[HN Gopher] Find the Odd Disk
___________________________________________________________________
Find the Odd Disk
Author : layer8
Score : 183 points
Date : 2025-04-20 19:17 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (colors2.alessandroroussel.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (colors2.alessandroroussel.com)
| OisinMoran wrote:
| I think this would be more fun if it started out easier, but most
| importantly if it gave you some real world stats at the end, such
| as how you compare to others, or whether you're colorblind etc.
| Freak_NL wrote:
| I found it did start out really easy, getting harder half way.
| You might have some form of colour blindness (or a really bad
| monitor).
| zootboy wrote:
| I wish this had a "I can't tell" option. A few of the really hard
| ones I got right, but I'd say it was more of a lucky guess than a
| genuine ability to discriminate the difference.
| Freak_NL wrote:
| Quite. With the odds being 1 to 3 you'll pick the right one
| when you have to click one at random to proceed, the results
| get skewed.
| Retr0id wrote:
| If you repeat the test a few times, it'll average out.
| lucb1e wrote:
| That's why there's 20 rounds I guess. If you could just
| press "all the same" it wouldn't have to be as many
| isoprophlex wrote:
| 18/20 correct, I think I did well? Interesting how sometimes it's
| more of a feeling than an objective perception.
|
| At the end it says I can play again, because it'll generate more
| data. But for what?
|
| It'd be cool to see some stats, or learn a bit more about what I
| just did...
| tripdout wrote:
| 17 out of 20. Was super easy until #10 and I had to stop and
| think more carefully (which was actually my first mistake), and
| then I got #14 and #15 wrong. The score was about what I
| expected, though - would've been surprised if it was <15 correct.
|
| I wonder how much of this would come down to screen calibration /
| color accuracy? If everything's consistently off in 1 direction I
| guess not much, but I would imagine certain shades might appear
| effectively the same on some cheaper screens?
| layer8 wrote:
| This is from the creator of the ScienceClic YouTube channel [0]:
|
| "As part of the next video, which will be out in a few weeks, l'd
| like to invite you to take part in an experiment about color
| perception. If you don't experience color blindness, l'd greatly
| appreciate it if you could take this test. Feel free to try it as
| many times as you like, think about it as a game!"
|
| [0] https://youtube.com/@scienceclicen
| nkrisc wrote:
| Would be interesting to get some basic analysis of my results.
| From a glance it appeared that the ones I missed (6) tended
| towards red. The low saturation ones and green ones I found to be
| easiest, but was there any actual significance of the
| distribution of my errors? Simply too small a set to say?
| hilbert42 wrote:
| I got the same number wrong but I've passed every Ishihara test
| ever thrown at me. I did this test on a cheap mobile that's not
| calibrated, so it's anyone guess what its gamma and transfer
| curves are like.
|
| One should only take such tests seriously if one's using a
| properly calibrated monitor and it's viewed under ideal viewing
| conditions.
| robertclaus wrote:
| Interesting! All of my misses were blue leaning a bit towards
| violet.
| kamma4434 wrote:
| Same here. The blues/purples were all alike. Reds and greens
| were easier.
| blueflow wrote:
| How much of the result is vision accuracy and how much is
| dependant of the display?
| hilbert42 wrote:
| As I've mentioned, you can't take this seriously unless you've
| a properly calibrated monitor.
| wtallis wrote:
| Calibrating a monitor is intended to ensure that colors on
| your monitor closely match colors on an ideal reference
| monitor. That's not the same thing as ensuring that two
| different colors on the same monitor actually show up
| differently; that's a much looser quality standard, because
| even a badly mis-calibrated monitor may still show both
| colors as distinct wrong colors.
|
| I would only expect poor calibration to break this test for
| colors near the edge of the display's gamut, or if there's a
| drastic-enough shift that the color space's lack of
| perceptual uniformity means a numerical difference that
| _should_ have been visible ends up in a different part of the
| color space where that same numerical difference is not
| perceptible.
| hilbert42 wrote:
| Well, I initially ran the test on my cheap vivo phone when
| I switched to my Motorola the difference was very
| noticeable, there's obvious color crushing/reduced visible
| color gamut on the vivo, they're like chalk and cheese when
| compared side by side.
