794 REPORTS ON THE STATE OF SCIENCE, — 1915, 



extent — i.e., faxiing, could be brought to its lowest terms of inconvenience, 

 though the eamples of colour published would be made in such a way that fading 

 would be guarded agaii:st as far as modern colour chemistry makes it possible. 



The colours in the primary scheme should be named. No sane naturalist 

 wishes to talk in such symbols as ' 40 J8t. ' On the other hand, the same 

 naturalist would not wish to use many of the colour terms even in Ridgway, 

 who rightly objects to such absui'd names as 'ashee of roses' and 'elephant's 

 breath.' The usual method of assigning colours to common natural objects 

 should be followed, ae far as is possible, in the primary scheme. Whether in 

 the more complicated schemes every colour, shade, tint, and hue should receive 

 a name is a matter for consideration. I am informed that the colours supplied 

 to artists under the same name are not always the same even from the same 

 firm. This is ridiculous, if a colour name means anything. A standard of 

 colours would seem to give some protection. 



Unfortunately, most of us suffer from the fact that we have received no colour 

 education. This has probably been one of the principal reasons why many 

 people have not adopted a colour chart : the constituents of a given colour are 

 not appreciated, and hence the difficulty of matching it. More attention seems 

 to be paid to this subject in America than in this country, judging from the 

 literature on the subject. 



A further point is that a colour standard should be cheap. Charts of colour 

 samples are supplied gratis by every dealer in artist's colours, wall distempers, 

 &c. ; yet the naturalist has to expend a considerable sum for a scheme, 

 eighty per cent, of which is probably useless to him, and other workers in his 

 subject may be using other charts. There seems no apparent reason why a 

 suitable series of standard colours should not be published at a shilling or so. 

 There is no need for much letterpress dealing with the theory of colour, but 

 there should be a few notes on the best way of comparing colours, having regard 

 to texture of surface and various optical illusions. 



To summarise : — 



1. For ordinary use there should not be too many coloure. 



2. A fair-sized, even sample of colour should be given. 



3. The colour must be as durable as can be obtained. 



4. The colour must be standardised by modern physical and chemical 

 methods. 



5. Coloure to be interpolated in the special cases where necessary. 



6. The colours must be named in the primary list, popular names being used 

 where possible, and common objects referred to when suitable. If an inter- 

 national scheme be adopted, there would necessarily be a polyglot nomen- 

 clature. 



7. The standard must be cheap, well arranged, and in book form. 



In conclusion I would express my thanks to the numerous naturalists with 

 whom I have discussed the question of a colour standard. 



Some discussion took place, and Mr. Greevz Fysher (Leeds Naturalists' 

 Club and Scientific Association] pointed out the importance of colour standards 

 from a commercial point of view. As it was the general opinion that the 

 matter did not come within the province of any one of the Sections of the 

 British Association, it was referred to the Corresponding Societies Committee. 



The meeting closed with a vote of thanks to Mr. Ramsbottom. 



The following Delegates attended the Conference and signed the attendance book, 

 their attendance being indicated by the figures 1 2, which refer respectively to the 

 first and second meeting. 



AFFILIATED SOCIETIES. 



1 2 Andersonian Naturalists' Society. . . . M. A. B. Gilmour, F.Z.S. 



1 2 Berwickshire Naturalists' Club . . . . G. P. Hughes, F.R.G.S. 



1 2 Bournemouth Natural Science Society . . Sir Daniel Morris, K.C.M.G. 



