[HN Gopher] Is My Blue Your Blue?
___________________________________________________________________
Is My Blue Your Blue?
Author : bpierre
Score : 1343 points
Date : 2024-09-03 01:17 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (ismy.blue)
(TXT) w3m dump (ismy.blue)
| pjsg wrote:
| It is a pity that the website does not collect information about
| whether the participant is color-blind or not.
| lolinder wrote:
| To be relevant to blue/green wouldn't they need to not just
| collect a boolean but collect the _type_ of colorblindness?
| AlotOfReading wrote:
| It gets complicated if the goal is perfect accuracy. Cone
| sensitivity also varies on an individual basis even for
| color-normal people. Worse, the transfer function of the
| eyeball also varies with age as your lens yellows and
| internal fluid clouds a bit. Even holding those constant,
| brains do a lot of processing that maps what your eyes can
| physically capture into perceived colors, which are
| significantly influenced by upbringing.
|
| Plus, screens and ambient lighting. It's a lot of variables.
| jameshart wrote:
| What makes you think it's collecting any information at all?
| jccalhoun wrote:
| From the about:
|
| "What happens when I hit submit?
|
| When you hit submit, we store your responses anonymously so
| we can aggregate them later and measure aggregate naming
| curves. We don't store any information that would identify
| you personally. "
| jameshart wrote:
| Didn't notice that option. The website has neither an
| 'about' nor a 'submit' button until you have completed the
| activity.
| 65 wrote:
| I'm red-green colorblind but I surprisingly got a perfectly
| median result. I'm usually horrible at determining what is
| green but I think the blue/green distinction is less prone to
| issues with red-green colorblind people.
| Perenti wrote:
| There's a few 'kinds' of red-green colorblind as I understand
| it. It has to do with whether you're missing a type of cone,
| or whether the frequency response of a cone type is shifted.
| I knew someone who had never experienced what others call
| "green" - all things supposed to be green are brown. I on the
| other hand see some green things, but a lot of things other
| people call green are brown, maroon or even purple. Pastels
| are the worst.
| jes5199 wrote:
| I have mild tritanomaly ("blue-yellow colorblindness"), which
| _directly_ affects blue vs green color discrimination, and I
| landed at 168, "greener than 85% of the population"
| Perenti wrote:
| I'm deuteroanomalous, and I got 165 - greener than 94%.
| Turquoise is blue (well yeah, it always has been!). People
| often tell me things are green that clearly are not, so I'm
| wondering what this means. Does the "165, which is greener..."
| thing mean that I only say it's green when other people would
| say "very green"?
| avodonosov wrote:
| Great site.
|
| I wish they had a Turquoise option.
| TechRemarker wrote:
| I assume that would defeat the purpose, since turquoise is blue
| and green. And while for most the more initial more obvious
| blue or greens are easier, when close to the middle of in
| between blue and green (aka turquoise), that's where it can get
| confusing, and this test helps to show if your perception leans
| more towards blue or green and by how much.
| avodonosov wrote:
| Then maybe allow non binary choice. Like 0.7 green / 0.3
| blue. Becase when I see a mix of blue and green and there is
| only two buttons, I choose green. Or maybe I should treat the
| buttons as "> 0.5 green" and "> 0.5 blue".
|
| Imho violet vs purple are difficult to distinguis (classify),
| maybe they can add a page for that too. These two colors are
| not spectral neighbors, so may be more interesting.
|
| One more note - modern RGB displays do not produce real
| turquoise, just combinations of G and B. Are RGB(0,1,10) and
| RGB(0,10,100) on the same position of the scale between green
| and blue? On the final diagram, how is the horisontal axis
| computed?
| TechRemarker wrote:
| > Becase when I see a mix of blue and green and there is
| only two buttons, I choose green. If you choose green,
| because you see a slight more tint of green than blue, yes,
| that's what you should do for this particular test. Just as
| you should choose blue if you see slightly more blue. For
| many when close to the middle hard to tell since have to go
| with your eyes and gut. But if anytime you are unsure if
| blue or green, if you always choose green regardless, then
| the test presumably wouldn't provide accurate results. > Or
| maybe I should treat the buttons as "> 0.5 green" and ">
| 0.5 blue". Yes, with each color they show, it's asking you
| if you see green (aka more green than blue) or blue (aka
| more blue than green). With the test starting off easier
| and then shades much closer to the middle (either left or
| right of the middle) where much harder to tell without a
| color picker, and everyone's eyes will be different and
| close to the middle you will probably see most as either
| blue or green.
| Maxmo74 wrote:
| It really would be helpful to have the x and y axes
| labelled.
| avodonosov wrote:
| Yes.
|
| The horizontal axis is Hue of the HSL color model, as I
| learned from the About section (the middle button after
| the test completes).
| steve1977 wrote:
| > Then maybe allow non binary choice. Like 0.7 green / 0.3
| blue. Becase when I see a mix of blue and green and there
| is only two buttons, I choose green.
|
| And (as far as I understand), this bias is what the test is
| supposed to detect.
| hydrox24 wrote:
| Neat website, and lovely to use. I wonder if the test needs to be
| slightly more sophisticated?
|
| My results seem to depend on whether the starting colour is blue
| or green. If it starts with blue I will categorise more of the
| turquoise as blue, and if it starts as green I will categorise
| more of it as green.
| Jeremy1026 wrote:
| Interesting. My wife and I both took this. We used the same
| laptop at the same screen settings. I'm slightly more bluer than
| she is, but we are both pretty squarely less green.
| ww520 wrote:
| Does it depend on the monitor's color setting?
| epiccoleman wrote:
| I mean, it obviously does, to some extent. I can certainly
| manipulate my settings to make colors very different than the
| "default."
| fogleman wrote:
| I think this is flawed. You quickly end up on a color that's
| clearly not "blue" or "green" and you're unlikely to keep hitting
| "this is green" several times in a row, conceding that ok, fine,
| maybe this is blue, whatever. You're basically measuring how many
| times people are willing to click the same button in a row.
|
| Edit: Possible improvements: changing the wording to "this is
| MORE green" and "this is MORE blue" and randomizing the order in
| which they are shown, somehow. I realize you're just doing some
| kind of binary search, narrowing the color range.
|
| This is not to mention color calibration of your monitor, or your
| eyes adjusting / fatiguing to the bold color over time...
| jsharpe wrote:
| Exactly my thoughts! Thanks for putting it so clearly.
| fsckboy wrote:
| > _I think this is flawed. You quickly end up on a color that
| 's clearly not "blue" or "green" and you're unlikely to keep
| hitting "this is green" several times in a row, conceding that
| ok, fine, maybe this is blue, whatever._
|
| I agree with you, the whole thing is flawed when it could be
| better. When you ask the question "is my blue your blue?", you
| are evoking the old philosophical question, and it's a question
| about color perception, not words. This test did not test color
| perception, it tested "what word do you use?"
|
| I think of blue as a pure color, and green as a wide range of
| colors all the way to yellow, to me another pure color. so if
| there's any green at all in it, I'm going to call it green.
| (maybe it's left over from kindergarten blending "primary
| colors". also, while I like green grass, I don't like green as
| a color, so any green I see is a likely to make me think, ew,
| green) But in terms of what I see, I can only assume I'm seeing
| the same thing as everybody else is because the test is not
| testing it. Just because I call something green doesn't mean I
| don't see all the blue in it.
|
| > _Edit: Possible improvements: changing the wording to "this
| is MORE green" and "this is MORE blue" and randomizing the
| order in which they are shown, somehow. I realize you're just
| doing some kind of binary search, narrowing the color range._
|
| yes, the test should show you pure blue, then a turquoise mix,
| then pure green, and a ... etc. It should also retest you on
| things you already answered to measure where you are
| consistent.
| yarg wrote:
| I do think that the philosophical question could potentially
| be approachable in a modern context;
|
| Show people a colour and map their brain activity - the level
| of similarity between two people's colour perceptions should
| be reflected by similarities in the activity.
| lazide wrote:
| Why do you think that would be the case?
|
| One persons 'blue' activity could be different than
| another's while still being the same wavelength of light
| and general perception.
| yarg wrote:
| The philosophical question is not dealing with the
| objective external reality;
|
| It's a question of subjective experience - and that
| experience should be reflected in electrical activity.
|
| Given the fact that the broad structure of the brain is
| largely shared across members of the species, similar
| stimulation should trigger similar activity in the same
| regions of the brain.
|
| If the same colour triggers markedly different
| activities, it would not be unreasonable to conclude that
| the subjective experiences are not the same.
| lazide wrote:
| Except that's literally not how humans are wired or
| develop - even nerve paths and other fine grained details
| in our bodies show significant divergence, and there are
| major macro level differences readily apparent even based
| on gender, color blindness, etc.
|
| Honestly, it would be shocking if it were even a little
| true beyond 'frontal cortex' levels of granularity. And
| even then, Phineas Gage type situations make it clear
| that may not actually be required either.
|
| And that means completely different individual activity
| can trigger similar subjective experiences as much as
| similar activity can trigger different subjective
| experiences, no?
| yarg wrote:
| If that were the case then there's no way that they'd be
| able to extract images from people's neural activity, and
| yet they've started doing that very thing.
| lazide wrote:
| Occasionally, after training on specific individuals, for
| those specific individuals.
| amenhotep wrote:
| It sounds like you're in possession of a solution to the
| hard problem of consciousness, you should alert your
| nearest philosophy department.
| yarg wrote:
| No real need for the snark; if we dismiss the notion of
| human divinity and look at ourselves as broadly fixed
| macro-structure computational machines (like any other
| broadly deterministic machine) similar signals
| propagating over the same sets of sub-computers will
| generally (accepting the undetectable, such as
| steganographically hidden homomorphic compute contexts)
| be reflective of similar underlying operations.
|
| If I were to imagine a warrior, and his general
| perception of the colour red, I may find the way his
| brain processes the colour more closely to a rival
| warrior than his wife the gardener.
|
| A real world example; London taxi drivers and bus drivers
| show distinct patterns of changes to the hippocampus.
|
| https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17024677/
|
| The way that the mapping data is stored will be heavily
| bias towards being spatially reflective of the real world
| counterpart.
|
| Note the bias will be towards a degree structural
| isomorphism, one internal 2D + 1T spatiotemporal surface
| map of the city might be a rotation and/or
| reprioritisation of another - but they will have a shared
| basis (convergent compute simulations of biased subsets
| of the same real world structures), and when navigating
| from point A to point B, the path and nature(though not
| the propagation vector) of the electrical activity of
| both will be reflection of the same real-world surface
| map.
|
| Now I say spatiotemporal - because the driver going from
| A to B in the morning will develop different expectations
| of the levels of traffic at different parts of the
| journey.
| lazide wrote:
| Except the internal structure is randomly seeded for each
| instance.
|
| Or do you think fingerprints are the most random thing in
| humans?
|
| There may be general patterns from above, but the actual
| details vary immensely when you zoom in.
|
| Large populations may still roughly conform to a normal
| curve, but the volume under the deviations is still
| _huge_. And the dispersion is immense.
| yarg wrote:
| Refer to structural isomorphism above.
| lazide wrote:
| That's just hand waving away all the interesting details
| so you can claim everything is the same though?
| pminimax wrote:
| People have done this. See, e.g. Brouwer and Heeger (2009),
| Decoding and Reconstructing Color from Responses in Human
| Visual Cortex.
| yarg wrote:
| Thanks.
|
| https://www.jneurosci.org/content/jneuro/29/44/13992.full
| .pd...
| yarg wrote:
| I'd prefer blue/green/neither.
|
| With the third colour, I just thought "no, that's teal", and my
| decision was (as you suggested) semi-arbitrary.
| adamhartenz wrote:
| but is the teal more green or blue. You should be able to
| answer that
| yarg wrote:
| Is zero more positive or negative? You should be able to
| answer that.
| jdiff wrote:
| More positive. -0 is more negative.
| yarg wrote:
| It's neutral (-1 * 0 [?] +1 * 0); don't confuse it for an
| infinitesimal (which can be positive or negative).
| lll-o-lll wrote:
| Nah, zero definitely feels a bit more positive to me.
| zeven7 wrote:
| I think they were referring to -0 in floating point,
| which does exist as a separate value from +0
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signed_zero
| Feathercrown wrote:
| But teal isn't a single point, it's a range. You can have
| teals that are more blue or more green than each other;
| they can't all be zero. Whichever one you choose to be
| the true transition point between blue and green, there
| will be teals that are more blue or green than that one.
| yarg wrote:
| Sure, but there's also a subrange at the (subjective)
| centre of that range that will not be perceived as either
| more blue or more green.
|
| And the teal that I referenced in my earlier comment was
| (for me) such a colour.
| nayroclade wrote:
| Saying it's a subrange implies you can perceive
| differences in tone within it. In which case, reframe the
| question as "is this shade of teal closer to the blue or
| green end of the subrange" if you like.
| yarg wrote:
| No it absolutely doesn't.
|
| It's a well know fact that people are unable to
| distinguish colours that are too close together.
|
| You could even have a smooth gradient from colour 'a'
| through colour 'b' to colour 'c', where it's possible to
| distinguish 'a' from 'c' but not to distinguish 'b' from
| either 'a' or 'c'.
| reichstein wrote:
| That's not how it works.
|
| Maybe if I'm given two colors inside that range, I can
| say which is bluer and which is greener. Given just one
| color, I simply cannot say that it's green or blue, or
| even if it's more green than blue or vice versa.
|
| I stopped at the 3rd or 4th come because I couldn't give
| a honest answer. That makes the test useless. I can't
| complete it with correct answers, and if I give incorrect
| answers, the conclusion is useless.
| lifthrasiir wrote:
| I think the main point of this test was to determine the
| position of teal in your case, as your definition of teal
| _is_ the midpoint(-ish range) between blue and green.
| (For me it 's more blue though.)
| yarg wrote:
| Then call it something else. But the point stands that
| there's a point at and around which the colours are
| neither blue nor green.
| lifthrasiir wrote:
| I mean, a good test would be able to detect that neither-
| blue-nor-green range and approximate midpoint as well,
| and it should be fair to say the midpoint is indeed the
| threshold between blue and green. (I don't think the
| current version of test can do this, though.)
| yarg wrote:
| I actually checked that at the end of the test (when it
| shows the gradient image with the response overlay).
|
| There were two distinct points, one for blue and one for
| green, where my mind would place the transition to the
| colour in between.
|
| (And yes, on one end it's bluer and on the other end
| greener, but (much like a shade of orange is neither red
| nor yellow) the colours are still not either green or
| blue.)
| delecti wrote:
| Then by that framing, the test is asking you to decide
| what hue value is the "zero" between the
| positive/negative blue/green. Is the wording imperfect?
| Sure, but the intent was still entirely clear.
| mewpmewp2 wrote:
| True zero is very rare. So you are saying that teal just
| happens to be the true zero?
| yarg wrote:
| No, I'm saying that the sliver of a chasm between the
| colour in isolate, and what I subconsciously imagine the
| midpoint to be, is so damned thin that were I to look at
| the colours side by side, I could not distinguish one
| from t'other.
|
| And (even if I could) a bluish teal would no more be a
| blue than a reddish orange a red.
| antisthenes wrote:
| Nope. On RGB, they are equal parts blue/green.