|
| BTW, I used to calibrate color grading equipment for the
| film processing industry and the controls were strict, 18%
| gray walls, D65 calibration sources, densitometric
| equipment, Ishihara tests for me, etc. so I'm well aware of
| the issues.
| zamalek wrote:
| I think you mean gamut? Calibration would only make the discs
| have the _most_ correct color, not discernible colors.
| schobi wrote:
| There is certainly also a device limitation. I would expect
| that with less than full 24 bits of color, some fields might
| just look the same and the results do not depend on your vision
| any more.
|
| Let's say the device has a "24 bit color display". What about
| eye protection color shifting? This limits the color space used
| could reduce the effective remaining bit depth. Or maybe they
| do temporal dithering to get more bit depth? Or maybe the 24
| bits are already achieved with temporal dithering?
|
| It does not need to be a calibrated display, but a cheap tablet
| in sunlight will be worse than a color grading monitor in a
| reference environment.
|
| I hope they also register the devices used and analyze the
| statistics on that.
| nuancebydefault wrote:
| What stood out a lot in this exercise is that when looking at,
| versus near a disc, its luminance (or maybe the color as well) is
| perceived as changing. Almost the same i have when staring at not
| too bright stars, they seem to disappear when staring directly on
| them.
|
| And related, I once had an 'eye migrane'. During that half an
| hour, the figures of a clock disappeared the moment i looked at
| them.
| fallinghawks wrote:
| I'm curious how the eye migraine is related. I had one many,
| many years ago. It was a smallish (palm at arm's length) oval
| in the center of my vision that looked like snow on an analog
| TV, accompanied by a feeling of overwhelmed by all the colors
| of the products on the shelves (I was in a grocery). It stuck
| around for about half an hour for me as well.
|
| I've also had eye floaters which cause things to distort and
| can be hard to see through. For about 6 months I had a large
| one in the center of my left eye vision, which was a bit scary
| when I discovered I might not see a car reflected in my wing
| mirror.
| twodave wrote:
| I've had visual migraines ever since I started training hard
| with weights. Played sports in High School and never had one,
| but suddenly I'm doing CrossFit in my late 30s and an hour
| after a workout I get these sparkly jagged lines in my vision
| (both eyes!). It took a while to even be able to describe
| them, let alone figure out what they were. Thankfully there's
| no pain and they clear up after a while, but I have noticed
| since this all started that I'm also a bit more sensitive to
| screen brightness. That HDR emoji article from the other day
| was kind of triggering.
| z0r wrote:
| Sounds like symptoms of impending retinal detachment - ex
| discussion https://www.reddit.com/r/myopia/comments/o7rhi3/
| retinal_deta...
| robbiep wrote:
| The characteristic 'jagged lines' of aura is not at all
| related to the characteristic visual flashes of retinal
| detachment which an entirely different pathophysiology.
| Given that the advent of the flashes are new and related
| to exertion however it wouldn't be unreasonable for the
| OP to keep a log of onset and duration and consider
| neurologist referral if they were to become more common
| with consideration for screening imaging as there are
| certain conditions related to exertion that can trigger
| aura
| twodave wrote:
| I doubt it. I've described the issue to multiple eye
| doctors, none of whom mentioned this. It's literally a
| psychedelic looking jagged line in my vision (which I can
| see with either of my eyes closed, superimposed over my
| vision). I'd think if it were an eye issue directly it
| only affect one or the other (or if both, it would be
| discernible which one is flaring up).
|
| During an episode I usually first notice it as it is
| entering my focal region and interfering with reading.
| Then it sort of moves across my field of vision until
| it's in my peripheral, and then goes away altogether.
| gblargg wrote:
| I had visual migraines for years, and was thankful they
| weren't full-blown... until I started getting headaches
| that lasted 18+ hours (pretty sure they're migraines). Now
| I'm just thankful I don't have multi-day-long ones.
| alternatex wrote:
| The symptoms you mention read like scintillating scotoma:
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scintillating_scotoma
|
| I've had it happen many times and it's usually followed by a
| regular headache. Quite terrifying the first few times it
| happened to me. Felt like I was losing my sight.
|
| Spending the whole night gaming when I was younger would
| sometimes trigger it in the morning. Thanks to not having any
| more time for that, it hasn't happened in years.
