
It can't generate colour images by itself, filters are required.
( , Mon 30 Jul 2018, 1:06, Reply)

It detects light of various waveforms.
That's colour, to you.
( , Mon 30 Jul 2018, 1:22, Reply)

but the sensor itself doesn’t capture colour information, only the intensity of all light in a broad spectrum that is permitted through interchangeable filters. thus you could capture a hi res frame of ‘red’ light, by filtering all but red frequencies. then a frame of ‘blue’ light, then ‘green’. add them together and you’ll have something like an rgb image of the field. visible light isn’t as important as radio and xray though. these can be turned into some very pretty ‘colour’ images. but i expect you know this already.
( , Mon 30 Jul 2018, 10:33, Reply)

Cones detect light within a certain band
( , Mon 30 Jul 2018, 15:07, Reply)

Perception is individual and relative to previous experience.
( , Mon 30 Jul 2018, 15:18, Reply)

Colour is light of different wavelengths. Hubble can detect different wavelengths. It processes that information. It can see colours.
( , Mon 30 Jul 2018, 15:23, Reply)

The function of our cones varies.
I think we've been left arguing on the same side.
( , Mon 30 Jul 2018, 15:59, Reply)

is that the hubble’s ‘retinas’ consist only of ‘rods’, sensitive to the combined intensity of a broad spectrum of frequencies, specific colour information is not discernable, which is where filters come in.
( , Mon 30 Jul 2018, 21:53, Reply)

Colour is light of different wavelengths. Hubble can detect different wavelengths. It processes that information. It can see colours.
( , Mon 30 Jul 2018, 22:53, Reply)

by debating an important, albeit academic point about the way colour information is (post-) processed
here's a succinct cnet article to help you out
( , Mon 30 Jul 2018, 23:16, Reply)