|
| Since most people are viewing this on a monitor, the
| question is pointless.
| SamBam wrote:
| It's not about how an RGB monitor produces the color,
| it's about how it's perceived. #00ffff ("Cyan" or "Aqua"
| [1]) looks bluer to me than green, while #008080 ("Teal")
| looks significantly greener, despite both colors using
| equal amounts of blue and green in RGB.
|
| 1. https://htmlcolorcodes.com/color-names/
| Narishma wrote:
| It's more teal.
| pminimax wrote:
| It is common practice in psychometrics to use two levels in a
| forced choice and model responses as a logistic regression,
| which is what's done here. Adding an N/A option turns the
| thing into an ordered logistic regression with unknown
| levels, which is tricky to fit, but it's possible. Having
| done a lot of psychophysics, having more options generally
| doesn't make the task easier.
| bofadeez wrote:
| Sounds like psychometrics is unsuitable for modeling this
| problem, according to what you're saying. When you have a
| hammer everything looks like a nail.
| zarzavat wrote:
| The way that XKCD did it is the best, you ask people to
| give a name to each color then the responses are entirely
| natural and unprompted.
|
| I don't think that forced choice can give accurate results
| if a substantial number of people perceive green and blue
| as being non-adjacent - i.e. there exists a color between
| green and blue (turquoise/cyan/teal).
|
| Otherwise it's like asking people whether a color is red or
| yellow, when it's clearly a shade of orange.
| ljsprague wrote:
| Some shades of orange are closer to red and some are
| closer to yellow.
| zarzavat wrote:
| Yes but saying that a shade of orange is closer to yellow
| is different from saying that it is yellow.
|
| Orange is closer to green than blue but I wouldn't say
| that it's a shade of green. It's just orange.
| cubefox wrote:
| > Otherwise it's like asking people whether a color is
| red or yellow, when it's clearly a shade of orange.
|
| No it's like asking people whether a color is red or
| green, when it's clearly a shade of yellow.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_wheel#/media/File%3AL
| ine...
| tripzilch wrote:
| Are you sure that it is common practice for a problem that
| has three valid answers A, B and C, to only allow people to
| answer A or C?
|
| Your website is not talking about "levels" of colour.
|
| It's asking " _is_ this blue or green ", not "is this
| _closer_ to blue or closer to green ".
|
| The question (1) " _is_ this blue or green " has three
| valid answers: blue, green or neither.
|
| The question (2) "is this _closer_ to blue or green " only
| has two valid answers.
|
| I would assume that with these types of surveys, the first
| thing to do is to qualify the proper categorization of the
| question.
|
| Sorry to say, but to me it seems that almost all of the
| confusion in the discussion here is because you're asking
| question (1) (which has three valid answers) but expecting
| an answer from (2) (which indeed has two valid answers).
| EasyMark wrote:
| That's why I took the test 5 times, and my scores varied
| between 63% and 69% "green" so I took the average at 66.4
| elcomet wrote:
| But this choice has very limited impact; as you are already
| in a very narrow window of color
| tptacek wrote:
| One issue with it: I did it 3 times and got 3 very different
| results.
| Retr0id wrote:
| Likewise. I think for me there's quite a wide band of colours
| in the middle that I consider to be "neither/either", so I'm
| basically just picking a random answer for those.
|
| A modified version of the test that finds two boundaries
| (green/neither/blue) could be interesting.
|
| Or maybe it just needs to take more samples, in a more random
| order.
| wzdd wrote:
| Same. Some of them are neither obviously blue nor obviously
| green, so what the test was measuring for me was what I was
| thinking about at the time, the decision I'd previously made,
| whether my mouse was currently hovering over "blue" or
| "green", etc.
| adamhartenz wrote:
| Yup, but at that level, you are not affecting the results very
| much. So it all works out
| pminimax wrote:
| The order _is_ randomized. Hit reset and you 'll get a
| different sequence. The sequence is also adaptive (not a binary
| search---it's hitting specific points of the tail of a sigmoid
| in a logistic regression it's building as you go along). Try it
| a few times and you'll see how reproducible it is for you.
|
| It of course depends on the calibration of your monitor. One of
| the reasons I did this project is I wanted to see if there were
| systematic differences in color names and balance in the wild,
| for example, by device type (desktop vs. Android vs. iPhone),
| time of day (night mode), country (Sapir-Whorf), etc.
| Rastonbury wrote:
| These results would be interesting
| lifthrasiir wrote:
| The sequence itself should be converging however, right? I
| feel that there should be some random jumps outside of the
| current confidence interval so that contextual aspects can be
| filtered out or at least recognized.
| isoprophlex wrote:
| Yes, exactly this. Because it seems to be converging right
| now, I quickly get the feeling that there's no meaningful
| choice, after the first three prompts you end up with
| something that's neither green nor blue. Re-taking the test
| gave me a very different score.
|
| It might work better for me to do some contrastive
| questioning: show a definite green followed by an
| intermediary color, then a definite blue followed by an
| intermediate color.
| wodenokoto wrote:
| The whole point of asserting where your border between
| green and blue is, is to ask about colors that are in
| between the two. It doesn't make sense to ask is
| RGB(0,0,255) blue to you? Well, unless you are color
| blind it is.
| isoprophlex wrote:
| Of course, that's clear as day; the idea is to reset your
| presumptions from the previous trial and sample the
| ambiguous colors in a more consistent way, by priming you
| from the extreme ends of the green/blue scale.
|
| See it as a way to avoid perceptual hysteresis.
| terryf wrote:
| > and you're unlikely to keep hitting "this is green" several
| times in a row
|
| I did. Because it was green!
| yread wrote:
| Agreed. It would be more accurate to show the final gradient
| (without the curve) and let people choose where is the
| boundary. It wasn't even clear what the actual task is
| arendtio wrote:
| Yeah, it felt like a trick question to me.
|
| Because the second color I saw was somewhat like turquoise and
| the site is called 'Is My Blue Your Blue,' I decided that
| everything that you say yes to colors would be blue and
| everything else would be green. I never saw a green until the
| result was displayed :D
| larschdk wrote:
| I am unable to answer many of them. I see mostly turquoise, not
| blue or green.
| KaiserPro wrote:
| VFX engineer here. Yes we used to cailbrate monitors and work
| in the dark.
|
| However one of the key people that built our colour pipeline
| was also colour blind, so its not actually a requirement, so
| long as you use the right tools.
|
| Most people aren't that sensitive to colour, especially if its
| out of context. a minority of people aren't that good at
| relative chromaticity as well (as in is this colour
| bluer/greener/redder than that one) But a lot of people are.
|
| Language affects how you perceive colour as well.
|
| But to say the experiment is flawed I think misses the nuance,
| which is capturing how people see colour _in the real world_.
| Sure some people will have truetone on, or some other daily
| colour balance fiddling. But thats still how people see the
| world as it is, rather than in isolation.
| MisterBastahrd wrote:
| I once worked for a company that had a designer who was color
| blind. He would always show up wearing the exact same outfit
| every day: turns out that he was REALLY color blind, and so
| he just gave up and bought 7 long sleeved shirts and 7 pants,
| all black. Didn't work out so well for him in the designs...
| most companies don't want monochrome websites.
| Al-Khwarizmi wrote:
| I definitely have the bias you mention. In my case I don't
| think it's mainly due to not wanting to push the same button
| many times in a row, but because I compare with the previous
| color, so if previously I was already somewhat unsure but I
| chose green and now it became slightly bluer, it "must" be
| blue, right?
|
| I think I can get over it, but it requires conscious effort and
| even then, who knows. Bias is often unconscious.
|
| Another possible improvement would be to alternate the binary
| search colors with some randomly-generated hues. Even if those
| answers are outright ignored, and the process becomes longer, I
| think they would help to alleviate that bias. At least you
| wouldn't be directly comparing to the previous color.
| joegibbs wrote:
| I got "Your boundary is at hue 167, greener than 86% of the
| population. For you, turquoise is blue". I think I consider
| darker and yellower colours as green - for instance tennis balls
| are firmly green to me, but a lot of people say they're yellow.
|
| I wonder if this has anything to do with your upbringing. I grew
| up on a farm in a dry part of Australia, where the grass didn't
| often get very green. Most of the year it was yellow. If you
| associate green with grass and the grass is yellow, maybe you
| associate green with a yellower colour?
| epiccoleman wrote:
| I got a very high "green" threshold too - 95% averaged across
| three runs, since my first result seemed surprisingly high.
|
| It's funny though - I feel like I'm less likely to go green on
| the other direction too. I'd probably say a tennis ball is
| right on the line, and seems more yellow than green to me too.
|
| Maybe I'm some sort of green gatekeeper, and I don't want to
| dilute my personal definition with lesser greens. Green is my
| favorite color, I'd say, so maybe that's something to do with
| it.
| Jeremy1026 wrote:
| It's very cultural. For example, Japan used the same word for
| green and blue, so their green light on traffic lights is as
| blue as possible while conforming to international standards
| for the light to be "green".
|
| Also, there is a pretty well done video by Vox on how color
| names are influenced by culture
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMqZR3pqMjg
| WesolyKubeczek wrote:
| Thank gods at least red is red.
|
| In all rulebooks, lights are red-yellow-green, but in many
| places, I can see red-amber-turquoise. Now a sure way to get
| a traffic police officer livid is to call the yellow light
| "amber" or "orange"...
| pests wrote:
| My friend got a "Running an Amber" ticket when we were
| teens outside metro Detroit, MI. I had never heard it
| called that color before but that small memory is always on
| my mind when the light changes as I'm crossing.
| petercooper wrote:
| In the UK, the yellow light is officially an "amber"
| light in terms of driver regulations and statutes, such
| that some anally retentive type is always bound to
| correct anyone who dares say "yellow".
| azepoi wrote:
| It's orange in french
| tzot wrote:
| In Greek too.
| dhosek wrote:
| The blue-green distinction is something that tends to come
| late in most or maybe all language families. Ancient Greek
| also used the same word for blue and green. As I recall, the
| first color words a language gains are black and white,
| followed by red. Blue-green is one of the last distinctions
| made.
| numpad0 wrote:
| I think this might be a bit overblown. "why do we call it
| _blue_ signal? " is a common 3-5 years old question in Japan.
|
| Old Japanese traffic signals had blue tinted lenses, like
| ultramarine blue. Those lenses were used in conjunction with
| warm yellow incandescent lamps, technology available at the
| time. Deep blue + warm yellow = green.
|
| Over time the green color must have normalized, without laws
| and slogans not reflecting that. And nowadays they're green
| LEDs.
| arrowsmith wrote:
| Not just Japanese - many languages use the same word for
| "green" and "blue". Linguists call it "grue".
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue%E2%80%93green_distinction.
| ..
|
| E.g. the Vietnamese word _xanh_ means "grue", and to
| distinguish between green and blue you say "sky xanh" or
| "leaf xany".
| petercooper wrote:
| This has begun to happen in the UK as well, and I'm
| struggling to get anyone else to see it. Traffic lights
| installed in the past couple of years seem to use a new style
| of LED that emits a turquoise light instead of green. I took
| a picture and looked at the RGB value and the G/B were equal.
| Everyone else I ask says they still look green. Here's an
| example: https://static.independent.co.uk/2022/04/22/00/21135
| 757-1ac1...
| azepoi wrote:
| It can be cultural. Turquoise is often called bleu turquoise in
| french. So it's more of a blue to me.
| seszett wrote:
| Yes, and I'd like to see a breakdown of the answers per
| country.
|
| I'm French and my boundary is at 167 apparently (though I
| have a poor screen and depending on where I look, I could say
| that even further towards the green side is still blue). But
| a regular occurrence at home is my wife (who speaks a
| different language, we don't live in France) talking about <<
| the green table >> while I'm trying hard to find any green
| table around us, until I realize she's talking about _that_
| turquoise table that I call the blue table. Also happens on
| the red /pink and pink/purple boundaries.
| warpech wrote:
| Agree. If the author collects the IP address of the
| response, maybe countries can be mapped retrospectively.
| e40 wrote:
| Got "Your boundary is at hue 175, bluer than 65% of the
| population"
| dabber21 wrote:
| got the exact same
| Sateeshm wrote:
| My boundary was at 89%
| hettygreen wrote:
| Am I missing something? The ambiguous ones are neither blue nor
| green, they're just cyan.
| kstrauser wrote:
| If you _had_ to say that cyan was more blue or green, which
| would you pick?
| TechRemarker wrote:
| Sorry do you mean in general, if I went to a paint store and
| they showed me a cyan patch? It would depend on that
| particular shade of cyan if it was more green or blue, and
| then on top of that my eyes bias towards green/blue. Or are
| you asking for the results of my own test here which show my
| particular bias of turquoise (as the author refers to or cyan
| as you refer to)? Took the test a couple types and varies but
| for me say I see turquoise as green (though close to 50%, so
| if took a few more times imagine may land blue sometimes
| and/or depend on if I'm viewing in a dark room or light room.
| qiqitori wrote:
| I'd pick... u wot m8.
| TechRemarker wrote:
| Sorry not sure I understand. Yes, with each color that
| appears the I (or any user) has to pick which color they
| see more of, blue or green. Since every color shown unless
| presumably exactly 50% between green and blue, will either
| be more blue or more green. So you/I/users have to pick if
| they see more green or blue. The person next to you might
| see a hint of blue and you may see a hint of green for the
| same color since our eyes all work differently. UPDATE-Oh
| you may have been asking that of the person I was replying
| to initially.
| kaashif wrote:
| If I had to say zero is more positive or negative, I'd
| probably say positive. But in reality it's neither.
| hypertele-Xii wrote:
| Cyan is literally an even mix of blue and green.
| postalrat wrote:
| So if there is only one cyan then then it should be easy to
| label something as green or blue.
| alexlll862 wrote:
| Where do you put yellow on the purple-red scale? There is
| only one yellow after all, it should be easy to label
| something as purple or red
| TechRemarker wrote:
| Yes, that's the point of the test, to see how you perceive the
| ambiguous ones. That is, at the end it shows the chart with the
| left 50% is green and right 50% is blue. The turquoise in the
| middle is what is hard to tell if green (aka on the left 50% or
| blue aka on the right 50%). For many the result line isn't down
| the middle but more to the left or right, and thus shows if you
| see turquoise (the ambiguous colors) more as blue or green. The
| text at the bottom of the test should put the answer in
| words/numbers.
| the__alchemist wrote:
| It sounds like he or she perceived the color in question as
| cyan, which isn't an option.
| TechRemarker wrote:
| Since cyan means 50% green and 50% blue, other than exactly
| in the middle of the chart, all the colors shown are either
| to the left of cyan(the middle), or to the right. So all
| the colors are either slightly to a lot blue or slightly to
| a lot green. This test is testing where everyone middle
| essentially is. If there were as cyan/turqouise option,
| that would be a very different test, I imagine essentially
| testing to lines, where the line between blue and
| cyan/ambiguity begins and the line between green and
| cyan/ambiguity begins requiring I imagine several more
| questions to get that answer and would only then be showing
| two lines on the graph, vs this test which is able to say
| if you lean more to the right or left of the middle of blue
| to green.
| declan_roberts wrote:
| That's the fun part, where do you draw the line in comparison
| to other people?