| RetroTechie wrote:
| Similar experience. What surprised me: sometimes the odd-one-
| out was really quick/easy to see, and other times it took much
| longer & I thought "at the end, they'll say all disks were the
| same color".
|
| Got 14/20
| mrguyorama wrote:
| For some of the easier ones, I was surprised by how
| aggressively my brain was making what seemed like "close"
| colors stand out. Like it was mentally "highlighting" the odd
| one out. I thought that was cool, but eventually the later
| ones were hard enough that the effect went away, and I was
| much less confident in my choices, and I got 3 mistakes, all
| in the last five rounds.
|
| The way your brain manipulates your vision 24/7, with no way
| to get around that, is truly crazy to me. There's all sorts
| of effects in your visual system like edge detection and
| certain types of stimulus suppression that it's crazy we even
| feel like reality is coherent.
| Liftyee wrote:
| I experienced this too. IIRC the brightness-sensitive rod cells
| are more concentrated in your peripheral vision while your
| central vision has more colour-sensitive cone cells. This makes
| the centre of your vision less sensitive to dim objects, so you
| can see them only while looking indirectly (and they
| "disappear" when staring at them)
|
| Another related effect is flickering of badly designed lighting
| only in my peripheral vision. When looking directly at the
| lights they look fine, but when the lights are in my peripheral
| vision they appear to flash distractingly. I think the
| peripheral vision is optimised to detect fast
| changes/movements. At least, that makes sense based on
| evolution.
| moebrowne wrote:
| This is referred to as 'Averted Vision'
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Averted_vision
| fallinghawks wrote:
| 19/20. The first many were very obvious. I missed #14 and I think
| right around there I started to slow down because the differences
| were getting smaller. Looking away and then coming back helped, I
| think. It seemed like if you look at them too long, whichever
| circle you're looking at seems to shift color and it becomes
| really hard to discern the difference.
| archmaster wrote:
| Interesting. Got 19/20 too, and also missed #14!
| Animux wrote:
| Was way easier after deactivating the Android night light.
| Retr0id wrote:
| Interesting. I only got 15/20, and previously considered myself
| "above average" at colour distinction tests but based on other
| replies that's not an especially good score. I'll try again,
| going more carefully.
| Retr0id wrote:
| Ah, yes, 19/20 the second time (only the last one wrong).
|
| The first time I kept my eyes fixed in the same place roughly
| in the middle which clearly wasn't a good idea. On the second
| attempt I glanced between each circle in turn, trying to
| discern the difference over two points in time rather than two
| points in space.
| thechao wrote:
| I have poor color discrimination, but excellent flicker
| detection (?). This last skill was discovered by the senior
| devs when I was doing GPU driver debug, and "we" were looking
| for an extremely transient high-refresh rate tile clear issue.
| The issue only occurred at 120Hz (or higher) refresh rate with
| solid clear color on a large screen, with nearly identical
| colors. About one 4x8 pixel tile every minute or so. That was a
| boring few days, let me tell you.
| dvh wrote:
| Your score: 20 out of 20. Mistakes: 0
| two_handfuls wrote:
| Black text on dark grey background, sorry, that's too hard to
| read.
| wtallis wrote:
| Your display might have a more serious gamma problem, because
| the contrast ratio there isn't horrible on the displays I've
| tried. Or maybe your display is just set too dim for your
| viewing conditions. The test probably does legitimately need
| the neutral grey background.
| layer8 wrote:
| It's true that white text would be more readable on that
| background: https://www.achecks.org/apca-accessible-colour-
| contrast-chec...
|
| The dark-mode browser extension I use changes the text from
| black to white on that page, which I hadn't noticed wasn't the
| original text color until you pointed out the poor readability
| of the black text.
| MisterTea wrote:
| 7/20. I'm also red green colorblind so that likely has something
| to do with it. Could also be the phone screen I'm looking at.
| MisterTea wrote:
| With phone screen on full brightness I was able to get 14/20.
| ilker2495 wrote:
| 17 out of 20. good enough for me. actually, i wonder how many of
| the 17 were just lucky guesses haha! they mention data in the end
| screen, i wonder if it will be made public (so i can see where in
| the bell curve i sit)
| jjmarr wrote:
| 19/20 somehow on my first try. Near the end was just tiny
| differences in saturation or brightness.
| _Algernon_ wrote:
| 17/20
|
| Wonder how big an influence the type and quality of screen has.
