4 ms·

Can These Glasses Help the Colorblind? We Put EnChroma to the Test

51 points by IgorPartola 11y ago

bonobo 11y ago
> But there’s still the concern that wearing a colored filter while taking the D15 test will alter the relative brightness of the chips, providing a context cue that can help subjects score higher. I'm confused about this statement: isn't the whole point of these glasses to provide such clues? I may be more knowledgeable about the subject than the average Joe (I like reading about it), or I may be completely wrong (I'm no pro), but it's obvious to me that real color vision is indeed impossible without gene therapy -- you can't show to the brain what the eyes can't detect, at least not through the eyes. Do they claim it provides real full color vision? I don't even think this is testable, for that matter (qualia etc).
- gizmo686 11y ago
  Our eyes essentially convert incoming light into three scalar values (one for each of our three cones, S, M, and L). The specific color blindness that this article is talking about is not really color blindness, but rather two of these cones overlapping more than usual. In theory, by filtering out the wavelengths of light in these overlapping regions, you can improve the wearers ability to perceive differences in color. Of course, this also affects percieved brightness, and their is no good way of knowing if the user is telling the difference based on the fact that the signal is being picked up by different cones, or the fact that it is being picked up as a different brightness.
  - bonobo 11y ago
    I thought they were talking about dichromatism, I missed the part where they say it fixes anomalous trochromatism only. It makes sense now, thanks.
    - jacobolus 11y ago
      Deuteranomaly/protanomaly are between them something like 2.5 times as common as deuteranopia/protanopia (other color vision deficiencies besides those four are very rare). So this should still be very helpful to most “colorblind” people.
samstave 11y ago
https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/3qkr7e/iama_colorblind_guy_who_has_been_using_enchroma/ https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/3qkr7e/iama_colorblin...
jessriedel 11y ago
Interesting to note that the 2-parameter space of colors we see (basically, 3 RGB minus one parameter for overall brightness) is completely a consequence of humans only having 3 cones. Since you can basically have an arbitrary spectrum (i.e., arbitrary strength at each frequency), the "fundamental" space of physical colors is vastly larger.
- nikatwork 11y ago
  Some humans have 4 cones: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrachromacy#Human_tetrachromats https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrachromacy#Human_tetrachrom...
  - escherplex 11y ago
    Interesting subject matter. A tech article which summarizes current research on retinal tetrachromat genotypes can be found here: URL: http://glimpsejournal.com/index.php/Glimpse/pages/view/2.3-KAJ http://glimpsejournal.com/index.php/Glimpse/pages/view/2.3-K... Notice how standard test results suggest to one research group that the color processing among tetrachromats is defective while to another the same results suggest such subjects exhibit higher sensitivity and simply see things differently. Also curious, toward the bottom of the article is the wide evenly spaced European Starling tetrachromat probability peaks chart with sensitivities well above 300 nm. Hypothetically, it would be interesting to feed output from a Starling retina into an interface with the sophisticated human occipatal lobe and learn what qualial configurations are synthesized in the conscious workspace. Maybe new color qualia would show up.
lbenes 11y ago
If you enjoyed this article, I recommend the PBS series, The Brain with David Eagleman. You can watch all the episodes on their Roku channel or their website[1]. The episode "What is Reality?" covers how everyone's brain creates a unique internal model of reality. [1] http://video.pbs.org/program/brain-david-eagleman/ http://video.pbs.org/program/brain-david-eagleman/
tritium 11y ago
My God. That video of the monkey compulsively pecking away at that touch screen for rewards... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEeU8CV_3Mo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEeU8CV_3Mo That video hits so much closer to home than it should. I see a lot more of myself in that monkey than is comfortable.
xacaxulu 11y ago
Years ago I applied (and was accepted) to a special assignment in the US Marines that required perfect vision including color vision. I took a few weeks leave, went to Canada (so there'd be no US medical records) and got lasik and ChromaGen contact lenses. Passed all the vision tests. For me this was the only thing that stood between me and a very cool assignment. Edit: I eventually passed the Ishihara test (colored dots) where I previously failed it.
pmoriarty 11y ago
I'm looking forward to the day that people with "normal" vision are able to see currently invisible colors. It doesn't look like this technology would allow that, but perhaps gene therapy or some other technology might. We might even naturally evolve that capability, and there has been some evidence that already there are some people who have that mutation. There was a RadioLab episode about that,[1] which included discussion of the possibility that in Homer's time humans did not have the ability to see blue. [1] - http://www.radiolab.org/2012/may/21/sky-isnt-blue/ http://www.radiolab.org/2012/may/21/sky-isnt-blue/
- mikekchar 11y ago
  I didn't listen to the episode, but I'm a little sceptical. Traditionally, in Japanese there was no word for green, only blue (aoi in Japanese). The forest is blue, the ocean is blue, the sky is blue, etc. Green (midori) was only added to the language in recent times. Even now the green light on a traffic light is called "aoi" (blue) in Japanese. It's not that Japanese people are not able to distinguish between green and blue, it's that linguistically the colours are broken down differently. If you have a discussion about the colours of the forest, for instance, even now many people will insist that the deep, dark green of pine needles is "aoi" (blue) and that midori (green) is more on the yellow end of green (for example new shoots). So you might be tempted to think that maybe it is the same -- they couldn't see blue and therefore green and blue had the same name. However, the kanji for geen, 緑, has existed for thousands of years and is used in many Japanese words. For example, 緑茶 means "green tea" (as opposed to oolong tea, for instance). So even though the concept of green existed and there was a character for writing it, if you were to ask people 100 years ago (or just ask older people now) what colour "green tea" is, they would say "blue". So I think it is entirely possible that Homer simply didn't use the word "blue" because he categorized colour differently. It's not necessarily the case that he couldn't see it. Well... I guess Homer was blind.... but you get my point ;-)
  - abrowne 11y ago
    More about "grue" in other languages: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distinction_of_blue_and_green_in_various_languages https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distinction_of_blue_and_green_...
BuckRogers 11y ago
I'm colorblind[0] and already knew about the professors in Washington state doing gene therapy on this. I'm eager to join in the human trials when they begin, but my understanding from friends who are scientists that the legal hurdles of such a thing is enormous. My mother found out when as a child I said "wow the grass sure is red today". I've never really seen green grass other than in a painting. Grass varies of course, but it's closer to a reddish for sure though on average. I can't really tell when it's brown and dying very easily either. It's pretty difficult to explain to someone that you "don't know" what color something is really. I'm not interested in Enchroma though, you can't add lost information. I'm sure it helps differentiate between shades. Just as you can't upscale a 640x480 image to 4K without adding the missing information. I'd like to try them on to test, but without that I can't send these people ~$400 for something that seems dubious to begin with. I did just learn this from the Enchroma page- "something as ordinary as peanut butter, which should look brown, appears to be green for someone with color blindness!" I had no idea peanut butter was brown. I remember seeing a Sesame Street episode as a kid in the mid 80s where they showed a peanut butter factory, noting the color as a child. I always thought it was greenish/tan. I would love to see the world how it is to everyone else before I die at least. [0]http://enchroma.com/test/result/strong-deutan/?completed=1&result=strong+deutan&pts=1.32&dts=1.32&tts=0.225 http://enchroma.com/test/result/strong-deutan/?completed=1&r...