| rhplus wrote:
| I think the whole point is that the blue/green distinction is
| very subjective and may be culturally influenced for certain
| populations:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue%E2%80%93green_distinction...
|
| The example we see every day in traffic lights. In most parts
| of the world we'd unambiguously call it a "green" light,
| despite the fact they're almost always cyan, with the blue
| component (apparently) helping drivers with red/green color-
| blindness.
|
| https://engineering.stackexchange.com/questions/53255/what-c...
| p1necone wrote:
| Cyan is just another shade of blue to me. The colour you get
| when you google image search "cyan" is definitely more blue
| than green to my eyes.
| kaetemi wrote:
| That's partially a cultural effect of many peers calling cyan
| blue.
|
| Same as chartreuse and turquoise just getting called a weird
| shade of green, names affect perception.
|
| Worse, if you call cyan blue, turquoise may become a weird
| shade of blue too, even though it's not even close.
| hypertele-Xii wrote:
| Open up any digital drawing program. Adjust the color. Max
| out green and blue. That's cyan. Equal parts both.
| jjk166 wrote:
| Open up that same drawing program on a display with a
| different color balance. Max out green and blue. What color
| is that?
|
| RGB values are an arbitrary color coordinate system which
| does not match up 1:1 with human language.
| mbb70 wrote:
| Hey I got 179, which the site says is 1 away from exactly
| halfway.
|
| Being good at the difference between green and blue is normal to
| want and possible to achieve!
| doe_eyes wrote:
| I suspect it tests your monitor and monitor calibration as much
| as your color perception. In particular, sRGB displays have a
| pretty severely limited green gamut. If you have a wide-gamut
| display, the test is probably gonna appear different.
|
| But another problem is with displaying the colors essentially
| full-window, which is going to be nearly-full-screen for many
| users. When we're staring at a screen with a particular tint, our
| eyes quickly do "auto white balance" that skews the results. It's
| the mechanism behind a bunch of optical illusions.
|
| To address that last problem, I think the color display area
| should be much smaller, or you should be shown all hues at once
| and asked to position a cut-off point.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| These sorts of tests also need to be done in controlled
| background lighting. Whether people are doing this in a dark
| room, in a sunny kitchen, or under green led lighting would be
| a greater factor than anything being tested.
| AlotOfReading wrote:
| I don't think that's necessary for an informal test. Human
| color perception is _extremely_ good at compensating for that
| and modern screens are relatively uniform and uniform
| besides. Cultural differences like the person downthread
| saying they consider anything with the slightest hint of
| green to be "green" seem far more impactful.
| TuringNYC wrote:
| >> These sorts of tests also need to be done in controlled
| background lighting. Whether people are doing this in a dark
| room, in a sunny kitchen, or under green led lighting would
| be a greater factor than anything being tested.
|
| Whether its a dark room or sunny kitchen, i'm not sure
| whether Turquoise is ever going to be blue or green. The
| entire question seems more like wordplay.
| krick wrote:
| I mean, it really just tests arbitrary word usage. I have no
| fucking clue if turquoise is supposed to be "green" or "blue",
| it's turquoise!
| ibash wrote:
| Nah turquoise is green.
| MathMonkeyMan wrote:
| Apparently I thought so as well. Then again, my display is
| in night mode...
| ibash wrote:
| Oh shit. Turned off night mode and switched sides!
| ninetyninenine wrote:
| No turquoise is blue.
| chronogamous wrote:
| Within the ISCC-NBS System of Color Designation Turqoise
| (#40E0D0) is classified as a brilliant bluish green.
| Turquoise blue (#00FFEF) is close to turquoise on the
| color wheel, but slightly more blue.
|
| More metrics, including sRGB, can be found on
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turquoise_(color)
| langcss wrote:
| A bit like "is this hotdog overpriced" amd trying to binary
| search the exact cent where it became overpriced.
| Bluecobra wrote:
| That's easy, any hot dog that is more than $1.50 USD is
| overpriced.
| eCa wrote:
| But you get the price in another currency, and don't know
| the exact exchange rate (in place of monitor
| calibration).
| pjc50 wrote:
| Parent was a joke about the Costco fixed price hotdog.
|
| UK Costco hotdogs are PS1.50, which is not equal to
| $1.50, reflecting both its arbitrary nature and that UK
| purchasing power is weaker than the exchange rate would
| appear. (Computer books are a frequent offender here of
| having the same $ and PS prices)
| mrweasel wrote:
| That might be a language issue. In Danish it's common to use
| "turkis bla", i.e. turquoise blue. Then again, you can also
| use "turkis gron", turquoise green.
| mewpmewp2 wrote:
| But with green/blue there is certain opinion that I have at
| least.
| arcxi wrote:
| the real question is whether orange is red or yellow
| hypertele-Xii wrote:
| Turquoise is dark cyan, no? So equal parts green and blue.
| pminimax wrote:
| Author here, yes, it tests a mix of your monitor calibration
| and colour naming. The two types of inferences you can make
| with this are:
|
| 1. If two people take the test with the same device, in the
| same lighting (e.g. in the same room), their relative
| thresholds should be fairly stable. 2. If you average over
| large populations, you can estimate population thresholds,
| marginalizing over monitor calibrations.
|
| The most interesting thing for me is that while cyan (#00ffff)
| is nominally halfway between blue and green, most people's
| thresholds, averaged over monitor calibrations, imply that cyan
| is classified as blue. I was not expecting that the median
| threshold (hue 174) would be so deep into the greens.
| ddejohn wrote:
| I'd love a last step in the test where you're presented with
| the gradient, but before showing the distribution and the
| user's score. Allow the user to select where they consider
| their threshold, then display the final results.
| aaomidi wrote:
| Thats genius
| pminimax wrote:
| That's fun! I bet people would tend to nudge the threshold
| toward the middle of the scale. Or you could do a sorting
| interface, etc.
| ddejohn wrote:
| A sorting interface would be another neat step! And yeah,
| I think most would gravitate toward the middle. Seeing
| how "far off" you are would be fun :)
|
| Ooh maybe have the user slide a gradient left and right
| inside a window, aligning the center of the window with
| where they think the line is between blue and green
| (i.e., instruct the user to fill the window with equal
| amounts of green and blue).
| martyvis wrote:
| This test gets you sort hues along a gradient.
| https://www.xrite.com/hue-test
| smeej wrote:
| It tells me to rotate my device, implying it should work
| on my phone, but I can't figure out how to move the
| colors. Holding and sliding doesn't work. Tapping doesn't
| seem to do anything.
|
| Does it not actually work on mobile?
| martyvis wrote:
| Works on my android fine.
| Veve wrote:
| Ilovehue and ilovehue 2 are excellent mobile games around
| this sorting idea, they're quite zen and for all ages,
| highly recommendend!
| rsyring wrote:
| I really wanted to be able to drag my vertical bar on the
| distribution to the right just a bit. :)
|
| When I could see the entire gradient, I actually thought
| green continued to the right a bit more than where my line
| was.
| egypturnash wrote:
| I got hue 174 as my threshold and really I just wanted to say
| "neither, this is turquoise/teal" for most of the questions.
| But blue/green was the only option.
| plorkyeran wrote:
| Same, my answer was "neither" after the third color so I
| just alternated between blue and green until it stopped.
| dotancohen wrote:
| Try looking away between tests.
|
| I tried twice and got 182, then 184. Which I suppose it
| more or less consistent.
| ljsprague wrote:
| "Neither" is the coward's choice.
| jsvlrtmred wrote:
| Is a crab a mammal or a reptile?
| pepve wrote:
| I'm not gonna fight you on that.
| xattt wrote:
| Is a hot dog a sandwich?
| bumby wrote:
| Of course. It's a bologna sandwich in log form.
| Suppafly wrote:
| >It's a bologna sandwich in log form.
|
| Finally someone else realizes that hotdogs are basically
| just bologna.
| jimz wrote:
| Is a burrito a sandwich?
|
| (Yes in New York and Indiana, no in Massachusetts, and
| the law is silent elsewhere. Personally I believe that
| because the torta exists, the burrito may have some
| characteristics of a sandwich but should be considered a
| wrap)
| Nav_Panel wrote:
| No, it's a calzone, per https://cuberule.com/
| falcolas wrote:
| It's an insect. 6 legs, exoskeleton, etc.
| digging wrote:
| I know you're making a joke about classification, but
| crabs have 10 legs, not 6.
| falcolas wrote:
| My bad, I misremembered. 6 walking legs, two swimming
| legs, two pincer legs.
| hilbert42 wrote:
| Logically, a color, green etc., is a 'simple' notion and
| cannot be explained terms of anything simpler. With color
| we have to revert to a different description, here
| wavelength. But wavelength is not human perception (and
| we can't explain such perception in simpler terms).
| riffraff wrote:
| Fun, I got 174 and when I saw the results my reaction was
| "but that is not turquoise!" which I suppose means I either
| don't know what turquoise is, or my screen has bad
| calibration/gamut.
| dsego wrote:
| I got 174 as well.
| aaroninsf wrote:
| Me too... Apple Silicon era MBA, with Samsung 4K display
| with corresponding U28D590 driver...
| jimnotgym wrote:
| I don't think those specs make a difference. You would
| need a wide gamut display and a hardware calibrator to be
| sure you were looking at the colour as it should be
| naijaboiler wrote:
| Nobody knows what turquoise is
| dim13 wrote:
| Funny, 174 by me too.
| bryanrasmussen wrote:
| it looks like my default is if there is 40% green in that
| it is green. Thus it told me that turquoise for me is
| green. Which if I look at Turquoise the RGB color, that is
| green. If I look at Turquoise the mineral about half the
| time it is green and half the time blue.
| Tor3 wrote:
| Same thinking here, though I got 184
| wodenokoto wrote:
| Me too, but I liked the conclusion ("to you, turquoise is
| blue/green")
| loopdoend wrote:
| That must be the perfect result. I also got 174 but it
| said "For you, turquoise is green."
| Woshiwuja wrote:
| 176 for me its blue
| jimz wrote:
| 180 and blue and I suspect that language also plays a
| part (I was brought up in an environment where the word
| turquoise starts with green, but now live in a turquoise-
| producing state where the finished product look far
| blue-r.)
| Woshiwuja wrote:
| i mean i always saw turquoise as a greenish light blue,
| so it kinda makes sense
| Filligree wrote:
| But it isn't. Turquoise is turquoise, and since that
| wasn't an option, I picked one at random.
| anamexis wrote:
| The whole point is demarcating the line between where
| colors seem more-blue-than-green, and more-green-than-
| blue.
| ryandrake wrote:
| That wasn't clearly part of the test. To be ultra-
| pedantic (this is HN after all), the user's choices don't
| say "This is more-blue-than-green" and "This is more-
| green-than-blue". The choices are only "This is green"
| and "This is blue" forcing you to just pick one, where
| there is no clearly correct choice. When the color on the
| screen is neither green nor blue, many people will just
| pick a random answer.
|
| I bet if the choices actually said "This is more green
| than blue" the results would be different.
| anamexis wrote:
| > When the color on the screen is neither green nor blue,
| many people will just pick a random answer.
|
| Or people will naturally intuit that they should choose
| whichever answer they think is closer to true.
| samstave wrote:
| Turquoise is blue with green , so if it asked me to pick
| I'd pick green. Because if they have eggs then pickup a
| dozen milks HN pedant here
| JAlexoid wrote:
| Or most likely people will come out with a severe feeling
| of dissatisfaction with the results.
| amonith wrote:
| On such a random internet doodad most users will pick a
| random answer period. To see what this thingy tries to do
| without wasting any time on it. I hope it doesn't try to
| do gather any meaningful data.
|
| Personally I "tried" to answer truthfully at first and
| then went absolutely "ok f u, don't care no more" when it
| showed turquoise :D
| fragmede wrote:
| > most users will pick a random answer period.
|
| Taking how you behave, and extrapolating that it to
| everyone, (and furthermore being unable to accept that
| other people might behave differently), is not a winning
| strategy for life.
| amonith wrote:
| There is no winning in life. And I'm doing fine tyvm ;)
| wvh wrote:
| Not feeling blue?
| amonith wrote:
| Pretty turquoise, green even!
| elzbardico wrote:
| My whole family tested this and nobody had the same
| reaction as you.
|
| Just to add my own anedcote to the database.
| amonith wrote:
| It's different when you show something to someone with
| intent. Of course they will pay attention. Especially
| your family, come on.
|
| I'm talking about random day to day browsing when you
| stumble on something random on the internet.
| Kerb_ wrote:
| Sounds like you're just a low-engagement user tbh
| amonith wrote:
| According to conversion rates and engagement metrics of
| most apps I've seen (not even mentioning social media
| where 2-3% engagement is the norm) most users are
| -\\_(tsu)_/-. Unless said app is a work/hobby tool, but
| that shouldn't be really called engagement.
| Filligree wrote:
| Turqoise doesn't feel either more-green-than-blue _or_
| more-blue-than-green. It feels neither blue nor green,
| and I don 't see any way to compare it to either.
|
| It's clearly more turqoise than blue. Or green.
|
| Turqoise on a computer monitor is always missing part of
| itself, so maybe I should've answered based on that, but
| I don't think the computer monitor was the point.
| layer8 wrote:
| It's not a line though, it's a range where you can see it
| either way, like a flipping Necker cube.
| amelius wrote:
| To be honest, when I got turquoise and had to choose blue
| or green, I just thought "oh whatever" and picked one
| randomly.
| tracker1 wrote:
| Same here... Then again, natural turquoise can appear
| more blue or green in nature too.
| JAlexoid wrote:
| I actually disliked the conclusion, because it forced me
| to classify turquoise as either blue or green. When it's
| a mix more than anything.
|
| It lacks the "can't classify" to make it a better tool.
| subsubzero wrote:
| yeah kind of a waste of time, what is this 50% mixture of
| green and blue? pick one - Blue or Green
|
| answer it should have: Its both
| gehwartzen wrote:
| You could look at it as "How much yellow do I have to add
| to my blue until I no longer consider it blue and instead
| consider it turquoise"
| hammock wrote:
| The point is to determine whether turquoise to you is more
| green, or more blue.
| jacobolus wrote:
| The color name question here doesn't have a clear answer
| because most of the respondents would call this "teal",
| "blue-green", "turqoise", "cyan", "aqua", or some similar
| name. You'd get somewhat similar results asking whether
| an orange (the fruit) is really "red" or "yellow", or
| whether an eggplant is really "blue" or "red".
|
| An individual person's answers on this kind of question
| are likely to vary from day to day, are context dependent
| (i.e. whether one object or another appears more "green"
| or "blue" depends on what kind of object it is), and
| colors this intense are very sensitive to changes in eye
| adaptation and technical details of the display and
| software, as well as inter-observer metamerism.
|
| So in addition to the color naming difficulties, it's not
| even a very good test of color naming, if you want to get
| reliable psychometric/linguistic data.
| RussianCow wrote:
| For a single individual, all of the above is true, but
| for a large enough sample size, the answers may be more
| generally useful because you account for all of those
| rounding errors.
| bmer wrote:
| No, because if my case holds more genera (and I suspect
| it does), the answers are in part out of sheer
| frustration, and therefore prone to being similar to the
| last one given.
|
| I am not afraid to say this is poorly designed.