| Do OLEDS give an advantage for instance?
| vinnymac wrote:
| 19/20 the neon blue one really messed with my head and kind of
| hurt to look at for some reason, so I am not surprised I got it
| wrong.
| rkagerer wrote:
| My 14/20 went up to 18/20 after I turned up my phone brightness.
| amelius wrote:
| I think it matters what colors you looked at in the previous
| screen. It takes a while for the eyes to adjust.
| yellowapple wrote:
| 13 out of 20 for me. Would've been 14 but I misclicked on one
| early on.
| lucb1e wrote:
| How do I know my screen can display all of these correctly? I
| tried on three different screens, one of which I know is bad, and
| got 16, 16, 18. Is those two mistakes the error margin of the
| screen if my eyes are fine, or much more likely to be the error
| margin of my eyes?
|
| For those reporting scores: please also report device type, like
| LCD/OLED, or which phone model if applicable. Tweakers.net has a
| large database of screen color measurements. As mentioned in e.g.
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43746400, it can make quite
| a difference
|
| My 18 score was on an Oppo Reno8, the 16 score on the not-known-
| bad screen is some ~2008 display. On the former, Tweakers reports
| an average color error of 3.42 DE2000, 9.58 DEITP, or 2.60 DE2000
| if white is excluded
| theoa wrote:
| Browser > right click on the dot > inspect the RGB numbers
| fuzztester wrote:
| Clever.
| Mogzol wrote:
| The first line on the page says
|
| > Click the disk that's a different color. Use your eyes only!
|
| Inspecting the color is cheating.
| fuzztester wrote:
| Tried it briefly, upto 6. Got all right. Gonna do more later.
|
| Need some interesting optical illusion type of posts on HN!
| fuzztester wrote:
| Escher's creations are cool. Our chemistry teacher introduced
| us to them in school.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/M._C._Escher
| lucb1e wrote:
| I was wondering if it got harder or if it's just random:
| function generateColors(difficulty, blacklist) { ...
| let sample = Math.floor(Math.min(Math.max(0,
| 1-Math.pow(1-difficulty, 1.5)), .99)*5); let distance
| = (5 - sample)/5; ... } function
| setupRound(blacklist) { ... const data =
| generateColors(currentRound/totalRounds, blacklist);
| ... }
|
| Plotting that first magic:
| https://lucb1e.com/randomprojects/js/testformula.htm#%24%28%...
| round# difference 0-- 2 5 3-- 5 4
| 6-- 9 3 10--13 2 14--20 1
|
| The "blacklist" parameter prevents that you get the same
| challenge twice. Note also that it submits every answer to the
| server (fine imo, but I think it would be even nicer if this was
| mentioned on the page)
| tennysont wrote:
| I appreciate
| https://lucb1e.com/randomprojects/js/testformula.html, it's a
| cool idea!
| lucb1e wrote:
| Happy to hear, though note the file is without l (lowercase
| L) in the end (I guess autocorrupt is to blame here?). Fun
| fact: if you remove the filename, it'll show you all the crap
| in that directory, listing this file as being last modified
| in 2015-09-27. If past performance is an indicator, it should
| be stable to use for the next ten years as well :D
| readingnews wrote:
| Thanks for posting, I thought the same thing... my (useless
| data point of one) results showed 100% accuracy except the last
| four, which I thought "wow, I am just guessing now, can
| literally not see a difference".
| morning-coffee wrote:
| Not sure what to make of this. Most looked the same and I
| couldn't tell if I was really seeing a difference or not. 12/20.
| (And I am color blind, so not sure if that has a lot to do with
| it or not.)
| havan_agrawal wrote:
| Shouldn't there also be a few "control" challenges sprinkled in
| where all three are the same color and there's no "right" answer?
| If the test is implemented well and/or there is no human bias
| (either from the previous question or from the positioning of the
| circles), then you'd expect to see a uniform distribution of
| answers on the control. If there is bias (e.g. some innate
| preference for the top circle (say)), that should get adjusted
| for in the final analysis.
| smusamashah wrote:
| 14/20. Increased brightness to full, turned off blue light filter
| (aka night light on Android), zoomed in, scrolled the circles up
| and down to dissipate after image from eyes, 19/20.
