Colour terms have been described as receiving a 'total' interpretation: a simple sentence like the flag is red is true if the flag is entirely red, and false otherwise. This paper considers the apparently simple question of whether this totality is the result of lexical meaning, or whether it is derived through semantic computation. Based on data from conjunction and additive particles, I argue that colour terms are lexically partial, not total. I therefore follow the spirit of Levinson (1983) in arguing that totality is the result of exhaustivity. However, I also show that a number of meanings predicted by an exhaustivity account of totality are not intuited. Rather, colour terms' exhaustivity is constrained in a previously unobserved way: colour terms must be in the immediate scope of the Exh operator.