
Online Color Challenge - ibrad
http://www.xrite.com/online-color-test-challenge
======
poopchute
I already know that I'm colourblind, but if anyone else is curious what those
results would look like; Here ya go:
[http://imgur.com/a/OgnuM](http://imgur.com/a/OgnuM)

Something of interest that I noticed is the fairly constant gap between areas
of low colour acuity

~~~
egeozcan
I didn't concentrate too much but still wonder if my score of 49 is something
I should be worried about?
[http://i.imgur.com/WqRonYi.png](http://i.imgur.com/WqRonYi.png)

~~~
stan_rogers
Why worry about something you can't fix? (Unless, of course, your monitor, not
your vision, is the problem.) Unless you "do colour" for a living and have
wondered why clients aren't banging down your door, it's probably not a real-
world problem for you. (If it was a problem severe enough to be a safety
hazard or mangle your fashion sense to the point that a hypothetical
Garanimals For Grownups might be helpful, you would probably be acutely aware
of it by now.) Hell, there's even at least one "name" professional
photographer (Joel Grimes) who would score worse than you did. (Your problem
is relatively subtle, apart from a bit of a mess in the red/yellow/green
transition. You would probably have some real difficulty distinguishing the
yellows of an egg yolk, a buttercup and a lemon, or at least being able to
spot them in isolation. As handicaps go, I've seen worse.)

~~~
egeozcan
Well, I also do front-end web development from time to time and when I do,
maybe I should consider having much more external advice on design matters
than before. I never thought I had _any_ problems, that's what worried me.
Thank you very much for the explanation.

------
mjs7231
Perfect score! Test takes a bit of time, I got bored about half way through. I
wonder how I would do on not a nice a monitor.

~~~
NaNaN
Want more challenges? Try this:
[http://color.method.ac](http://color.method.ac)

~~~
brute
Or try blendoku: [http://www.blendoku.com/](http://www.blendoku.com/)

------
agf
Interesting test. I got a 4, much better than I expected, on my RMBP.

Anyone else here take the XKCD color survey back in 2010:
[http://blog.xkcd.com/2010/05/03/color-survey-
results/](http://blog.xkcd.com/2010/05/03/color-survey-results/)

I was presented with an awful lot of colors I didn't have a better word for
than "tan", "beige", "green", etc, so I expected that my "color acuity score"
would be poor.

Looks like I was having trouble without something to compare to, and having
trouble naming, rather than having trouble identifying differences between
shares. Good to know!

------
PhasmaFelis
The scoring is weird. It places your final result on a scale from 0 to 99, but
just hitting Submit without changing anything produces a score in the 800-1100
range, and my "Highest score for your gender and age range" is 1520. Why
doesn't the scale reflect actual values? How could someone score substantially
worse than random?

...I think something is wrong with their best/worst scores, actually. About
80% of the age/gender brackets say the best is 0 and the worst is 1520, and
that consistency is weird to begin with, but some have really dramatic
outliers. Women aged 50-59 range from negative 162 to 410,378,090!

------
joshvm
Perfect colour vision, actually quite surprised at that - some of the shades
in the middle were very hard to distinguish. Performed on a 5 year old Macbook
- assuming my Dell IPS panel make it easier.

~~~
fatbat
Surprised I got a 0 as well! At some point I was not sure if my monitor color
collaboration was off or I am seeing patterns.

------
aaroninsf
Is it just me, or is this for many people more a test of

a) your capacity to stare at a screen without tearing up, blurring, etc.

and

b) the quality and color profile both native and gamut-corrected etc. of your
monitor?

I swear this is much more a test of my current monitor settings vs. ambient
light conditions, than anything serious about my own color perception.

A physical version with color chips and the option to work under a variety of
lights (LED, halogen, CF, incandescent, sunlight...) at whim would be way more
revealing.

But yeah, harder to code in JS.

------
zacinbusiness
I scored a 12 on an uncalibrated laptop display (late 2010 MacBook Air) so I
don't think that's too poor for my age range (29). Still, I would have liked
to see some median scores.

My results:
[http://screencast.com/t/s5ohpINp](http://screencast.com/t/s5ohpINp)

Also, by the end of the process I felt like I was going to be sick, not sure
if it was the brightness (my eyes are extremely sensitive to light and I
normally keep the brightness at 1 bar but I had it at full brightness for
this).

~~~
hamburglar
I don't think the calibration of your monitor has much to do with it, since
the task is to sort colors relative to each other, not absolutely. In fact,
after writing that first sentence, I tweaked the heck out of my monitor color
settings (the r/g/b adjustments go from 0 to 100 with defaults at 50 and I
increased my red to 73 and decreased my green to 37 -- it looked like hell)
and was still able to score 16.