| fmajid wrote:
| I got 17/20, but then again I have a high-end NEC PA302W hardware
| color-calibrated monitor.
| tkcranny wrote:
| 18/20 on an iPhone - they've have Display P3 wide colour for
| many years.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| 18/20 on an uncalibrated "gamer" spec display with windows'
| late night colour yellowing turned on. I'd argue
| spec/calibration isn't maybe that important, as long as a
| difference can be spotted.
| dark-star wrote:
| I got 16/20 but I am colorblind and tried it on a small 8+ year
| old laptop screen in dubious lighting conditions :)
| colordrops wrote:
| 20/20 but I've always done well on these color tests. I had to
| pause for a second and look with my head twisted though so the
| afterimage of the previous color didn't affect the next one.
| susam wrote:
| 19/20 - <https://i.imgur.com/GplfQbO.png>
|
| By the way, I keep Night Shift enabled all the time:
| <https://i.imgur.com/LGkSlJZ.png>. I don't know how much it
| matters in a game like this.
|
| See also <https://susam.net/myrgb.html> for a colour guessing
| game I wrote last year.
| richrichardsson wrote:
| > I don't know how much it matters in a game like this.
|
| Probably significantly since it explicitly tells you to disable
| any blue light filters on your screen.
|
| I think the website needs to be more explicit that this is
| trying to gather data and that deviating from the test
| parameters will skew the results.
| terr-dav wrote:
| 20/20 (once) - I found that by looking at the edge between the
| border and color sample that I could usually tell pretty quickly.
| ryao wrote:
| This seems to be a test of the color accuracy of a display. I got
| 17/20 and the 3 I got wrong were the last 3. I did this on my
| iPad Pro. For the last ones, they all looked the same to me.
| gblargg wrote:
| I wondered whether any display issues caused some to have no
| difference. I wonder whether it could somehow do a test to be
| sure your display is up to the task. It's annoying not knowing
| whether it's a visual limitation or hardware issue that causes
| wrong ones.
| ryao wrote:
| I just tried this on my desktop's monitor, which unlike my
| iPad Pro that was factory calibrated, has never been
| calibrated as far as I know. By round 11, the colors were
| nearly imperceptible, although I managed to answer 4 more
| correctly for a total of 14/20. Those additional 4 were
| likely more the result of luck than actual perception.
| wrs wrote:
| Toward the end, I think the confounding effect of the afterimages
| of the discs was bigger than the difference between the discs.
| (That is, when looking at the three discs in turn, the effect of
| the afterimage of disc 1 on judging disc 2, etc.)
| aimor wrote:
| I noticed this too. I did much better covering up two of the
| disks and looking at them one at a time, or comparing pairs of
| disks.
| gblargg wrote:
| It could rearrange the discs each time to avoid this issue,
| perhaps just flipping the pattern vertically each time.
| 1970-01-01 wrote:
| Not bad, I only missed 2 on purple and 2 on brown. It seems those
| laser safety and solar eclipse goggles do indeed work!
| the__alchemist wrote:
| Aww. 16/20. Seems like this is the worst score anyone's posted,
| other than the color-blind guy who tied me.
| Liftyee wrote:
| Is it sleep deprivation or do the disks actively change colour
| and swap places?
|
| I think this must be a low light optical illusion - something to
| do with different sensitivity in center of eyes vs peripheral.
| Will try again in the daytime.
| daemonologist wrote:
| I definitely noticed that effect (it's late here as well) - I
| found it necessary for the last couple to look at the center of
| the triangle rather than each dot in turn.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| 11 of 20.
| saagarjha wrote:
| Oh god this is colorblindness torture
| akww wrote:
| does 20/20 on my first try mean i get the job?
| coolcoder613 wrote:
| 19/20. I'm on a MacBook, so I have a pretty good screen.
| noduerme wrote:
| Got 18/20. I chalk that up to spending years as a graphic
| designer. I'd like to see a similar study about which text was
| perfectly kerned, or by how many pixels an element was off-center
| or misaligned. I can spot that on billboards a block away, and my
| life is therefore a constantly grating experience.
|
| Marginally related. I paint oils as a hobby, and my studio gets
| northern light, usually overcast and cloudy, during the day.
