

About the 80 million dollars Blue (#0044cc) - vladocar
http://www.vcarrer.com/2010/03/about-80-million-dollars-blue-0044cc.html

======
frou_dh
Virtually no one calibrates their monitor so your carefully defined 24bit
colours are going to hit eyeballs in all sorts of different forms.

~~~
sp332
The author didn't account for gamma correction [0] at all, so the math is
meaningless. I mean, if the "Pareto Principle" numerology didn't tip you off.

[0] <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1141971>

------
jemfinch
That was one of the most incomprehensible essays I've read in a long time.

What was he even trying to say?

~~~
samps
He also uses the "<>" operator for inequality, which is unforgivable in my
book.

~~~
fnid2
Lots of languages use <> for not equals.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
Lots of languages do, but not English.

------
vladocar
I'm perfectly aware that this article is not easy to understand.

Here is small summary:

In the <http://live.visitmix.com/MIX10/Sessions/CL06> the color #0044cc was
indicated like the color that brings Bing 80$ million dollars

I calculate the number #0033cc is better than #0044cc

By accident I find out that the Bing is actually is using #0033cc not #0044cc

So the question remains why the number #0044cc was used in the presentation.
Is it pure author mistake or something else?

Anyway there is no "perfect number" or "perfect color". Every color should be
balanced properly with all other colors in order to obtain proper results.

------
gr366
I'm no color theorist, but it's confusing to me why he would think the numbers
for the perfect blue have to add up to 255 across _all_ three channels. By
that logic, wouldn't the perfect color white would be R:85 G:85 B:85 (or
#555555)?

------
BudVVeezer
I love how there is no actual USAGE of the color in the article. :-P

~~~
mseebach
He probably can't afford it.

