Welcome to HN. Normal rules are that posts have to say something, so 'hi' gets downmodded, but I think most of us didn't realise you were the person that made this.
Is there something special going on here (e.g. to "normalize" the gradient), or is it just an element with the linear-gradient CSS style applied it to it?
This could be useful for generating cyclic color maps [0], of which there is a dearth in matplotlib. Cyclic color maps are great for coloring angles where one wants 2π periodicity.
How about you embiggen it to include polar on 1 unit circle and 3 points in 1x1x1 square (Pro version has more detail). Maybe even include shading and luminescence.
Its funny how gradients were cool in the 90's. Then became uncool and now they're cool again. Now everything is full of gradients - Stripe, Open AI, Apple's new iPhone promotions/wallpapers come to my mind.
I have a question - why are graphic designers all about trends? Whether it is brutalist design or back in 2010 it was all this material UI and flat design. Gradients are popular right now and everyone is jumping on it. In my view today's web designers are decorators than actually understanding the purpose and utility of design. You can't produce timeless design when simultaneously you're chasing trends.
I’ve had a long unanswered question that I think about a lot: does design (fashion, architecture, app UI/UX) evolve or does it just change? Are the fashions we are wearing today better or simply different from 30 years ago? The fact that retro is cool seems to point to it being just different, versus better.
But I’m not really sure. A lot of architects almost have a morality about their designs: that a building shouldn’t cover up structural columns or engineering structures. That beauty is honesty, and adding extraneous stuff in the name of design isn’t honest, and in fact, immoral.
This is certainly different from the design of buildings 200 or 300 years ago, which often were excessive and baroque.
But it’s hard to say one is better than the other.
If you want to sell whatever you have, despite function, would you rather purchase something that "looks old" or something that "looks new"? I suspect most people would go with the latter. Since "looks new" sells, people will design it in that matter.
Note that "looks new" and "looks old" are relative terms to the last design. That's why they're trends and cycle back and forth.
29 comments
[ 1.6 ms ] story [ 78.9 ms ] thread[1] https://mycolor.space/gradient?ori=to+right&hex=%2300FF00&he...
[2] https://youtu.be/LKnqECcg6Gw?t=148
[0] https://matplotlib.org/gallery/color/colormap_reference.html
Anyway, does the color interpolation take into account the fact that RGB values use gamma coding?
I have a question - why are graphic designers all about trends? Whether it is brutalist design or back in 2010 it was all this material UI and flat design. Gradients are popular right now and everyone is jumping on it. In my view today's web designers are decorators than actually understanding the purpose and utility of design. You can't produce timeless design when simultaneously you're chasing trends.
But I’m not really sure. A lot of architects almost have a morality about their designs: that a building shouldn’t cover up structural columns or engineering structures. That beauty is honesty, and adding extraneous stuff in the name of design isn’t honest, and in fact, immoral.
This is certainly different from the design of buildings 200 or 300 years ago, which often were excessive and baroque.
But it’s hard to say one is better than the other.
Note that "looks new" and "looks old" are relative terms to the last design. That's why they're trends and cycle back and forth.