| Differentiating tiny color variations under those conditions is
| very easy, and in general your objective "pitch perfect"
| impression of color is also pretty accurate. However, I've
| painted in the same room at night under a "warm" LED bulb, and
| been absolutely shocked at how wrong and _blue_ everything turned
| out when seen in the light of day. Not just that, but the hues I
| intended to be close to one another are much farther apart than
| they appeared under LED lighting.
|
| So if lighting conditions can shift not just your perception of a
| color, but also its relationship to the ones around it, then I
| think how much more does your screen gamma and range alter that?
| A fair test would be printed on the exact same Heidelberg in 4
| colors.
| 01HNNWZ0MV43FF wrote:
| Swear on me mum I saw a game about kerning and alignment years
| ago on HN or proggit and of course it's impossible to find on
| search
| evulhotdog wrote:
| I recall playing one that had to do with making sure the
| kerning was aligned...
| pronoiac wrote:
| Kern Type, perhaps? https://type.method.ac/
| noduerme wrote:
| This is absolutely brilliant! And an example of why every
| time I come up with an idea, I should check to see
| whether someone else had made it before. But brilliant.
|
| I got 100/100 on the first six, except for "Yves" where I
| got 70/100. I think they're wrong on that one. From any
| distance, the v should really nestle beneath the Y.
|
| Gonna send this to all my design nerd friends, thank you.
| isp wrote:
| > I'd like to see a similar study about which text was
| perfectly kerned, or by how many pixels an element was off-
| center or misaligned.
|
| > Swear on me mum I saw a game about kerning and alignment
| years ago on HN
|
| _Can 't Unsee_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27188989 - May 2021 (126
| comments)
| rcxdude wrote:
| Yeah, metamers are a trip and a bad LED bulb will really screw
| with the appearance of colors. If anything, screens are more
| consistent, but more limited.
| nine_k wrote:
| Regarding the LED lights: unless you use a lamp with CRI < 90,
| you see obvious, glaring color distortions, and some colors
| just "disappear", cannot be seen, because of the lack of a
| particular spectrum bands. Sadly, most inexpensive LED lamps
| have CRI around 80, and that light feeld definitely artificial,
| even if pleasant to the eye. A lamp with CRI 90 is okay, most
| things look natural, even though you can notice it's not
| sunlight. A lamp with CRI 95 is very fine, it's practically
| sunlight, and most tricky colors are visible well. I've never
| encountered a lamp with CRI, say, 97, but they exist and cost a
| lot.
|
| (Source: doing object photography.)
| madaxe_again wrote:
| Surely an incandescent bulb, being a black body radiator, has
| a CRI of 100? Yes, the temperature is low compared to
| sunlight, but the rendering is theoretically perfect.
|
| I suppose if you want to get closer to sunlight, you need a
| carbon arc, which is only a few hundred degrees cooler and
| again, a perfect black body emitter.
| jerf wrote:
| Yes. An incandescent bulb is basically the reference for
| CRI 100. The parent of your poster is explicitly discussing
| non-incandescent technologies.
| jrapdx3 wrote:
| IME producing artwork that relies on subtle color
| relationships requires high quality, "full spectrum"
| illumination. Natural daylight is the obvious canonical
| option, but of course not always practical.
|
| My studio gets very little natural light, so selecting
| optimum light sources is crucial. At one time the most
| practical option was D50 compliant fluorescent tubes, but
| these were only fairly acceptable.
|
| Situation with LED lamps is also difficult. Even CRI 90 is
| inadequate, mainly poor red emission and excessive blue
| radiation. However D50 compliant LED fixtures are available
| if somewhat more expensive vs. typical LED lamps.
|
| One vendor worth checking out is Waveform Lighting [0]. They
| offer several types of products with CRI 95 and CRI 99. I've
| been using their D50 'shop light' for several months and find
| it very satisfactory.
|
| [0] https://www.waveformlighting.com
| slowwriter wrote:
| I got 19/20. Turned off True Tone and cranked the screen
| brightness. Half the time I didn't know if it was just my eyes
| playing tricks on me, but it was interesting to notice how the
| colors seemed completely indiscernible for a few seconds and
| then suddenly one stood out.
| 0xTJ wrote:
| I also got 18/20, I was confident on most of them, blinking I
| found "reset" my vision and made it easier. This was on my
| relatively comfortable (not too bright) monitor.
