Online Color Challenge
xrite.comI already know that I'm colourblind, but if anyone else is curious what those results would look like; Here ya go: http://imgur.com/a/OgnuM
Something of interest that I noticed is the fairly constant gap between areas of low colour acuity
I didn't concentrate too much but still wonder if my score of 49 is something I should be worried about? http://i.imgur.com/WqRonYi.png
Why worry about something you can't fix? (Unless, of course, your monitor, not your vision, is the problem.) Unless you "do colour" for a living and have wondered why clients aren't banging down your door, it's probably not a real-world problem for you. (If it was a problem severe enough to be a safety hazard or mangle your fashion sense to the point that a hypothetical Garanimals For Grownups might be helpful, you would probably be acutely aware of it by now.) Hell, there's even at least one "name" professional photographer (Joel Grimes) who would score worse than you did. (Your problem is relatively subtle, apart from a bit of a mess in the red/yellow/green transition. You would probably have some real difficulty distinguishing the yellows of an egg yolk, a buttercup and a lemon, or at least being able to spot them in isolation. As handicaps go, I've seen worse.)
Well, I also do front-end web development from time to time and when I do, maybe I should consider having much more external advice on design matters than before. I never thought I had any problems, that's what worried me. Thank you very much for the explanation.
I wouldn't put too much weight on it...
I tried it without much effort on my so-so Dell desktop display and got 59. Tried again on my RMBP with even less effort and got 14. However, I did have trouble in the same places both times so it's certainly demonstrating something.
Dell: http://imgur.com/MFvcSky
RMBP: http://imgur.com/61WlVQS
I'm also using a Dell display. Maybe I should fiddle with the settings a bit.
Interesting--I got a 16, but your spectra look very close to accurate to me. How severe is your colorblindness? Does it affect your daily life?
The optometrist I go to said it was a pretty severe case of colourblindness, however compared to other colourblind people I know, its not too bad. I have 2 cousins who fully cannot distinguish red from green, where as I think of mine to be closer to an optical illusion.
Green/Red street lights are easy to tell apart, but the amber light in the middle can look very close to either depending on the light level outside. A red flower amongst a green leaves is something I would overlook, unless it was pointed out to me. Then I would have to search for the flower. While looking directly at it, its pretty apparent its different from the green leaves but to spot it without previous knowledge that its there is a difficult task (This situation came up yesterday while someone was pointing out a wild rose among a hedge.).
Overall it I would say it doesn't have an effect on my daily life. I can still wire up a RJ-45 connector under good light conditions (I use my phones flashlight to do it). Oddly enough, being colourblind has made me better than my coworkers at wiring up Cat6, as I double and triple check each of my connectors quite thoroughly to make sure there is no mistakes (As me making a mistake will directly be blamed on colourblindness and my abilities will be called into question, if a coworker makes a mistake it is just that - a mistake).
A friend of mine discovered his color blindness when he joined the military and took an eye exam. He said he never noticed things like stoplights red/green being very similar because he just thought that was how it is supposed to be.
Perfect score! Test takes a bit of time, I got bored about half way through. I wonder how I would do on not a nice a monitor.
Interesting test. I got a 4, much better than I expected, on my RMBP.
Anyone else here take the XKCD color survey back in 2010: http://blog.xkcd.com/2010/05/03/color-survey-results/
I was presented with an awful lot of colors I didn't have a better word for than "tan", "beige", "green", etc, so I expected that my "color acuity score" would be poor.
Looks like I was having trouble without something to compare to, and having trouble naming, rather than having trouble identifying differences between shares. Good to know!
The scoring is weird. It places your final result on a scale from 0 to 99, but just hitting Submit without changing anything produces a score in the 800-1100 range, and my "Highest score for your gender and age range" is 1520. Why doesn't the scale reflect actual values? How could someone score substantially worse than random?
...I think something is wrong with their best/worst scores, actually. About 80% of the age/gender brackets say the best is 0 and the worst is 1520, and that consistency is weird to begin with, but some have really dramatic outliers. Women aged 50-59 range from negative 162 to 410,378,090!
Perfect colour vision, actually quite surprised at that - some of the shades in the middle were very hard to distinguish. Performed on a 5 year old Macbook - assuming my Dell IPS panel make it easier.
Surprised I got a 0 as well! At some point I was not sure if my monitor color collaboration was off or I am seeing patterns.
Is it just me, or is this for many people more a test of
a) your capacity to stare at a screen without tearing up, blurring, etc.
and
b) the quality and color profile both native and gamut-corrected etc. of your monitor?