| simon_o wrote:
| Unlikely, I'd expect most people to not have a meltdown
| about this.
| seplox wrote:
| As someone who rage-quit on the third question, I'm going
| to say that frustration is a likely experience.
| mrgoldenbrown wrote:
| I didn't exactly rage quit but did think it was silly.
|
| I wouldn't describe teal as blue or green any more than
| I'd describe purple as red or blue, so being forced to
| pick felt silly. Like being forced to choose my seventh
| favorite Norwegian glacier - technically its a valid
| question but my answer is necessarily going to be
| arbitrary.
| layer8 wrote:
| That's like asking which way a Necker cube is oriented.
| It's both and neither. For blue and green, there's a
| range of shades for which that ambiguity is true and you
| can "flip" it in your mind.
|
| I would actually find it more practical to determine the
| thresholds on both sides where I find it to become
| ambiguous.
| RussianCow wrote:
| > I would actually find it more practical to determine
| the thresholds on both sides where I find it to become
| ambiguous.
|
| Isn't that the point of this exercise?
| layer8 wrote:
| No, it assumes there's a singular point where it is
| ambiguous, whereas I'm saying it's a range within which
| it's ambiguous.
| jsnell wrote:
| Not as far as I can tell. The phrasing of the question
| test does not acknowledge such ambiguity to start with,
| and by forcing them to answer one way or the other the
| test does not allow the users to signal perceived
| ambiguity even if they wanted to.
|
| So how could the point of this exercise possibly be to
| find the range of ambiguity?
| hammock wrote:
| Here is a chart of HN reader results, based on two pages of
| comments: https://i.imgur.com/tIQfTjN.png
|
| Mean is 176 Median is 175 Mode is 174
| soulofmischief wrote:
| I got hue 175. It's interesting to note that some older
| cultures, Japan for example, didn't always have separate
| words for blue and green, both were the same color ("ao" in
| Japanese). You can see the effects of this even today with
| things like traffic lights in Japan, which are considered
| "green" by their standards but blue by many others'
| standards.
|
| There are also other cultures, such as Russia, where light
| blue / dark blue (simplification) are effectively
| considered separate colors.
|
| All this to say, personally, I think we will continue to
| evolve to recognize more distinct "colors" such as teal,
| which is neither blue nor green but somewhere between. A
| lot of this recognition power is rooted in linguistics and
| culture, it's not as strictly biological as one might
| think.
| IgorPartola wrote:
| In Russian light blue is "blue" and dark blue is "indigo"
| essentially. It still has seven colors in the rainbow.
| It's just that in English colloquially nobody uses
| indigo.
| soulofmischief wrote:
| Yes, well that's what I mean. Culturally, Russians think
| and speak about colors differently, dividing them up
| differently than the West.
|
| > Russian does not have a single word referring to the
| whole range of colors denoted by the English term "blue".
| Instead, it traditionally treats light blue (goluboi,
| goluboy) as a separate color independent from plain or
| dark blue (sinii, siniy), with all seven "basic" colors
| of the spectrum (red-orange-yellow-green-goluboi/goluboy
| (sky blue, light azure, but does not equal
| cyan)-sinii/siniy ("true" deep blue, like synthetic
| ultramarine)-violet) while in English the light blues
| like azure and cyan are considered mere shades of "blue"
| and not different colors.
|
| > Blue: plava (indicates any blue) and modra; in the
| eastern speaking areas modra indicates dark blue, in some
| of the western areas it may indicate any blue
|
| etc. from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue%E2%80%93gree
| n_distinction...
|
| I am not deeply knowledgeable on Russian, I failed
| Russian in high school, just going off of my surface-
| level knowledge of linguistic relativity regarding color,
| and discussions with a friend from that part of the
| world, so I might not know what I'm talking about here.
| AceyMan wrote:
| Thanks for this comment! I dabble in fountain pens a bit,
| and one of my favorite inks is "ao" by Taccia.
|
| Now it all makes sense (tho, to my eye it's kind of a
| blurple-royal blue; I get no green or teal from it. But,
| now I'm tempted to go do a blotter of it and look at it
| extra carefully in natural light.)
| blahedo wrote:
| > _while cyan (#00ffff) is nominally halfway between blue and
| green, most people 's thresholds, averaged over monitor
| calibrations, imply that cyan is classified as blue_
|
| Yes, because (at least for me) the thought went "well that's
| cyan, it's not really blue but if forced to pick, cyan is
| more like blue so I'll click that". It's like rounding up at
| 0.5.
| Tor3 wrote:
| For me it was like "if forced to pick, cyan is more like
| _green_ ". So I kept clicking green and got 184.
| ryandrake wrote:
| For me, if forced to pick between two choices that were
| not correct, I'd just pick one randomly. I think this is
| a wording problem more than anything.
| Suppafly wrote:
| >For me, if forced to pick between two choices that were
| not correct, I'd just pick one randomly. I think this is
| a wording problem more than anything.
|
| That's what I'd do if I were being paid to take the
| survey. Instead I just closed the window as soon as it
| popped up cyan and only gave me blue and green as
| options.
| Jaxan wrote:
| I refuse to call cyan either blue or green. It's clearly in
| between.
|
| Just like I would never call orange yellow or red.
| nobrains wrote:
| primary: yellow, red, blue
|
| secondary: green, orange
|
| cyan: not primary nor secondary.
|
| i hope that helps.
| crazygringo wrote:
| > _cyan: not primary nor secondary._
|
| That's incorrect.
|
| The 3 primary colors of light are red green blue. The 3
| secondary colors are yellow, _cyan_ , and magenta.
|
| The 3 primary colors used in printing are _cyan_ ,
| magenta, and yellow (why it's called _C_ MYK where K is
| black).
|
| Cyan is primary or secondary in both of the major color
| models.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_color#RGB_and_C
| MYK
| fwip wrote:
| CMY and RYB are both valid primary color sets.
|
| RYB, being taught in grade school, has a lot of influence
| on how people perceive and name colors, which is what
| this conversation is about.
| crazygringo wrote:
| I mean, I was taught in grade school that George
| Washington cut down a cherry tree and then said he
| couldn't tell a lie. That didn't make it true.
|
| I would hope that here on HN, people are aware of RGB
| primaries, and then maybe CMYK. Saying that cyan is "not
| primary or secondary" is just wrong. Even Wikipedia
| explains in the first paragraph that the RYB model has a
| "lack of scientific basis":
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_color
| naijaboiler wrote:
| I refuse to call cyan cyan. I just call it blue-green
| tgsovlerkhgsel wrote:
| I'd check whether there are biases depending on which color
| you start with / which colors you present when.
| codeflo wrote:
| > The most interesting thing for me is that while cyan
| (#00ffff) is nominally halfway between blue and green, most
| people's thresholds, averaged over monitor calibrations,
| imply that cyan is classified as blue.
|
| Perceptually (that is, in CIE-LCh color space, for example),
| the hue component of #00ffff is a lot cloer to #00ff00 than
| it is to #0000ff. But the website doesn't ask which color is
| closer, it asks if it's "green" or "blue". And how we use
| those words has more to do with culture than with perception.
| We also call the color of a clear afternoon sky "blue", even
| though that is perceptually extremely far away from #0000ff.
| zestyping wrote:
| Not that surprising. To most people, pure RGB-blue looks a
| bit violet. People are used to ink (subtractive) blue more
| than light (additive) blue. People call the sky blue and
| water blue; both are closer to cyan. Most people think of a
| neutral blue as something like #0080ff.
| lupire wrote:
| > To most people, pure RGB-blue looks a bit violet.
|
| And then our mothers and teachers mock us :-(
|
| Is this color bias the same across genders?
| jsvlrtmred wrote:
| Another variable is the name of the website. If the page were
| called "is my green your green" perhaps you'd get the
| opposite result...
| lupire wrote:
| In USA:
|
| Primary Additive Colors: Red, Green, Blue
|
| Primary Subtractive Colors: Cyan, Magenta, Yellow
|
| But, before digital color displays became popular, the
| average person had, by far, mostly exposure to subtractive
| (paint) colors.
|
| US school children are taught from birth that the primary
| subtractive colors are red, yellow, and blue, simply because
| those words are easier to pronounce, and so magenta is a
| weird "red" and cyan is a weird "blue" , until the children
| discover on their own, or in specialized print/paint schools,
| red and blue are not primary subtractive colors.
|
| Humans are terrible at naming things.
|
| And to bring it back to Current Thing: Google AI cites this
| source for its red/yellow/blue claim, even though explicitly
| this source says that Google gives the wrong answer.
|
| https://science.howstuffworks.com/primary-
| colors.htm#:~:text....
|
| Will GenAI's aggressive ignorance kill sarcasm and nuance in
| writing? Or will people learn to ignore AI input like they
| ignore banner ads?
| hilbert42 wrote:
| This test is useless or of very limited value.
|
| I kept pressing green until the end _because_ you had no
| 'cyan' button to press when clearly many colors were actually
| cyan. Cyan is not blue.
|
| Incidentally, my color vision is perfect on all Ishihara
| tests.
| nobrains wrote:
| Blue and Green and primary and secondary colors.
|
| Cyan is not. The author decided to cut off the colors list
| at secondary colors. There is nothing wrong with that.
| digging wrote:
| Not to be mean, but I think _every_ assertion in your
| comment is wrong.
|
| Blue and Green are English words which _sometimes_
| describe primary or secondary colors additive colors.
| Cyan is (an English word that describes) a primary
| subtractive color.
|
| Colors are not English words. They're physical reactions
| inside our eye-brain systems, affected by varying
| wavelengths of light. (Actually that's not the most
| accurate description of color either, but it's a more
| useful model.)
| hilbert42 wrote:
| _" The author decided..."_
|
| 'The author decided' is not physics. Suggest you look at
| the Wiki page under 'Wavelength':
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_vision
|
| Green: 500 - 590nm, Cyan: 485 - 500nm, Blue: 450 - 485nm.
|
| Color vision theory is far too complicated to discuss
| here, and I'm not going to debate cyan as a mixed color
| of blue and green wavelengths versus a fixed wavelength
| that's in between both of them.
|
| What the author provided was, at best, misleading but
| nonsense as far as science is concerned.
|
| If the author said he was an artist and presented colors
| as a preferential list it would have been a different
| matter.
|
| BTW, I don't mind being voted down (it happens to me
| regularly), but here those who did are only showing their
| ignorance. I'd add the author--who penned here--ought to
| explain his actions in much more detail.
| nov21b wrote:
| I did this test with tinted sunglasses, could be another
| factor (boundary at hue 172)
| mschuster91 wrote:
| > 2. If you average over large populations, you can estimate
| population thresholds, marginalizing over monitor
| calibrations.
|
| This might be one case where it might make sense to cluster
| between the reported operating system. At the moment I only
| have a family of Macs to test, but I can imagine that Windows
| users with their different default gamma get back different
| results.
| Suppafly wrote:
| >most people's thresholds, averaged over monitor
| calibrations, imply that cyan is classified as blue.
|
| I think that's just to your test forcing people to pick
| either blue or green even though cyan is both, they are just
| going to pick blue because it's the first option and more
| likely to be picked randomly.
| LocalH wrote:
| I classified cyan as green because, well, it's greener than
| pure blue, and it's also the _most_ greener you can get than
| blue, in RGB space, without losing any blue :)
| samstave wrote:
| Wouldn't this then be best for calibrating VR headsets most?
| aaroninsf wrote:
| OP have you considered doing a version for this to test
| contemporary Greek native speakers, vs others ("control"
| group),
|
| for differentiation of blues?
|
| I remember reading that modern Greek has two color-names for
| sky- and dark- blue (not sure what the prototypes are for
| each nor if they have hue components, maybe the "sky" blue is
| green-shifted?)... always been fascinated by the discussion
| of "weak Sapir-Whorf" around this and would be quite
| interested to see if there are any differences in
| discrimination...
|
| The classic cognitive/perceptual psyche data to gather would
| be time-to-discriminate, with the prediction being that Greek
| speakers make faster judgement because they have
| higher/faster discrimination, than others.
|
| Not sure how you'd pose the question to non-Greek speakers
| tho :)
| jedberg wrote:
| > I was not expecting that the median threshold (hue 174)
| would be so deep into the greens.
|
| You're not asking gender of the test taker. Your results will
| be skewed because you're probably getting more men than
| women. Women in general have more ability to detect green vs
| blue.
| dentemple wrote:
| Even more fundamentally, red-green colorblindness is a
| recessive trait on the X chromosome, thereby affecting
| biological males in far greater number than females.
|
| It could be a high enough percentage to make the results
| from this site noticeably different between the sexes.
| itronitron wrote:
| I checked in at hue 174, the median, which is interesting to
| me as I know that my wife will test to a very different hue
| as we have occasional disagreements on whether something is
| 'blue' or 'green' :)
| jacobolus wrote:
| By the way, "cyan" is a very poor name to use for #00ffff.
| The term "cyan" refers to the kind of slightly greenish blue
| used in 4-color printing (CMYK), and was just a Greek word
| for "blue" chosen to be a jargon word to avoid confusion with
| the English color name. It has a totally different color than
| the equal mixture of typical G and B primaries in a computer
| display.
|
| Similarly, "magenta" is a poor name to use for #ff00ff. The
| term "magenta" is a jargon word for the slightly purplish
| printer's red, which was chosen to avoid confusion with the
| English word "red". It has a completely different than the
| equal mix of RGB R and B primaries.
|
| ("Red", "green", and "blue" are also very poor names for the
| RGB primaries, which are substantially orangish red,
| yellowish green, and purplish blue.)
| ljf wrote:
| It is interesting to test people at just one device.
|
| I used my phone on a mount, and completed the test with my
| wife, children and myself - I was interested (though not
| surprised) what an outlier I was, as I am colour blind in
| various combinations, but though my wife scored 'bang in the
| middle' - it was interesting that wasn't common.
|
| My kids were both to the left of the scale fwiw - I was
| further right than 98% of people.
| wmil wrote:
| I think you're paying more attention to the mathematics than
| the social usage.
|
| The ocean at a tropical beach is often actually cyan but
| never referred to as green.
| resonious wrote:
| Very good point. I just realized I did this with my monitor on
| low-blue-light-mode.
| extraduder_ire wrote:
| I only realized after seeing your comment. As usual, when I
| turned it off to compare, the hue it shifted to looked super
| unnatural and I had to re-enable it.
|
| I always forget how much white-balancing my vision does.
| Inviz wrote:
| If sRGB has severly limited green, what would you say about
| CMYK?
| lifthrasiir wrote:
| CMYK is generally even more limited in the colorness to the
| end of gamut.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| This is pretty much the same way that a calibrator works (if
| you have ever watched a color calibrator running, you know what
| I mean), but a calibrator doesn't get biased, like the human
| eye.
|
| In order for it to be a true "neutral" test, each test would
| need to be preceded by a "palate-cleanser" gray screen, or
| something, and there would probably need to be a neutral
| border.
|
| _> you should be shown all hues at once and asked to position
| a cut-off point._
|
| This is actually the way I have seen this stuff tested, before.
| lloeki wrote:
| Ambient light will also affect the result.
|
| Not necessarily because the ambient light would affect the
| screen shows (it's emissive, not reflective) but because the
| brain _also does_ "auto white/colour balance".