| junon wrote:
| 18/20 :D The only two I couldn't really discern were indeed the
| ones that I got wrong.
|
| I'd be curious to see some sort of score for each in terms of
| similarity in terms of human perception, just to get a scale of
| difficulty.
| js2 wrote:
| The X-Rite Color Challenge and Hue Test:
|
| _Are you among the 1 in 255 women and 1 in 12 men who have some
| form of color vision deficiency? If you work in a field where
| color is important, or you're just curious about your color IQ,
| take our online challenge to find out. Based on the Farnsworth
| Munsell 100 Hue Test, this online challenge is a fun, quick way
| to better understand your color vision acuity._
|
| https://www.xrite.com/hue-test
|
| (My memory is that the full test used to be online.)
| red75prime wrote:
| What is "color IQ"? Color identification quotient?
| danw1979 wrote:
| Definitely not a brag, but I scored 20/20 on my first attempt. Is
| this because my phone has a particularly good screen that renders
| colours very accurately?
|
| I'm not in any way involved with art or graphic design or have
| any experience working with anything to do with colours so I
| can't chalk it up to experience.
| laserbeam wrote:
| I honestly felt the grime on my phone's screen had more impact on
| my accuracy than anything else. Sometimes i'd just rotate my
| phone and instantly spot the difference after the disks moved.
| throwaway0665 wrote:
| Towards the end the disk I was looking at would change color and
| become brighter than the others. I didn't notice until I focused
| on each one at a time and the "different" one became the one I
| was looking at.
| bobbyblackstone wrote:
| Your score: 17 out of 20. Mistakes: 3
| kuratkull wrote:
| 14 and 15 when doing it relatively quickly. 20/20 when i looked
| away from the screen for circa 5-10 seconds after each difficult
| set from 10th one onwards.
| nand_gate wrote:
| 16/20 speedrun, all my mistakes were within the final 5 weirdly.
| Boredom?
| dusted wrote:
| Interesting, it'd be neat if it showed the one you missed.. I had
| 19 of 20 correct, but I don't know which one I got wrong.. and my
| wife tells me I'm terrible with colors because I insist most
| turquoise are greener than they're blue :P
| nottorp wrote:
| Hmm M3 macbook pro screen, brightness at max.
|
| At about 13/20 they all started to look the same. I even turned
| off truetone at like 16.
|
| I ended up scoring 15/20, but it's more like 12/20 and 3 lucky
| guesses.
|
| But then I'm well known to not know or care about subtle colour
| differences.
| matja wrote:
| 18/20. I struggled most with the blue ones, but it was actually a
| purple and a green one that I got wrong - which wasn't what I was
| expecting! ASUS sRGB OLED at 50% brightness.
| Night_Thastus wrote:
| 17/20, not too bad. My failures were a blue, purple and brown
| example.
|
| As others have said, a lot of this also comes down to what
| monitor and OS you're using, glossy/matte screen type, interior
| lighting and how everything is configured. This will be a lot
| easier with an OLED and all but impossible with an old TN panel.
| And whether HDR is enabled or sRGB mode, etc.
| alyandon wrote:
| 17/20 for me on Windows 10 with a cheap(ish) 27" 1440p gaming
| monitor. I really struggled with the purples so I'm wondering if
| that is more the monitor than my eyeballs.
| kimbernator wrote:
| 13/20. Didn't analyze the results, but I immediately tried it on
| my other monitor and got 19/20.
| tristor wrote:
| Got 18/20, which I credit mostly to my calibrated display and
| photographer's eye for color. That said, both of the ones I
| missed were blue and I am wearing glasses that have some blue
| light filtering, which likely negatively impacted my perception
| of the blue parts of the color spectrum. It's food for thought as
| to whether or not I can effectively do post-processing of my
| photos while wearing glasses like these.
|
| Interesting idea though. I wonder what the distribution looks
| like?
| Teknoman117 wrote:
| Apparently I have trouble telling the difference between
| different shades of pink...
| aaroninsf wrote:
| I'm not sure there is strong signal about individual performance
| or human perception in the noise of variation between displays,
| display settings, and, angle of view.
|
| I have two monitors stacked vertically and this loaded on the top
| one and I'm fairly sure the latter was as big a factor as actual
| difference for the least-varying challenges.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-04-21 23:02 UTC)