The Direct Comparison Method: Principle of OperationIn applied fields — such as design, printing, and restoration — color samples are placed within the same field of view and compared directly.
The eye sees both colors simultaneously, in a unified context, and can accurately assess the difference.
In painting, this approach was technically impossible.
The subject, the palette, and the canvas are located in different areas, and the painter is forced to shift their gaze between them.
Colors are perceived sequentially, each in its own environment and lighting.
This key limitation — the inability to see the color of the object and the color of the paint simultaneously — makes accurate evaluation difficult and makes painting particularly susceptible to perceptual distortion.
The direct color comparison method, adapted for painters, largely removes these difficulties in color perception.
The essence of the method is to place a paint sample on the same line of sight as the subject and see both colors side by side and simultaneously.
By doing this, we effectively eliminate the surrounding context and allow the eye to compare the two colors more objectively and abstractly. The influence of cognitive distortions is minimized under such comparison.
Direct color comparison is a way to bypass the limitations of human perception. It allows the artist to "switch off" the brain’s automatic color interpretation mechanisms.
When placed on the same line of sight, the paint sample is subjected to the same surrounding environment and to the same effects of simultaneous contrast as the object itself — in the same “color environment”.
The method of direct comparison is not fundamentally different from the traditional approach in which the painter selects color by alternating visual comparison between the subject and the paint.
The only difference is that, in the traditional method, the painter cannot see the colors simultaneously and in the same context, but instead sees them separately, in isolation.
They are forced to compare the colors alternately, which almost always leads to mistakes.
An analogy: trying to pour the same amount of water into two glasses located in different rooms. If they were side by side, you could top off one until the levels matched.
But when they are apart, you have to remember how full the first one was, go back and forth, and so on.
Color perception is always comparative. We do not see color "in itself" — we perceive it in relation to the colors around it.
The brain cannot recognize a shade in isolation — it always places it on a scale: lighter or darker, warmer or cooler, more vivid or duller than its neighbor.
This is the foundation of how our color vision works.
Direct comparison of two adjacent shades creates the cleanest possible conditions for evaluation. This is the core of the method.
When side by side, on the same line of sight, the paint sample and the object are perceived more abstractly and in isolation.
The eye, seeing both colors at once and in the same environment, can objectively assess their differences — without cognitive distortions or simultaneous contrast.
This allows the artist to correct and control the color directly and accurately.
During work, the painter cannot clearly see the colors of the subject, the palette, and the painting all at once if they are even slightly apart. They are forced to shift their gaze.
Each time the gaze moves — for example, from the subject to the palette — the colors, being in different environments, start to distort due to simultaneous contrast, chromatic adaptation, and other factors.
On the palette, surrounded by other colors, a tone will always look different — even if it’s technically correct.
That’s how visual contrast works. It’s a fundamental property of our vision.
Looking at the color of an object, it is impossible to mentally classify it and then reproduce it accurately on a palette surrounded by entirely different colors.
A person cannot do this without direct comparison.
Unlike music, where there is a clear system of notes and intervals, color is a continuous spectrum, blending gradually from one hue to another with no obvious boundaries.
Color also varies smoothly in brightness and saturation, making the task even harder.
When we look at an object, the brain cannot retain precise information about the spectrum of light reflected from it.
This is physically impossible. Instead, it stores a vague “impression” of the object’s color in its context — and that impression quickly fades and becomes distorted.
Color memory is one of the shortest and least reliable.
Despite our ability to distinguish colors, the human brain was not designed to classify and memorize them accurately — evolutionarily, this was never necessary.
That is why the traditional method of color matching (from the palette) is always approximate and can cause great uncertainty in beginners.
Even experienced painters may stray significantly, especially when eye fatigue sets in.
The yellow spot on the human retina (
macula lutea), which is responsible for color vision, measures about 5 mm and covers a visual angle of about 10°.
If you extend your arm and look at your hand, this is roughly the width that fits within that field.
The angular radius of the central fovea (fovea centralis), the area of sharpest vision, is even smaller — about 1.3°, which is less than the width of your index finger at arm’s length.
Outside these
zones, color vision is much less precise.
Look at any colored object, then shift your gaze slightly to the side — you’ll notice that the color becomes less clear and defined.
Peripheral vision poorly detects subtle color differences.
Direct comparison creates the most accurate conditions for evaluating two shades.
Moreover, when the sample is aligned with the subject, it fits not only within the macula but also within the
fovea centralis — the area with the highest density of color-sensitive cones.
Both colors are simultaneously located within the zone of maximum visual acuity.