|
| For a fun experiment, get your hand on some heavily yellow-
| tinted party glasses, go outside on a clear day with a bright
| blue sky.
|
| When you put them on everything will be stark yellow tinged
| (and the blue sky will be completely off, like green or pink,
| can't recall which) but after a little while going on your
| business, perception adjusts and only a much less dramatic
| yellowish veil is in effect. You'd look at the sky and see
| almost-blue.
|
| The kicker is when you remove the glasses: the sky will
| suddenly be of a glorious pink! (or green, can't recall) Only
| moments later it'll adjust back to be blue.
|
| A certain wavelength may be absolute blue of a certain kind,
| but the perceptual system is all relative: "wait, I know this
| sky should be blue because that's what I've always seen, so
| let's compensate".
|
| The same kind of effect - although less dramatic - can be
| achieved with lights that can be adjusted from say 2400K to
| 6500K and having as reference an object that is known "pure
| white", like a A4/letter sheet of paper.
|
| This effect, in turn, adjusts how "absolutely displayed"
| colours are identified by way of biasing the whole perceptive
| system. AIUI that's the rationale behind Apple's True Tone
| thingy, aiming to compensate for that.
|
| So the result of this test should be somewhat different
| depending on ambient lighting temperature.
| dotancohen wrote:
| > Ambient light will also affect the result.
|
| Also deliberate software blue light filters. Mine is always
| on, both on the desktop and on the phone. Many people may
| forget that they are even using one.
| i_am_a_peasant wrote:
| Also my glasses filter blue light.
| cubefox wrote:
| Fancy way of saying they have a yellow tint (:
| i_am_a_peasant wrote:
| they're more like green-ish but yeah
| cubefox wrote:
| Then they filter also some red light...
| dotancohen wrote:
| That might explain one of my neighbors' driving at a
| nearby intersection.
| cubefox wrote:
| Digital cameras also do automatic white balance (between
| yellow and blue) to mimic the automatic white balance of our
| eye/brain. If cameras didn't do white balance, outdoor photos
| with sunlight during noon would look extremely blueish, or
| indoor photos with artificial light would look extremely
| yellowish.
|
| I like this illustration of how strong our natural white
| balance is:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_dress#/media/File%3AWikipe.
| ..
| MereInterest wrote:
| During some heavy dust clouds from nearby wildfires, the
| sky was a deep and unsettling yellow. However, I couldn't
| get a picture of it, because the automatic color balance
| removed the yellow overcast altogether.
| cubefox wrote:
| The same problem occurs with photographing the yellow sky
| when dust from a Sahara sandstorm (presumably coming
| across the strait of Gibraltar) blows over Europe every
| few years. But you can set the white balance manually in
| the camera.
| cubefox wrote:
| > AIUI that's the rationale behind Apple's True Tone thingy,
| aiming to compensate for that.
|
| No idea what "AUIU" is, but yes, generally displays should do
| automatic white balance like iPhones do. I don't know why
| most Android phones don't seem to do it (pretty sure mine
| doesn't), and generally TVs/monitors also don't do it. (The
| required color temperature sensor can't be that expensive?)
| nkrisc wrote:
| AIUI as I understand it
| cubefox wrote:
| Yeah I don't know what that is
| archi42 wrote:
| TYDUI (IMTOU) - Then You Don't Understand It (I Made That
| One Up) ;-)
|
| It's an abbreviation, and you're one of today's lucky
| 10000 - https://xkcd.com/1053/ for an explanation of the
| 10000 phrase.
| cubefox wrote:
| At least I know that cartoon. But generally people
| strongly overestimate how many people know various
| abbreviations. For years I didn't care to look up what
| "IANAL" means. I since have forgotten it again.
| nkrisc wrote:
| [A]s [I] [U]nderstand [I]t
|
| Take the bracketed letters:
|
| AIUI
| lloeki wrote:
| > I don't know why most Android phones don't seem to do it
| (pretty sure mine doesn't), and generally TVs/monitors also
| don't do it.
|
| The rageguy one would say either patents or "whoa the
| colors really pop I want that shut up here's my $$$"
| uncancellable LOOKATMEIAMTHESHINY mall mode, but via
| Occam'r razor I think mostly because they (manufacturers)
| simply don't care (about consumers, or about making a good
| product at all)
|
| TVs/monitors (or laptops even, and more phones that you'd
| believe) with just a simple auto-brightness are
| stupendously rare even though Apple does it since forever
| and a half ago.
| cubefox wrote:
| Yeah, laptops and TVs not even doing automatic brightness
| is even more absurd. Though Android phones have automatic
| brightness since forever, so why do many not have
| automatic color temperature (white balance)? The color
| temperature sensor can't be much more expensive than a
| brightness sensor. It's logically just an RGB brightness
| sensor.
|
| Android does have a night mode which changes the white
| balance of the screen at sunset and sunrise, but this is
| just a binary thing and doesn't respond to actual ambient
| light.
| collyw wrote:
| I was looking it and thinking that's turquoise. Is it closer to
| blue or green? Meh, it's close to the middle.
| jdhzzz wrote:
| I did it on IPS laptop display and got 175. On my OLED phone I
| got 179. I am more in agreement with the phone results, but the
| turquoise on the phone looked even greener to me.
| trebligdivad wrote:
| I tried it twice, once on each of my two different monitors (a
| Dell S2817Q and Dell S2409W) made a few years apart and with
| completely different settings; and I got 175 on one and 174 on
| the other. So pretty close even given the difference.
| adgjlsfhk1 wrote:
| alternatively putting the color in a white box should provide
| enough context
| Izkata wrote:
| > I suspect it tests your monitor and monitor calibration as
| much as your color perception. In particular, sRGB displays
| have a pretty severely limited green gamut. If you have a wide-
| gamut display, the test is probably gonna appear different.
|
| Also browser choice:
| https://issues.chromium.org/issues/40401125
| chimeracoder wrote:
| > To address that last problem, I think the color display area
| should be much smaller, or you should be shown all hues at once
| and asked to position a cut-off point.
|
| If you're doing this on a phone, try holding your phone at
| arm's length and against a white background (such as the wall
| or ceiling) and doing the test that way. Assuming you have
| redshift/night mode disabled, I suspect you'll end up closer to
| the median.
| jawns wrote:
| The author of the site says that he made it using claude. It
| would be interesting to find out what, exactly, Claude generated.
| cynicalpeace wrote:
| It's probably simpler to ask what claude didn't make at this
| point.
| pminimax wrote:
| Author here, it started out with:
|
| ``` Can you help me make a website called is my blue your blue?
| I want to make a website that is in vue.js that allows one to
| determine the boundary between their perception of blue vs.
| green. It should use a golden ratio search to find the midpoint
| between blue and green. It should have the color be the color
| of the background, and it should have two buttons, blue and
| green. If they pick green, you should show something bluer, and
| vice versa. ```
|
| It offered a starter with vue and tailwind, then I asked to add
| a supabase backend. I took maybe 5 hours to get the original
| version, which I tweaked until I got about 800 initial
| responses so I could show a population curve. Later I modded it
| with cursor to add an about section, fit a proper GLM rather
| than a simple golden ratio estimation method, and the d3
| animation at the end.
| whalesalad wrote:
| Your boundary is at hue 187, bluer than 98% of the population.
| For you, turquoise is green.
| cynicalpeace wrote:
| You and I have the same name for things that are blue (mostly).
| That's what this test examines. But what if what I see as blue is
| actually your red?
|
| Is this even knowable? Like if you were to see through my eyes
| and you looked at the sky would it be what you called red?
| r2_pilot wrote:
| We can agree on wavelength but not qualia, the philosophers
| say.
| analog31 wrote:
| Would we pick the same tomatoes from my garden? or would you
| see a ripe tomato where I saw an unripe one, and vice versa?
| cynicalpeace wrote:
| You both call the same tomato ripe. But if you were to switch
| eyes maybe you would be shocked that what the other person
| called a ripe tomato was actually your green
| analog31 wrote:
| Indeed, or we could swap taste buds.
| silisili wrote:
| I think most people have this realization and question,
| probably as children.
|
| It's probably impossible to know for sure. But I largely think
| we see them similarly, mainly because of favorite colors. Few
| people like orange, brown, tan, pea green, etc.
|
| If we all saw colors differently, I feel like there'd be
| greater variety in favorites.
| cynicalpeace wrote:
| That's a very plausible theory
| Summerbud wrote:
| Your boundary is at hue 189, bluer than 98% of the population.
| For you, turquoise is green.
|
| That is interesting, I usually address my monitor to make it look
| darker and more lean toward warm color, guess this will affect
| the result
| kstrauser wrote:
| I was at 192. My Mac monitor's fairly bright and I don't have
| Night Shift enabled.
| _nivlac_ wrote:
| I would love a version of this based on orange. I've always felt
| my perception of orange is different from others.
| fogleman wrote:
| You might like the xkcd color survey:
|
| https://blog.xkcd.com/2010/05/03/color-survey-results/
| airstrike wrote:
| That was such a rewarding read! LOL thanks for sharing
| yieldcrv wrote:
| This explanation is trying too hard to affirm people's vision
| capabilities and just say their monitor and naming schemes are
| different
|
| Blue part of the color spectrum is the hardest for both our eyes
| and monitors to perceive, it extends the easiest out of the
| display range of both.
|
| It is very valid to talk about our eyes, genetics, sex in this
| conversation too.
| gjstein wrote:
| Similar: XKCD conducted a color survey back in 2010 [1]. The
| results are detailed and the writeup quite interesting.
|
| [1] https://blog.xkcd.com/2010/05/03/color-survey-results/
| the__alchemist wrote:
| I quit on the second one; it's a blue-green. Binary
| categorization is not sufficient.
| p1necone wrote:
| If you do this for green and yellow we can solve the "what colour
| are tennis balls" debacle once and for all.
| tln wrote:
| Chartreuse!
| srcreigh wrote:
| Is 175 the average score, or 1 std dev more blue than average?
|
| We may never know.
| ddfs123 wrote:
| I like that the test refresh your eyes with a random noise. But I
| think it should be a bit longer. My eyes still have a bit residue
| from previous color.
| pminimax wrote:
| The mask is 200 ms long, which is a bit on the long side
| compared to most psychophysics experiments. I can try to crank
| it up to 300 ms, but beyond that I think it'll start feeling
| slow.
| gastonmorixe wrote:
| It was fun! If you are on a Mac / iPhone / iPad:
|
| - Remember to disable Night Shift (went from 86% to 94% by
| disabling it)
|
| - Use the Apple Display (not external one unless you know it's
| calibrated and good)
| ProfessorLayton wrote:
| Yep, disabled Night Shift, but forgot True Tone is still a
| thing, and I have a warm light on. Result say my green is
| turquoise.
| Retr0id wrote:
| Having True Tone on should really make your results more
| accurate. (Ideally you'd be in a room lit with D65, though)
| gastonmorixe wrote:
| Yeah, not an expert on True Tone but I'd leave it enabled.
| I agree it should help if it does what I guess it should.
|
| That being said I haven't read about it in a long time nor
| tested without it.
| jimnotgym wrote:
| I'm intrigued that you think the Apple display is necessarily
| more colour true than an external display out of the box
| ervinxie wrote:
| Is this test based on web rgb? I suggest use larger color space.
| RandomThoughts3 wrote:
| Today I learned that English doesn't have an equivalent to the
| French world "bleu-vert" literally "blue-green" and meaning a
| colour in between blue and green so that it can't be easily
| classed in either one (that's not exactly like cyan which exists
| in French but is a precise color). Sixty percents of the time I
| was thinking "in between".
| bbarn wrote:
| Commonly, Teal or Turquoise.
| RandomThoughts3 wrote:
| Amusingly, the dictionary tells me that teal is a dark
| bluish-green which both tells me that teal is not an exact
| translation but that bluish-green would be.
| swayvil wrote:
| You might ask, "What makes an artist an artist?"
|
| It's the seeing. Artists see differently (and there are some
| skills too of course).
|
| Meditation, drugs and some other stuff change the way you see
| too. So perception is definitely a variable and not a constant.
|
| So ya, the seeing of blue varies.
| bbarn wrote:
| Teal is my favorite color and I felt attacked..
| benatkin wrote:
| better do a protec
| Retr0id wrote:
| What function is being used to interpolate between green and
| blue?
| pminimax wrote:
| hsl
| Retr0id wrote:
| oof, I guess that explains why the transition looks so non-
| linear to me
| avodonosov wrote:
| Read the About section before commenting (The middle button after
| the test finishes).
| Sephr wrote:
| Cool. I got "Your boundary is at hue 174, just like the
| population median. You're a true neutral." with a MacBook Pro
| miniLED display.
| SilasX wrote:
| Omg! A perfect time to share my story from before[1], where I
| lost a notebook at a big box store, and I had early on lumped the
| notebook in with greens, and thus described it as a "green
| notebook".
|
| But some people, including the store employee that took my call,
| strongly felt it was clearly on the blue side and claimed not to
| have anything matching that description I only ever recovered it
| by going there in person and asking to see it.
|
| (Fortunately, it had my name in it as a second check.)
|
| Look for yourself: https://imgur.com/AlQAZBJ
|
| [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15092345
| kaetemi wrote:
| It's turquoise.
| 0xDEADFED5 wrote:
| if we're sticking with this binary thing then you get another
| vote for green
| 31337Logic wrote:
| You: Is this blue or green? Me: Yes.
| ks2048 wrote:
| A related quiz that might be interesting: fill the screen with
| random grid of colors, all close to BLUE and tell user to pick
| "blue". See how close people recognize 0x0000FF.
| lifthrasiir wrote:
| Try _I love hue_ [1] which is a game that works almost like
| that.
|
| [1] https://i-love-hue.com/
| extraduder_ire wrote:
| Or let you keep going after narrowing down blue with other
| pairs of colours.
| prng2021 wrote:
| Why has this been upvoted so much? It's a completely useless test
| where it seems we all agree there are a bunch of turquoises.
| two_handfuls wrote:
| I really like the way this shows the final result. Thank you!
| balozi wrote:
| What does it mean when I get better and better at picking
| blues/greens on second or third attempts? Does it mean my ability
| to pick colors can be somehow influenced or improved?
| pminimax wrote:
| Yes, you can absolutely get better at discriminating different
| colors, orientations, etc. though unfortunately improvements
| tend to be highly specific to the stimulus. There's a great
| book by Barbara Dosher called Perceptual Learning that
| extensively overviews the literature.
| jablongo wrote:
| This is great and surprisingly consistent. Apparently I'm in the
| 98th percentile of how blue my cutoff is. I wonder if this is
| related to my favorite color being green (I'm perceiving more
| things as green because I like the color)
| mathiasrw wrote:
| Can we get this for yellow and green?
| pminimax wrote:
| You can fork this here:
| https://github.com/patrickmineault/ismyblue
| RockofStrength wrote:
| Since the first color was right between blue and green, I refused
| to choose one or the other. I'm not gonna play that game.
| cirrus3 wrote:
| "For you Turquoise is green" isn't an interesting result. There
| is a line at which a color isn't one of two options, it is
| another well-defined color.
|
| It is a neat site, but I guess I don't understand the point of
| this is.
|
| Another version with vehicles could say "To you a Van is a
| Truck", and you would get some results on how many people
| classify a Van as a Car or a Truck... but the question is flawed
| to begin with, and thus so are the "results".
