Live data from Hacker News

White (Light) vs. Black (Dark) Backgrounds: Health Effects

stackoverflow.com

1–10 of 17 posts

Re: White (Light) vs. Black (Dark) Backgrounds: Health Effects

#2
I wonder how much of the effect is because black on white is actually superior, and how much is because people have so much more practice at reading black on white. It would be interesting to see the studies repeated, using sub-groups that are used to black on white and white on black, respectively.

Re: White (Light) vs. Black (Dark) Backgrounds: Health Effects

#4
post #3

I find it easier to read prose when it's dark text on a light background, but I find it easier to read code when it's light text on a dark background. Maybe it has to do with proportional vs. monospace fonts?

I do, too. I suspect it's just habit.

Re: White (Light) vs. Black (Dark) Backgrounds: Health Effects

#6
I've tried all kinds of combinations for coding over the past 10 years. The only combination which didn't start to hurt my eyes over time was a light grey background with dark text.

http://jlongster.com/media/images/screen.png

I absolutely love this scheme. It may not look pretty at first, but it's very very easy on the eyes, and also very clear. Colors are easy to make out and there's no glare anywhere.

Re: White (Light) vs. Black (Dark) Backgrounds: Health Effects

#8
post #3

I find it easier to read prose when it's dark text on a light background, but I find it easier to read code when it's light text on a dark background. Maybe it has to do with proportional vs. monospace fonts?

Agreed, but, for me, it has to do more with the fact that syntax highlighting seems more highlight-y on a black background and I depend on syntax highlighting to guide my eye. Somehow dark red vs black on a white background doesn't "pop" as much as red vs white on a black background.

Re: White (Light) vs. Black (Dark) Backgrounds: Health Effects

#9
post #2

I wonder how much of the effect is because black on white is actually superior, and how much is because people have so much more practice at reading black on white. It would be interesting to see the studies repeated, using sub-groups that are used to black on white and white on black, respectively.

My thoughts exactly. It would be hard to find many people who almost exclusively read white on black, though. I think the groups people break down into are likely the average people from "book-land", where all is black on white, and techies who use dark background terminals, but are fluent in both. In which case, it would make the most sense to test people who have extensive exposure to both (techies) for comprehension, etc.

Re: White (Light) vs. Black (Dark) Backgrounds: Health Effects

#10
I like dark on light; it's literally easier for me to read (though there is a medical cause for my choice).

I have Keratoconus, so there are very few corrective lenses which can actually help me have good clear vision. Light screens with black text cause my pupils to contract, which results in better focus (it's related to the reason that pinhole cameras work without any lenses).

If I do light on dark (my favorite colorscheme was Zenburn), the text gets too fuzzy to read at anything smaller than 14 point. On the other hand, if I use dark on light (I prefer bclear now) I can read text comfortably at 8 point.

It's certainly painful on the eyes if the rest of the environment is dark, but if you have a reasonably well lit room, I've noticed very little eye strain.

While my experience obviously does not carry over well to the population at general, it could help explain why dark on light is easier to read - it's easier to make out the details.

Post reply on HN