Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Contrast Rebellion

contrastrebellion.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–74 of 74 posts

Re: Contrast Rebellion

#71

Post by ricardobeat »

mrob wrote: post #44
ricardobeat wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Too much contrast is also bad, reducing blacks just a tiny bit reduces eye strain in the average screen.

There's no chance of too much contrast on an LCD displaying dark text on a light background. People have no trouble reading high quality print in sunlight, and that has much higher contrast. Grey text is harder to read, as demonstrated by the studies cited. Eg. this one finds pure 100% black on 100% white is most legible: http://www.laurenscharff.com/research/agecontrast.html Black text is the default, and changing i…

The medium-high contrast setting they compared with would be equivalent of #444444, much brighter than the #191919 used by the website. I find it impossible to read a book in direct sunlight, and am pretty sure it's not just me.

Re: Contrast Rebellion

#72

Post by mappu »

DanBC wrote: post #67
mappu wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>A tiny number of people filter ads. "41% of 18-29 year olds polled said they use adblock ... In some countries nearly one quarter of the online population has it installed" -- http://blog.pagefair.com/2014/adblocking-report/

> There are about 144 million active adblock users around the world. That is a small number of people of the total Internet population. It's a bit surprising that you think an advertiser pushing ads is a suitable source for information about ad-blocking. Obviously they're going to say that ad-blocking is prevalant and that you need to run better ads to stop people running ad-blockers and oh, we just happen to be an a…

It was the best source at hand, if you have another study i'd be interested to hear it.

There's apparently 2.9bn internet users, so you're right that ~5% isn't a very big number in context.

Re: Contrast Rebellion

#73

Post by dredmorbius »

ricardobeat wrote: post #71
mrob wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no chance of too much contrast on an LCD displaying dark text on a light background. People have no trouble reading high quality print in sunlight, and that has much higher contrast. Grey text is harder to read, as demonstrated by the studies cited. Eg. this one finds pure 100% black on 100% white is most legible: http://www.laurenscharff.com/research/agecontrast.html Black text is the default, and changing i…

The medium-high contrast setting they compared with would be equivalent of #444444, much brighter than the #191919 used by the website. I find it impossible to read a book in direct sunlight, and am pretty sure it's not just me.

The problem I notice is that anything other than _very_ slightly greyed font appears blurry to me. #330 is as far as I'll take it.

Rather than lighten the text, darken the background lightly. #fffff8 is a good start.

Re: Contrast Rebellion

#74

Post by dredmorbius »

dasil003 wrote: post #6

The critique of HN seems off-base. The low-contrast comments are the ones that are downvoted and therefore the low-contrast is there specifically to make them less readable because they ostensibly deserve less attention.

I swap the margin and main-body colors of HN:

http://stylebot.me/styles/2945

Post reply on HN