| jablongo wrote:
| Watch the results getting skewed in real time as night falls
| across the Americas and more people's phone enter the mode with
| more yellow for low light conditions...
| pminimax wrote:
| The site records local time of day when you hit submit so I can
| track whether this has any effect. I have 7,000 answers thus
| far, I should have enough by tomorrow to determine whether
| there are any systematic effects.
| kazinator wrote:
| I stopped at the first one I could not call blue or green.
|
| If I were to call it blue or green, it would not only not be
| reflecting what I think, but I could not guarantee that if I'm
| show the exact same color again, that I will go the same way. So
| I felt there was no point in continuing.
|
| This is a problem in the method; there needs to be a third
| choice, so that the user can always answer (at least if the test
| color is always in the blue-green gamut).
|
| It could work with two choices if the user were instructed to
| randomly choose in the event of indecision. I mean, truly
| randomly, like by means of a fair coin toss. But that could just
| be implemented for them by a third button. That button could then
| just record their indecision rather than randomly choose between
| blue and green, so you have better data.
|
| Without a third choice, or properly randomized behavior, you have
| bias problems. For instance, a certain user who likes the blue
| color might always say blue when not able to decide. Another one
| might always go for green. Yet, those two users might exactly
| coincide in what they unmistakably call blue, green and what
| triggers hesitation/indecision.
|
| (I realize that no matter how many bins we have, there are
| boundary indecisions, like not being able to decide between green
| and blue-green. What range constitutes indecision is also
| subjective.)
| phito wrote:
| Totally agree, I stopped at the second one because it was
| neither green nor blue
| rotidder wrote:
| That exactly is the point of the test though. Not to test
| whether most people call 100% blue blue, or 100% green green.
| It is to test at which point of the "inbetween" colors people
| switch from blue to green or vice versa. It forces you to
| decide whether the color you see is "more blue" or "more
| green", since after all they're all just a mix of blue and
| green.
| Timwi wrote:
| Well for me, personally, blue and green are simply not
| adjacent, so there's no point where green turns to blue
| without going through an intermediate color. This might well
| be due to my extreme exposure to computer colors, where the
| in-between color is usually called cyan, or sometimes teal or
| aqua. When I see cyan, I cannot sincerely say that it looks
| "more blue" or "more green" to me, any more than an orange
| tastes "more apple" or "more banana".
| ertgbnm wrote:
| Light can absolutely be more blue or more green in an
| objective sense. Either it is closer to blue on the
| spectrum or it's closer to green. It doesn't matter if you
| have intermediate categories in between.
|
| To poke a whole in your analogy, a more apt comparison
| would be to a gradient of sweetness, where one can indeed
| describe a flavor as "more sweet" or "less sweet" relative
| to apples and bananas.
| kazinator wrote:
| I suspect that if you were shown two blue-green colors side
| by side, with nothing between them, you could look at the
| boundary and tell which side contains more blue.
| Narishma wrote:
| In my case, and it seems OP's as well, it forced me to stop
| the test instead of picking one of the two.
| kazinator wrote:
| You can estimate that if you can determine at which point the
| color becomes too ambiguous to call blue on one side, or
| green on the other. Different people will have a different
| range. If you want to identify a threshold, you can take the
| midpoint of the range.
|
| Either of these approaches may be bad. The third paragraph of
| this page explains why:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-alternative_forced_choice
|
| My suggested approach might not be much better though; it
| still relies on presenting a single stimulus.
|
| It's not clear how the two-alternative forced choice can be
| used to find someone's blue-green threshold.
|
| I think a better experiment would be to show the user
| gradients and ask them to move a bar to where they think is
| the midpoint in the blue-green transition. Subsequent
| gradients center on the user's previously identified
| midpoint, but zoom in more.
|
| There is also this question: by which path do we interpolate
| from blue to green?
|
| Let's imagine the CIELAB color space. Say that our pure green
| lies on the red-green axis, all the way on the green end.
| Blue lies on the extreme of blue-yellow. Do we interpolate
| through these linearly or what? And using what luminance
| value?
|
| I suspect that for every given, fixed luminance value, the
| blue-green boundary is a contour. There are many paths we can
| take between blue and green, and along each path there is a
| boundary point. If we join those points we get this contour.
| Then if we do that for different luminance values, the
| contour becomes a 3D surface in the color space.
| leyesdos wrote:
| If the test is designed to select for non-blues in the HSL range
| of 150 and 210, how is it assigning boundary hues in a higher
| range?
| sreeramvenkat wrote:
| It is also possible that I say something is blue because rest of
| society says so. My blue can only be known to me
| Rastonbury wrote:
| Yeah me too, apples look blue to me but I know how to answer
| this website like a regular person
| rock_artist wrote:
| Nice. would've been cool if I could easily share my result
| similar to speedtest (as an example).
| marcus_holmes wrote:
| I'm red/green colourblind, so this was interesting to compare my
| green against my blue.
|
| The thing I find being colourblind is that I value colour less
| than shade. Colour signals, even when I can tell them apart, are
| just less important to me than to non-colourblind people.
|
| I most recently noticed this playing Valheim with my wife. There
| are red mushrooms in the game, surrounded by green foliage. I
| noticed that I have trouble spotting them, even though I have no
| problem seeing that they are red and the foliage is green. To
| her, the mushrooms stand out as being very visually different
| from the background and immediately noticeable. To me, they just
| aren't that distinct and get quite hard to spot.
|
| So while I got the green/blue distinction to within 80% of the
| population, despite my shitty colour perception, it just didn't
| matter. At some point in the process I got to "I really don't
| care. I would ignore the signal that any further difference in
| colour is sending".
|
| As you can guess, I have fascinating talks with designers and
| artists, to whom the differences really matter. I understand that
| colour is really important to them. I just don't see it.
| lll-o-lll wrote:
| I have normal color vision, and color just doesn't matter to me
| (I can never remember the colors of things, and distinction by
| color doesn't help me much). I'm not discounting your theory,
| but I think there must be a little more to it.
| AlotOfReading wrote:
| Not the person you're responding to, but also colorblind and
| I strongly relate to what they're expressing. It's different
| than not being able to remember colors. I can see (most)
| differences, but I need to actively focus on seeing to do it.
| For example, one CI system uses red/green stoplight emojis
| for test status. A given run might have 50-100 of them.
| Trying to see which ones are red means actively _looking_ at
| each individual status and thinking "what color is that?"
| because my brain simply doesn't register reds as "jumping
| out" in the sea of green.
| marcus_holmes wrote:
| Yes! I've had some lengthy discussions with UI designers
| trying to get them to understand this exact point. I can
| see that they're red and green, I just don't _notice_ that
| they 're red and green.
| nicolas_t wrote:
| Interesting, does playing a lot of games with a toddler
| asking them to distinguish between colors reduces the
| chance that they have your type of colourblindness? Since
| you can see the individual colors but need to concentrate
| on them, I wonder if playing such games make the child
| learn to notice the colors?
| marcus_holmes wrote:
| Mine is genetic, inherited from my maternal grandfather.
|
| My mother was an artist, spent ages testing my colour
| range with a set of Pantone colour swatches, just out of
| curiosity rather than as an attempt to cure it. That's
| how I know I see shade better than colour - she would
| show me two swatches that differed slightly in colour and
| then two that differed only in shade (or shade/tone/tint
| to be accurate). I could tell the shade differences apart
| better than the colour differences.
|
| So I'm not sure that early training would help. But it
| couldn't hurt
| dentemple wrote:
| Like the other person said, most forms of colorblindness
| is caused by genetics--specifically, recessive traits.
| So, it's the sort of trait that will run in the family.
|
| To help explain our experience, it's like trying to
| distinguish between two similar shades of yellow. It'll
| be clear and obvious that both are the color yellow. When
| there's only one example of each standing next to each
| other, it'll be easy to tell which shade is the lighter
| one, even if it's only slightly different. But if you had
| a sea of examples and are asked to pick out which yellows
| are slightly lighter than the other ones, then it might
| cause you to stop and study them for awhile to figure it
| out.
|
| It's just like that for the common forms of
| colorblindness (where the color cones in the eyes are
| bent, but not missing), but instead of this metaphorical
| "yellow" it's this special "red-and-green" color that we
| see that's different from what everyone else sees. It's
| like trying to distinguish between two different shades
| of the same color, where it's obvious which is which when
| there's only two examples to compare to but not so much
| when your entire field of vision has bits of one hidden
| amongst a sea of the other. It's like red and green are a
| spectrum of the same color rather than being two separate
| ones.
| jiehong wrote:
| Reminds them that colors and shapes must be different in
| a UI. They're supposed to learn that super early in their
| career.
| Suppafly wrote:
| >For example, one CI system uses red/green stoplight emojis
| for test status. A given run might have 50-100 of them.
| Trying to see which ones are red means actively looking at
| each individual status and thinking "what color is that?"
| because my brain simply doesn't register reds as "jumping
| out" in the sea of green.
|
| Fellow CVD person here, I have that same problem at work.
| That and when there are up/down arrows and whether up or
| down is good changes based on the metric and they use color
| to let you know. They all look samey unless I actually
| stare at them for a while and the color difference sorta
| bubbles up.
|
| It's so annoying too because it'd be trivial to use
| different signals instead of color, but no one cares about
| the 1/12 of us that are colorblind. It's crazy that the ADA
| doesn't recognize CVD as needing accommodation when it's
| far more common than most other disabilities.
| thisOtterBeGood wrote:
| Interesting. Red next to green creates a different kind of
| contrast. It looks like its glowing (vibrant border), the same
| way our eyes perceive something very close compared to
| something far away. That is just my observation, I'm not sure
| If there is some scientific evidence for that.
| mihaaly wrote:
| I am also red/green colorblind and so I cannot tell if graphs
| using colours in many articles (more than not) is so shitty for
| everyone else or not, but choosing no distinct colours (that I
| have no trouble differentiating) on thin lines is defying the
| purpose (understanding) I believe. Even if I had no trouble
| with colours (being close to darker shades of brown) I would
| perhaps use thicker lines and variate the style of the lines.
| So the information screams out. Putting similar shade colours
| on graph with colour legend in the corner telling which thin
| line means what is just something I throw away mentally being
| so difficult to navigate.
| karaterobot wrote:
| I've got normal color vision, and it's bad for me too. If
| there's more than about a half dozen lines on a graph,
| chances are two of them are going to be so close together
| that it's a pain to figure out which is which. Visually
| distinguishing information in graphs can be a very tricky
| problem, but at the same time, people could easily do a much
| better job at it if they tried.
| Finnucane wrote:
| I got 174 ('true neutral') by choosing 'blue' or 'not blue'.
| The 'green' here looks to me like a light yellowy-orange. The
| color that I have learned to associate with unripe bananas.
| benatkin wrote:
| I take my green seriously.
|
| Says my blue is 57% more blue than average. I'm all right with
| that. For me green is more exceptional than blue because the sky
| and large bodies of waters are blue.
| 20after4 wrote:
| Did it several times, I'm pretty consistently 178 with one
| outlier at 180.
| mattdesl wrote:
| Surely this should be using a perceptually uniform color space
| like OKLab rather than HSL!
| lifthrasiir wrote:
| While that would change the distribution of threshold hues
| (partly due to the non-linear mix of blue and green, as sRGB
| transfer function wasn't inverted), it shouldn't change the
| conclusion itself. Also it would be hard to constantly change
| the lightness in such systems, as the #0000ff green would have
| a much larger lightness than the #00ff00 blue and there are
| some gaps outside of the common sRGB or even P3 color space.
| mattdesl wrote:
| Pure RGB primaries gives an easy target for "red" and "green"
| endpoints but that's about it. Ideally the test should
| consider two endpoints with uniform lightness and chroma, and
| just shift the hue to form in-betweens. The transition from
| blue to green in RGB (or HSL) is not linear in these
| attributes.
| lifthrasiir wrote:
| That is what I believe the original comment meant to say:
| convert to some color space where linear interpolation for
| non-hue axes would be meaningful. In my knowledge, such
| linear interpolation will require the tone mapping due to
| out-of-gamut colors, and the tone mapping itself is fairly
| subjective.
| mattdesl wrote:
| Not quite--you can choose a ramp that will remain in-
| gamut for sRGB, eg try shifting hue here:
|
| https://oklch.com/#72.67,0.121,240.19,100
|
| Even if you were to use a more saturated ramp, I suspect
| that discontinuities due to gamut mapping with a good
| algorithm[1] should be less than the discontinuities due
| to lightness and chroma shifts in HSL, but I could be
| wrong.
|
| [1] https://bottosson.github.io/posts/gamutclipping/
| lifthrasiir wrote:
| Ah yeah, I only checked the path between sRGB #0000ff =
| oklch(45.2% 0.3131 264.05) and sRGB #00ff00 =
| oklch(86.64% 0.2948 142.50) which surely needs out-of-
| gamut colors. And as you have noticed from the post,
| there are many algorithms to handle them with different
| attributes of colors to preserve. CSS even has its own
| algorithm [1] that primarily keeps hue and lightness but
| allows slight alternations to avoid excessive reduction
| on edge cases. For the purpose of this test though, hues
| should be probably preserved at any cost.
|
| While lower saturation may solve this problem, some
| colors do greatly depend on saturation to be correctly
| perceived, like brown, so I don't think it is not ideal
| to change that either.
|
| [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/css-color-4/#css-gamut-mapping
| grishka wrote:
| It felt really odd for me to have to choose one or the other
| because my language has a name for that intermediate color
| between blue and green (also applies to any light blue, like that
| of the sky) but English doesn't.
|
| edit: actually, English does have a name for it, cyan
| aAaaArrRgH wrote:
| We call it appelblauwzeegroen (apple blue sea green)
| szszrk wrote:
| I thought it turquoise...
|
| Which is a constant battle with me and my wife: she has her
| blue-range shifted A LOT into my green-range.
|
| And this is precisely a tool where we could attempt to measure
| that. Thanks OP!
| steve1977 wrote:
| I think that is kind of the point of this test. _if_ you have
| to chose between blue and green when you see cyan, which one do
| you chose?
| IncreasePosts wrote:
| Why in the world is .blue a TLD?
| extraduder_ire wrote:
| It came with the wave of generic TLDs about a decade ago.
| Apparently, it's for people who like the colour. Users of
| Bluesky make great use of it nowadays.
|
| https://web.archive.org/web/20141021134657/http://dotblue.bl...
| adamc wrote:
| For me, the results weren't even stable, but varied from run to
| run according to what colors were shown.
|
| And the first time, it randomly showed me a bunch of blues and I
| thought it was broken. It told me my perception was bluer than
| 99% of the population.
|
| But all the subsequent runs were very different, and not stable.
| duped wrote:
| It seems like the test is starts with a clear green or clear blue
| and then devolves into cyan and asks if you think it's blue or
| green. I think it's blue or green hinted cyan.
| semiinfinitely wrote:
| I think this website is broken. at the end it said that my blue
| threshold is way higher than all of the colors it showed me which
| I said were blue.
| lrobinovitch wrote:
| Ha, I made something in the same vein a few years ago:
| https://colorcontroversy.com/
| thinkingemote wrote:
| This is good too, particularly as it also shows this same issue
| with other colours.