~~~
zacinbusiness
Interesting! I would have thought the color "trueness" would have a lot more
of an effect. But I guess the originator of the test took that into account.

------
otoburb
91\. Still not sure whether that's good or bad given my age range.

EDIT: Based on a brain damage study with 48 patients and 48 healthy controls
"a total error score between 20 and 100 was taken as the range of normal
competence for discrimination."[1]

[1]
[http://www.perceptionweb.com/abstract.cgi?id=v990416](http://www.perceptionweb.com/abstract.cgi?id=v990416),
"Scoring efficiency on the Farnsworth - Munsell 100-Hue test after brain
damage"

------
Cerium
I have taken this test several times over the years. I can score perfectly but
if I make a mistake it is in the blue greens.

I have fun running different sorting algorithms on the tiles. The trick to
getting a perfect score is doing a pass where you switch every pair of
adjacent tiles. This will double the color delta on the edges if the tile is
correct and halve the delta if the position was wrong. I always catch at least
a blue or two on this pass.

------
morbius
I got a 4. Pretty terrible result for somebody as young as I am, but I suppose
myopia and the the spectral aberration caused by eyeglasses makes it harder to
distinguish colors.

[http://i.imgur.com/uLRW0YI.png](http://i.imgur.com/uLRW0YI.png)

~~~
josephschmoe
I had a similar problem with a couple of them. They felt completely
indistinguishable to me. Got a 3.

A part of it is the fact this is on a computer monitor though. If you only got
a few wrong, it's probably not a big deal.

~~~
PhasmaFelis
Huh. So most of them _were_ distinguishable to you? Interesting.

I could tell a properly-placed color apart from the colors two or three spaces
away from it, but not usually from its immediate neighbors. My main strategy
was to assume that, if a color looked identical to each of its neighbors, it
was in the right place. I got a 16, which seems decent enough.

------
MisterBastahrd
I remember this test! I outscored the entire art department at my workplace,
with an uncalibrated monitor to boot. The worst scorer? The art director. He
clocked in with a score of 37. Luckily, his job has a lot more to do with
layout than color precision.

------
cessor
I liked this test. I am running a calibrated display, so I am assuming the
display is not a factor. Remember to relax your eyes frequently, starring at a
color for too long tires the cone cells and might affect your test results as
a fatigue effect.

------
monitron
This thing again!

I'm red-green colorblind, and got a 90. Ouch. It looked pretty good to me!

------
nardi
I really hate how they show lowest and highest scores, and no
median/mean/percentiles, or anything at all that would help you decide whether
your score was good or bad.

~~~
cessor
I noticed this as well, just giving the range is not really helpful. Also the
scale is strange, 0 being the best. I was confused when I scored a 4...

------
antipod
I got a perfect score (zero). The trick is to blur your vision.

~~~
throwwit
...or tilt an lcd screen.

------
lisch
I love stuff like this. Reminds you that what you believe is "true" is rarely
what other people may believe.

------
morl0ck
Perfect ColorIQ [http://grab.by/xGhe](http://grab.by/xGhe)

------
spacefight
It's still beyond my understanding, on how Pantone could copyright their
colorsets...

------
OneOneOneOne
Is using an LCD monitor "cheating?"

I got a perfect score but am neither artistic nor fashionable.

~~~
georgemcbay
There are lots of different kinds of LCD monitors.

Using a TN LCD panel with an effective 6 bits per color channel and a
compressed dynamic range would be the opposite of cheating, it would be
playing with two hands tied behind your back, so to speak.

Using a wide-gamut IPS panel that is properly calibrated would be more like
"cheating" (though not actually cheating if your own color perception is
really what you want to test, as in that case the monitor should reproduce
color as accurately as possible).

------
kefka
Hmm. I got 8

[http://imgur.com/R4LkI3s](http://imgur.com/R4LkI3s)

------
lgmspb
It gets trickier around 0.25 and 0.75, i wonder why?

~~~
smoyer
Very true ... I got a patch of four incorrect on each of the four strips (for
a score of 16) and they were all straddling either the 0.25 or 0.75 marks.

------
adestefan
Missed 4 in a row right in the green section.

------
menacestudio
Got a 6.