I swear this is much more a test of my current monitor settings vs. ambient light conditions, than anything serious about my own color perception.
A physical version with color chips and the option to work under a variety of lights (LED, halogen, CF, incandescent, sunlight...) at whim would be way more revealing.
But yeah, harder to code in JS.
I scored a 12 on an uncalibrated laptop display (late 2010 MacBook Air) so I don't think that's too poor for my age range (29). Still, I would have liked to see some median scores.
My results: http://screencast.com/t/s5ohpINp
Also, by the end of the process I felt like I was going to be sick, not sure if it was the brightness (my eyes are extremely sensitive to light and I normally keep the brightness at 1 bar but I had it at full brightness for this).
I don't think the calibration of your monitor has much to do with it, since the task is to sort colors relative to each other, not absolutely. In fact, after writing that first sentence, I tweaked the heck out of my monitor color settings (the r/g/b adjustments go from 0 to 100 with defaults at 50 and I increased my red to 73 and decreased my green to 37 -- it looked like hell) and was still able to score 16.
Interesting! I would have thought the color "trueness" would have a lot more of an effect. But I guess the originator of the test took that into account.
91. Still not sure whether that's good or bad given my age range.
EDIT: Based on a brain damage study with 48 patients and 48 healthy controls "a total error score between 20 and 100 was taken as the range of normal competence for discrimination."[1]
[1] http://www.perceptionweb.com/abstract.cgi?id=v990416, "Scoring efficiency on the Farnsworth - Munsell 100-Hue test after brain damage"
I have taken this test several times over the years. I can score perfectly but if I make a mistake it is in the blue greens.
I have fun running different sorting algorithms on the tiles. The trick to getting a perfect score is doing a pass where you switch every pair of adjacent tiles. This will double the color delta on the edges if the tile is correct and halve the delta if the position was wrong. I always catch at least a blue or two on this pass.
I got a 4. Pretty terrible result for somebody as young as I am, but I suppose myopia and the the spectral aberration caused by eyeglasses makes it harder to distinguish colors.
I had a similar problem with a couple of them. They felt completely indistinguishable to me. Got a 3.
A part of it is the fact this is on a computer monitor though. If you only got a few wrong, it's probably not a big deal.
Huh. So most of them were distinguishable to you? Interesting.
I could tell a properly-placed color apart from the colors two or three spaces away from it, but not usually from its immediate neighbors. My main strategy was to assume that, if a color looked identical to each of its neighbors, it was in the right place. I got a 16, which seems decent enough.
I remember this test! I outscored the entire art department at my workplace, with an uncalibrated monitor to boot. The worst scorer? The art director. He clocked in with a score of 37. Luckily, his job has a lot more to do with layout than color precision.
I liked this test. I am running a calibrated display, so I am assuming the display is not a factor. Remember to relax your eyes frequently, starring at a color for too long tires the cone cells and might affect your test results as a fatigue effect.
This thing again!
I'm red-green colorblind, and got a 90. Ouch. It looked pretty good to me!
I really hate how they show lowest and highest scores, and no median/mean/percentiles, or anything at all that would help you decide whether your score was good or bad.
I noticed this as well, just giving the range is not really helpful. Also the scale is strange, 0 being the best. I was confused when I scored a 4...
I got a perfect score (zero). The trick is to blur your vision.
...or tilt an lcd screen.
I love stuff like this. Reminds you that what you believe is "true" is rarely what other people may believe.
Perfect ColorIQ http://grab.by/xGhe
It's still beyond my understanding, on how Pantone could copyright their colorsets...
Is using an LCD monitor "cheating?"
I got a perfect score but am neither artistic nor fashionable.
There are lots of different kinds of LCD monitors.
Using a TN LCD panel with an effective 6 bits per color channel and a compressed dynamic range would be the opposite of cheating, it would be playing with two hands tied behind your back, so to speak.
Using a wide-gamut IPS panel that is properly calibrated would be more like "cheating" (though not actually cheating if your own color perception is really what you want to test, as in that case the monitor should reproduce color as accurately as possible).
I tried on two different LCD's and got wildly different scores. On big expensive HP IPS my score was way better compared to T530 LCD.
Hmm. I got 8
It gets trickier around 0.25 and 0.75, i wonder why?
Very true ... I got a patch of four incorrect on each of the four strips (for a score of 16) and they were all straddling either the 0.25 or 0.75 marks.
Missed 4 in a row right in the green section.
Got a 6.