|
| I'd like to see a combination website where it gives the
| answers at the end.
| remram wrote:
| This is great! What I would love is a way to compare myself
| with someone else though. I'm French and my wife is American,
| we have a lot of disagreement about colors (neither of us have
| vision deficiencies, we have ruled that out).
| grogenaut wrote:
| for a lot of them it was neither, it was turquoise or other
| colors, but thats not an option. I ended up at 68% because well
| that's what I was forced into. Like any survey that doesn't allow
| N/A.
| ddc777 wrote:
| That's definitely cyan, why did me have to pick a wrong color?
| Dwedit wrote:
| This is like showing a yellow screen and asking you if it's red
| or green.
| anilakar wrote:
| Depends on the angle I'm looking at the screen. The top edge is
| visibly green while the bottom is clearly blue.
| 0xDEADFED5 wrote:
| turquoise is green and i'll die on this hill
| Aardwolf wrote:
| > For you, turquoise is blue.
|
| I mean, turquoise is more like cyan, but it asked me to rate this
| color that's in-between green and blue as either blue or green so
| what can I do. It's like asking if orange is yellow or red.
| gnfargbl wrote:
| I was repeatedly asked to categorize a colour that I can only
| honestly describe as turquoise, as either green or blue. At the
| end of this process, I was told that I had failed to recognize
| turquoise. How silly.
| p4bl0 wrote:
| I had this result:
|
| > _Your boundary is at hue 171, greener than 72% of the
| population. For you, turquoise is blue._
|
| Of course there is a monitor and eyes component/biais tonthe
| measurement, but I also think this reveals something cultural. In
| France we call this color "bleu turquoise" so "turquoise" is not
| a color per se but a qualifier for the color blue.
|
| Interestingly, at some point in the test I really had a hard time
| choosing between green and blue and precisely thought "it's a
| perfect turquoise so just between the two, how to choose?" so I
| closed my eyes and looked at it again and decided... green for
| this one! I wouldn't have expected the final result it gave me!
| p4bl0 wrote:
| I just found this in the "about" section of the website:
|
| > _In early experiments, we found that people 's responses
| cluster around 175, which coincidentally is the same as the
| named HTML color turquoise. This is interesting, because the
| nominal boundary between blue and green is at 180, the named
| HTML color cyan. That means most people's boundaries are
| shifted toward saying that cyan is blue._
|
| That last sentence surprises me. At least in French, cyan is
| also considered a shade of blue. For turquoise I can understand
| that people would call turquoise green, but isn't cyan blue for
| everyone?
| voidUpdate wrote:
| This very quickly got to what I'd call "turquoise", and neither
| green or blue so I got a bit stuck
| arkh wrote:
| First run
|
| > Your boundary is at hue 174, just like the population median.
| You're a true neutral.
|
| Second run
|
| > Your boundary is at hue 174, bluer than 59% of the population.
| For you, turquoise is green.
|
| Third run
|
| > Your boundary is at hue 174, just like the population median.
| You're a true neutral.
|
| Now I have to try on another screen.
| smcameron wrote:
| I expected this to be about qualia. It's not. What I percieve to
| be red might be what you perceive to be blue, but we have no way
| to know this, because we will both call it by the same name. We
| have almost no insight into the qualia of others. Colorblindness
| is a chink in this armor. Not that I consider this a novel
| insight, it's something I thought of while a 10th grader back in
| 1984, and subsequently read about in books predating my own
| thoughts, such as Douglas Hofstadter's Metamagical Themas or
| Godel, Escher, Bach, or some other book I can't recall, though it
| seems quite obvious in any case.
| shahzaibmushtaq wrote:
| At 0% brightness, my hue is 167, bluer than 85% of the
| population.
|
| And at 100% brightness, my hue is 176, bluer than 69% of the
| population.
|
| This means that turquoise is green in sunlight and blue
| otherwise.
| fimdomeio wrote:
| Maybe that's because of much I learned about about color, but I
| very quickly get to a point where the correct answer can only be
| 50% blue, 50% green. Answering either blue or green feels wrong
| to me.
| anovikov wrote:
| Fantastic, we always had disagreements about colours with my wife
| - now i know why.
| 8bitsrule wrote:
| By chance, I was reading earlier today about the dilemma of
| recreating 'Tyrian purple', aka 'Royal purple', since knowledge
| of making (something like) it from sea snails was lost long ago
| (long before it was 'created in the lab' by Perkin in 1850s,
| igniting the German aniline industry). And the old faded art
| works (back when it was high fashion) are not so reliable either.
|
| The Wiki sez [0] that in 1998 the process was thought to have
| been discovered (who can be sure?) "True Tyrian purple, like most
| high-chroma pigments, cannot be accurately rendered on a standard
| RGB computer monitor" and shows 2 quite different swatches.
|
| [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrian_purple#Modern_hue_rende..
| .
| gokhan wrote:
| There's a color called turquoise.
| vanderZwan wrote:
| Lol, I have protanomaly. The second color they show is one that I
| perceive as light gray, and my only options are saying that it
| looks blue, that it looks green, or to reset. I reset. Now it
| lets me see three colors I can distinguish until I get a series
| of greys (I'm just clicking to see it through to the end).
|
| "For you, turquoise is green."
|
| It very much is not, sir.
| karoofish wrote:
| At the end, with the vertical bar, I felt that it was quite a bit
| left than than where it should be, it needed to be further into
| the green.
| martin-adams wrote:
| Same here, which is interesting when you see it next to more
| blue-blue. Maybe it's the relative effect.
| wazoox wrote:
| "For you turquoise is blue". Sure, it's even called in French
| "bleu turquoise", never "vert turquoise".
| ivanjermakov wrote:
| I think it's quite close-minded to call cyan green or blue.
| underwater wrote:
| You have a meta header that sets a strong blue theme-color on the
| top of the browser. I feel like this might be biasing the results
| on iOS Safari because, compared to this blue, turquoise appears
| comparatively green.
|
| Edit: it looks like the theme-color is meant to stay stuck as
| whatever the initial green/blue colour was. But for me, it shows
| as white if the initial choice is green.
| kang wrote:
| recommend the game 'i love hue' for realizing one's boundaries as
| a happy fun surprise
| gpattle wrote:
| Who wants the bet we'll see Is My Yellow Your Yellow on the front
| page tomorrow? Yellow and orange is another contentious issue.
| mrwww wrote:
| where is the "its teal" button?
| davidguetta wrote:
| I think the end result phrase is wrong.
|
| My line is on the greener side and it says im "bluer".
|
| The semantics are at best unclear on this last sentence
| sirdvd wrote:
| Zima Blue
| culebron21 wrote:
| Tested on full screen (24" display), got 175. Tested in small
| window, got 180.
| sdk77 wrote:
| On my phone, turquoise is green for me, but on my laptop it's
| blue. I guess that's why it's called turquoise. The same thing
| happens with the purple spectrum. There's an unlimited amount of
| purple hues, ranging from red purple to blue purple. That's why
| there's pink.
| harry_ord wrote:
| A lot of teal aand turquoise. Only saw blue at the start and
| green once.
| dubeye wrote:
| I read somewhere that cultures that have more words for shades of
| blues and greens, have brains that are objectively better at
| identifying minute differences in the shades.
|
| I've never said 'teal' out loud in my life and I'm useless at it,
| but greeks get top marks for eg
| lm28469 wrote:
| Yep, like some cultures have 10+ words for different types snow
| while people in warmer climate will bundle them all under
| "snow"
| hk__2 wrote:
| Isn't it largely a myth? I've heard this story for Inuit
| people but if you dig a bit you realize they just have a
| couple words for it.
| karaterobot wrote:
| English itself has dozens of words for snow, so I wouldn't
| be surprised if Inuit languages did too. In fact I'd be
| shocked if they didn't have complex ways of describing
| something so important.
| dghf wrote:
| So at the end, I'm shown a full-screen gradient from green to
| blue, with a line showing where my personal boundary between
| green and blue lies.
|
| Except that when I look at that gradient, it seems to me that the
| actual transition lies much further to the left, roughly in the
| middle of the screen: i.e., I'm being told that I consider a
| significant range of colours to be green that, on this final
| page, appear to me to be quite clearly blue.
| hooby wrote:
| I'm actually of the opinion, that blue-green colors like teal or
| turquoise are both green and blue at the same time. Basically a
| mixture.
|
| Having to pick just exclusively one - blue OR green - for such
| colors just feels, wrong and arbitrary?
|
| You could also make a website that shows various shades of purple
| - and ask people is it blue or red? Well, both! Purple is a
| mixture of both blue and red. Why treat teal differently than
| purple?
| cwales95 wrote:
| This was my opinion. Saying it's either blue or green when it
| looks to be a bit of both didn't sit well with me.
| cubefox wrote:
| This proves it, cyan is blue.
| alex-moon wrote:
| I'm doing it over and over again and getting different results
| each time, though the results seem to cluster around 174. I think
| part of the problem is that the response is primed by whatever
| you responded most recently, which means the final answer will
| tend toward (or away from?) whichever colour was shown first.
| (Might just be a me problem.)
| vullim wrote:
| I clicked "This is blue" whenever a green came up and "This is
| green" whenever it showed me a blue. Interestingly it didn't
| bother with any turquoises or cyans when I did this, it only
| showed me unambiguous blues and greens.
|
| At the end it told me " _Your_ boundary is at hue 180, bluer than
| 85% of the population. For _you_ , turquoise is green." Which I
| would've thought was impossible to discern from my choices.
| vullim wrote:
| Furthermore, there's some randomness to this. If I click only
| "This is blue" the hue boundary is different each time, in the
| end result. The lowest I got was "hue 134, greener than 100% of
| the population".
|
| Same for clicking only "This is green", with the highest
| observed boundary as "hue 226, bluer than 100% of the
| population".
| danbruc wrote:
| I expected this to be about the question whether your perception
| of blue might be like my perception of red. [1]
|
| [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evQsOFQju08
| sentientmachin3 wrote:
| I'm green red colorblind my result is "Your boundary is at hue
| 197, bluer than 99% of the population. For you, turquoise is
| green". I suppose that's because my cones don't detect green
| fully (without getting into the anatomic details of
| colorblindness). You should consider colorblind people aswell,
| this will make the results more interesting.
| buro9 wrote:
| I have a colour calibrated monitor, and landed at hue 181 which
| is almost dead centre.
|
| Fascinating... so I then tried on my mobile device and skewed to
| the left at 171.
|
| Retried the monitor, dead centre again. Retried the mobile
| device, back to the left.
|
| What device you use, the brightness, capabilities, calibration,
| environment... will all change the outcome.
| jimnotgym wrote:
| Did you calibrate it with a hardware calibrator?
| buro9 wrote:
| The monitor yes, the mobile lol no.
| illwrks wrote:
| Nice.
|
| But... this reminds me of an issue many years ago when i worked
| in a design agency. A client's marketing manager had been sent
| printed samples with spot colours for sign off. She was
| complaining about the colours not being correct...
|
| It turns out that someone in her team had taken photos of the
| printed items and emailed them to her because she was on the
| move. The correctly printed items were photographed in bad light
| with a camera phone, maybe it was an iPhone 3G around that
| time... which were then compressed and sent on email, and she was
| then comparing them on a poor quality PC laptop display...
|
| Sadly she wasn't the only one to raise a similar issue. Another
| guy was notorious for zooming in on 72dpi low quality images and
| complaining that the logo wasn't legible or sharp enough :D
| redrobein wrote:
| Interesting. Does anyone else see a band of green in their blue?
| My boundary is at 170. Greener than 85% of the population. This
| point looks like the transition between blue and green to me, to
| the right I can see the gradient go to blue then to green again,
| then back to blue. So there's a green band in the middle of my
| screen.
| cies wrote:
| I wonder how different the answers would be if simply the title
| was "is your green my green"
| tzot wrote:
| My threshold was at 176.
|
| I believe that an interval as threshold would be more interesting
| than a single value threshold. Perhaps if the user is shown N
| blocks from green to blue and then asked to drag&drop them to
| three buckets: green, not certain, blue?
| georgecoldham wrote:
| I feel like I achieved something by doing this. Thank you for
| sharing.
| Gaein_nidb wrote:
| This is a interesting website and I finished the test. But when I
| am in testing I relized that I am a daltonism and most of color
| that between green and blue is gray in my world :D (it just as
| same as my browser title bar)
| Zikaharun wrote:
| I don't know what is this.
| i5heu wrote:
| Ohhhh this is soo cool! I always wondered if my color perception
| is normal because sometimes i have the feeling that i do not have
| that much of saturation.
|
| Still failed to find such a test but this goes into this
| direction. Maybe this comment can help me with this search.
| lupire wrote:
| The websites shows a slope from green to blue across turquoise,
| but al most of this is almost certainly calibration error, and
| people being forced to say blue or green when they want to say
| turquoise.
|
| The true graph is most probably a very small slope on the green
| and blue ends, and rectangle of _measurement error_ in the
| middle. The "you are 70% greener" conclusion is a textbook
| example of false precision that ruins the science.
| theawesomekhan wrote:
| Surprisingly in some languages such as in my mother tongue
| "Pastho" : we have the same one single word for Blue and Green.
| let's call it blue.
|
| So we say "Blue like the sky? or blue like the grass"
| maxwell wrote:
| While Russian not only separates blue and green, but also light
| and dark blue.
|
| https://www.thoughtco.com/russian-colors-4776553
|
| And English includes indigo in the ROYGBIV rainbow because of
| Newton's numerology.
|
| https://nationalpost.com/news/why-the-colour-indigo-is-disap...
| rexpop wrote:
| > Someone forgot to check a physics textbook before sewing a
| flag, which isn't exactly a shocker.
|
| Why does the author find it necessary to mock "scientific
| accuracy at Gay Pride parades"? Especially when _the point_
| of the article is that 7 is no more "scientifically
| accurate" than the _gay_ 6?
|
| I think it's in very poor taste to suggest that to be gay is
| to be scientifically inaccurate.
| maxwell wrote:
| Yeah, I shouldn't've linked to the National Post, someone
| forgot to check a history textbook before publishing that
| article, which isn't exactly a shocker.
|
| The original rainbow flag from Gilbert Baker had 8 symbolic
| colors.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilbert_Baker_(artist)#Flag
| Suppafly wrote:
| >Surprisingly in some languages such as in my mother tongue
| "Pastho" : we have the same one single word for Blue and Green.
| let's call it blue.
|
| The history of language is like that, early on a population
| would have one word for both and then eventually distinguish a
| line between blue and green and then later start getting more
| specific shades from there.
| doctorhandshake wrote:
| I like the simplicity of this. There was a related game called
| Specimen that's worth checking out. http://playspecimen.com/
| OmarShehata wrote:
| Is the data collected by this open? Would absolutely love to take
| a peek/contribute to analyzing it
|
| (I'm trying to do similar experiments like this myself and I
| think it would be great if the data is published and we can like,
| reproduce each other's work/explore variants etc)
| kylecazar wrote:
| At 192, I apparently have high standards for blue
| michaelteter wrote:
| This is a classic problem of trying to choose a single label for
| anything.
|
| There are very few absolutes... maybe none.
|
| I like this test applied to an apple. . With no bites taken, is
| it an apple? (Of course) Now take a bite. Still an apple? (Most
| would say yes). Keep taking bites until it is just a core, or an
| even just a seed. Then?
|
| Maybe my favorite is just the boundary of one of us humans. Where
| is the boundary between me and not me? Obviously it's on the
| outer edge of my skin. But zoom in a lot, and you have this
| blue/green binary fit problem.
| Gormo wrote:
| Fundamentally, reality is a continuum of variation, and the
| categories and ontologies we define are just models that are
| useful for reconcile reality to our own cognitive capacities,
| rather than anything objectively true of the external world.
| svennidal wrote:
| I did this test multiple times and I get a mix of both extreme
| results. I think my vote of green or blue on the current color
| largely depends on the previously displayed color. E.g. If the
| previous color was a strong green, I'm more inclined to see a
| color between green and blue, bluer than it actually is.
| baggachipz wrote:
| This is like when you're at the optometrist and they keep
| flipping the lenses saying "better or worse?" and I'm like
| "better... no, worse. Hmm... well..."
| foxhop wrote:
| The universe is all about various spectrum and waves like sin.
| It's donuts and toroids all the way up and down, left and right.
| dustedcodes wrote:
| Love it, this is my result:
|
| Your boundary is at hue 174, bluer than 59% of the population.
| For you, turquoise is green.
| taylorbuley wrote:
| One thing that's really cool is how this differs by culture. Ask
| a Russian, and you'll get an answer that may diverge from an
| American.
| jade-cat wrote:
| I've taken the test multiple times, and ended up with my boundary
| being both greener than >70% of the population and bluer than
| >70% of the population in separate attempts. And I know my color
| perception to be good at distinguishing hue - it's just that I
| don't have strong opinions about categorizing it in this space.
|
| I'm pretty sure there's some hysteresis going on - if we randomly
| end up in the ambiguous zone on the bluer side, we'll be pressing
| "blue" every time a small change happens, because it's basically
| the same color. Until the changes add up so much that we're out
| of the ambiguous zone on the green side - and now our "border" is
| far on the green side. But if we started on the other side,
| entering the ambiguous zone from the green side, it'd take a big
| cumulative change before we press "blue".
| chiefrubberduck wrote:
| I got this :)
|
| Your boundary is at hue 177, bluer than 75% of the population.
| For you, turquoise is green.
| rybosworld wrote:
| If you do this in a fullscreen browser on a widescreen monitor,
| your peripheral vision will also come into play. You'll be able
| to see that the edges of the monitor are slightly different color
| than the center, because peripheral vision is less good at seeing
| color.
|
| When I shrunk the monitor down to a narrower window, I was
| getting more consistent results than otherwise.
| catoc wrote:
| As an anomalous trichromat I would love to see this for red and
| green as well!
| Suppafly wrote:
| I don't see the point in this is blue/green, when most languages
| have a name for the color that is between them. Pretending that
| teal, aka blue-green, aka cyan, etc, isn't a thing doesn't seem
| that useful if you are trying for a consensus. They should be
| asking, is this more green than blue or neither.
| islewis wrote:
| I'm curious how the aggregate results from this test would
| compare to the exact same test named "Is my green your green?"
|
| I could see the title influencing some of the more nuanced
| decisions in the middle.
| nsew wrote:
| If you guess the obvious wrong answer the choices between green
| and blue become more and more obvious. If you continue to guess
| wrong you end up with a boundary hue of 179 or 180 (bluer than
| 85% of the population). How is this possible? I'd suspect someone
| making the choices here would be colorblind and well into the
| 99.9th percentile.
| hpeter wrote:
| I got this: Your boundary is at hue 173, greener than 57% of the
| population. For you, turquoise is blue.
| mikewarot wrote:
| I know my blue isn't the same as it was before Cataract surgery.
| The world was a lot more yellow then. The benefit of not doing
| both eyes the same days in terms of complications and going blind
| is obvious. It gave me an A/B test as well to actually see the
| difference myself.
| whiterock wrote:
| I sent this to two friends and we got 163, 164 and 165. We are
| all maniacs in the +90% percentile I suppose xD.
| remram wrote:
| Where are you all from?
| rswerve wrote:
| The About pages notes that this was built with Claude Sonnet 3.5.
| Nice to see these real-world LLM uses where people who aren't
| front-end developers can share cool things.
| cranium wrote:
| If you want to have fun, try printing a logo with nuances of
| green on your CYMK printer. Nuances on the screen become a flat
| blob.
| pminimax wrote:
| Author here. I added fields so you can specify your first
| language (relevant link:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue%E2%80%93green_distinction...)
| and colorblindness.
|
| FAQ:
|
| * I can't know your monitor's calibration, your ambient light, or
| your phone's brightness. Obviously, this will affect the results.
| However, I am tracking local time of day and device type, from
| which we should be able to infer whether night mode and default
| calibration has any aggregate effects. Anecdotally, thus far, I
| haven't found any effects of Android vs. iPhone (N=34,000).
|
| * The order is randomized. Where you start from can influence the
| outcome, but methodologically it's better to randomize so the
| aggregate results average over starting point. You can run the
| test several times to see how reliable this is for you.
|
| * It's common practice in psychophysics to use two alternatives
| rather than three (e.g. blue, green, something in the middle). It
| would be a fun extension, which you can handle with an ordered
| logistic regression. The code is open if you want to take a shot
| at it: https://github.com/patrickmineault/ismyblue
|
| * I will release aggregate results on my blog,
| https://neuroai.science
|
| * I am aware of most of the limitations of this test. I have run
| psychophysics experiments in a lab on calibrated CRTs during my
| PhD in visual neuroscience. *This is just entertainment*. I did
| this project to see if I could make a fun webapp in Vue.js using
| Claude Sonnet, and later cursor, given that I am not highly
| proficient in modern webdev. A secondary point was to engage
| people in vision science and get them to talk and think about
| perception and language. I think it worked!
| kome wrote:
| some of your blue are actually azure to me
| KajMagnus wrote:
| It was fun but I messed up the statistics! I had Redshift
| running, which (maybe you know) makes the colors more reddish.
| And I got a bluer than 98% of the population result. Turning
| off Redshift ... makes me instead greener than bluer.
| pminimax wrote:
| I wouldn't worry about one datapoint out of 35,000 messing up
| the stats.
| KajMagnus wrote:
| That's a lot! Now I noticed: _" I am tracking local time of
| day[...] infer whether night mode [...] any aggregate
| effects."_
|
| So you've thought about that already :- ) (it's evening
| here)
| Moru wrote:
| I would guess the hackernews crowd has a higher percent of
| bluefilter installs since that is a very common topic.
| Probably also more agressive settings for the blue filter.
| scottdupoy wrote:
| My partner and I regularly disagree on blue vs green as the
| colours become more of a gray colour - might be interesting to
| randomise the brightness of the colours being displayed then
| seeing if the skew towards people perceiving blue Vs green
| changes as the colours become closer to gray.
| MayeulC wrote:
| I also often disagree on blue vs purple, which is
| inconvenient when we name the same coat two different colors.
|
| I think my "blue" is a way more specific shade than most
| people (hue 192 here, whatever that means on an uncalibrated
| display). Likewise, I'll usually say "purple" before others.
| beezle wrote:
| When done on my Xperia cell phone, even a small shift in screen
| orientation made the green leaners into obviously blue. Might
| be worthwhile capturing phone position if you can.
| Normal_gaussian wrote:
| This is a fantastic site.
|
| My partner and I were well aware of the limitations, but it has
| clearly demonstrated our difference in perceptions in a way we
| were both happy with. Being able to see where your partner
| lands relative to you is deeply satisfying.
| calimoro78 wrote:
| When you show the distribution at the end, it'd be cool to be
| able to select my own threshold not based on the test results but
| my reaction in the moment to the color palette. I found that the
| distribution did not line up with where I'd draw the line.
| splwjs wrote:
| I remember being in school and thinking that "what if my (color)
| is your (other color)" was a cool question, and then later I
| think I reasoned out that color is measurable so the actual color
| is objective, and the differences between different people is
| just like... rods and cones that are somehow different between
| people aka partial colorblindness.
|
| So I don't know what this is.
| Matheus28 wrote:
| I did it twice and landed on exactly 168 each time. Can't wait to
| show this to friends and argue.
| remram wrote:
| Twice on the same monitor?
| Matheus28 wrote:
| Yes. I'd assume it'd be slightly different on different
| monitors
| p0w3n3d wrote:
| Remember turning off your "eye protection" setting in android or
| you'll go left
| hammock wrote:
| "Your boundary is at hue 172, greener than 63% of the population.
| For you, turquoise is blue"
| QuercusMax wrote:
| I think it would be better to show a bunch of colors randomly and
| let you pick your blueness / greenness from that, instead of
| slowly converging to an answer with extremely similar choices
| near the end.
| JoblessWonder wrote:
| I used to have a lot of anxiety wondering if what my brain
| perceived as "Blue" was the same shade of "Blue" to other people.
| Like, sure, the sky is blue and a similar color to water for
| everyone.... but what if what I see as blue is actually red for
| other people and there is just no way to confirm because that is
| how our brain processes that frequency of light? I'm sure it
| isn't actually possible to confirm... but I was always interested
| in it.
|
| Late addition to comment:
|
| I just found this article that explains it well and has some
| theories on it: https://www.livescience.com/21275-color-red-blue-
| scientists....
| kolbe wrote:
| Ultimately it doesn't matter. Your "blue" is just a translation
| of that frequency to some distinguishable impression to allow
| you to see. But it's a good bet that the same wiring that went
| into your brain making that translation also went into other
| brains.
| dianne05 wrote:
| Actually that is a test only , we agree both to testing my
| monitor only, and experiencing what is cyber space.. atleast soon
| I am ready it could be happen...
| mncharity wrote:
| I'm reminded of xkcd's color survey map[1] and fun
| visualizations[2]. And a similar paper[3] with an interactive[4].
| Note the variation between linguistic groups, and high variance
| among individuals. Might be interesting to compare the results of
| TFA. There's also work on using google image search to learn
| color from names.[5] I was sketching a kids app for "use phone
| camera to name and collect colors".
|
| [1] map https://imgs.xkcd.com/blag/satfaces_map_1024.png from
| https://blog.xkcd.com/2010/05/03/color-survey-results/ [2]
| http://www.datapointed.net/visualizations/color/xkcd-common-...
| [3] short paper with pretty pictures
| https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10088356/1/Wuerger_A%2...
| [4] https://colornaming.net/ [5]
| https://inria.hal.science/inria-00439284/file/verbeek09tip.p...
| cdaringe wrote:
| My partner and I argue about gray vs green all of the time. Id
| love this test adapted to color vs gray too!
| izzydata wrote:
| Where is the Hatsune Miku's hair option?
| dariosalvi78 wrote:
| There's an issue of language here. For me, an Italian, blue is
| dark and "azzurro" is light. I played the game assuming that
| "azzurro"=Blue but I guess that sensitivity is skewed by
| semantics here. You can try to capture mother language too and
| see how it affects the statistics
| dehugger wrote:
| 169 here, for the guy scraping results.
| tigerlily wrote:
| Hmm, night mode on iPhone definitely messes with me. Without it
| score average, but with night mode on I got 185. Quite amazing! I
| can see this tool being useful for correcting monitor settings
| when making pixel art for games :)
| devit wrote:
| It needs three choices, since many of the colors are blue-green
| and the "this is blue" or "this is green" is essentially a random
| choice.
| seizethecheese wrote:
| Interesting. I am red/green colorblind, so would expect that I
| would be less sensitive to green. It turns out, my blue is 98%
| bluer than others. Could it be that what determines this is how
| much your mind overcompensates for a lack/abundance of cones in
| the eyes?
| jes5199 wrote:
| yeah this seems to detect my tritanomaly
| tracker1 wrote:
| Will vary a lot based on just window position and size... I got a
| very different score from the window fullscreen/centered vs off
| to the lower right when I first did it. My work monitor is not
| great, to say the least... will try on my personal display later.
|
| Towards the middle, I don't really see it as blue or green, but
| kind of accept that it's towards the middle. Half randomly
| selecting really.
| sublimefire wrote:
| lol since I was a kid I called this color "electric".
| pk-protect-ai wrote:
| lmao: "Your boundary is at hue 168, greener than 85% of the
| population. For you, turquoise is blue."
|
| When there is no choice to select proper color and you only
| forced to tell if it is green or blue, despite that you see how
| many green is in that blue. When you forced to call cyan a blue
| ... Amazing declaration of BS.
| gehwartzen wrote:
| A few interesting wiki reads on the subject:
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue%E2%80%93green_distincti...
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_term
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_color
| strogonoff wrote:
| If I call "blue" the same wavelength you call "blue", it does not
| mean your blue is the same as my blue.
| aucisson_masque wrote:
| > Your boundary is at hue 168, greener than 85% of the
| population. For you, turquoise is blue.
|
| I mean turquoise isn't blue and isn't green, what difference it
| makes if some say it's closer to green and some other say it's
| closer to blue. It's just turquoise.
| nocman wrote:
| "For you turquoise is blue" - no, for me turquoise is turquoise,
| but you did give me that as an option. Multiple times I thought
| to myself "I would not call this color blue or green, it is some
| variety of blue-green". So in my opinion that makes this whole
| test kind of nonsensical.
| eahm wrote:
| Did it yesterday right after I saw the link once and got 185
| (bluer than 97%..) but I've always had some passion for colors
| and variations, that's also why I like CSS. Anyway, funny to
| share but nothing changed in my life after that.
| andromaton wrote:
| Mine is 185. I am very fond of blue skies.
| hi-v-rocknroll wrote:
| Product from China in particular, what is sold as "red" is often
| red-orange.
| dianne05 wrote:
| I am here to talked about unblocked this
| Glyptodon wrote:
| I've very confused - is turquoise not supposed to be blue? (So
| far as I know the best turquoise is a kind of light but saturated
| blue...) (Got 169.)
| fbarred wrote:
| Reminder to turn off f.lux or "night light" or "night shift".
|
| My score was at 98th percentile, and dropped to 75th after I
| remembered I had a blue light filter on.
| roshankhan28 wrote:
| i have a gaming monitor and the results on it differ as compared
| to when i do it on mac.
| ark4n wrote:
| This seems kinda flawed, I did the test a few times and got very
| different results, from 80% blue to 80% green.
| AlexDragusin wrote:
| To start you down a colorful rabbit hole:
|
| BBC Horizon: Do you see the same colours as me?
| https://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/tv/entries/24bbc4b8-58f9-373d-a8...
|
| Episode here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b013c8tb
| merryocha wrote:
| I thought my results were a bit strange until I remembered that I
| leave Night Light on 24/7 on my PC.
| irrational wrote:
| My results are: bluer than 75% of the population. For you,
| turquoise is green. Isn't turquoise green for everyone? And, what
| does it mean that I'm bluer than 75% of the population?
| itslennysfault wrote:
| Is there a reason this code is so complex? For example, the code
| where it picks the next color uses this sigmoid function (
| https://github.com/patrickmineault/ismyblue/blob/main/src/ut... )
| to increment the hue.
|
| Is there a specific reason you didn't just have a list of a dozen
| or so colors and shuffle the array when the app starts? Just
| curious about the reasoning behind this and the value it
| provides.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-09-04 23:01 UTC)