51 points by IgorPartola 11y ago

> But there’s still the concern that wearing a colored filter while taking the D15 test will alter the relative brightness of the chips, providing a context cue that can help subjects score higher. I'm confused about this statement: isn't the whole point of these glasses to provide such clues? I may be more knowledgeable about the subject than the average Joe (I like reading about it), or I may be completely wrong (I'm no pro), but it's obvious to me that real color vision is indeed impossible without gene therapy -- you can't show to the brain what the eyes can't detect, at least not through the eyes. Do they claim it provides real full color vision? I don't even think this is testable, for that matter (qualia etc).

gizmo686 11y ago
Our eyes essentially convert incoming light into three scalar values (one for each of our three cones, S, M, and L). The specific color blindness that this article is talking about is not really color blindness, but rather two of these cones overlapping more than usual. In theory, by filtering out the wavelengths of light in these overlapping regions, you can improve the wearers ability to perceive differences in color. Of course, this also affects percieved brightness, and their is no good way of knowing if the user is telling the difference based on the fact that the signal is being picked up by different cones, or the fact that it is being picked up as a different brightness.
- bonobo 11y ago
  I thought they were talking about dichromatism, I missed the part where they say it fixes anomalous trochromatism only. It makes sense now, thanks.
  - jacobolus 11y ago
    Deuteranomaly/protanomaly are between them something like 2.5 times as common as deuteranopia/protanopia (other color vision deficiencies besides those four are very rare). So this should still be very helpful to most “colorblind” people.

samstave 11y ago

https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/3qkr7e/iama_colorblind_guy_who_has_been_using_enchroma/ https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/3qkr7e/iama_colorblin...

jessriedel 11y ago

Interesting to note that the 2-parameter space of colors we see (basically, 3 RGB minus one parameter for overall brightness) is completely a consequence of humans only having 3 cones. Since you can basically have an arbitrary spectrum (i.e., arbitrary strength at each frequency), the "fundamental" space of physical colors is vastly larger.

nikatwork 11y ago
Some humans have 4 cones: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrachromacy#Human_tetrachromats https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrachromacy#Human_tetrachrom...
- escherplex 11y ago
  Interesting subject matter. A tech article which summarizes current research on retinal tetrachromat genotypes can be found here: URL: http://glimpsejournal.com/index.php/Glimpse/pages/view/2.3-KAJ http://glimpsejournal.com/index.php/Glimpse/pages/view/2.3-K... Notice how standard test results suggest to one research group that the color processing among tetrachromats is defective while to another the same results suggest such subjects exhibit higher sensitivity and simply see things differently. Also curious, toward the bottom of the article is the wide evenly spaced European Starling tetrachromat probability peaks chart with sensitivities well above 300 nm. Hypothetically, it would be interesting to feed output from a Starling retina into an interface with the sophisticated human occipatal lobe and learn what qualial configurations are synthesized in the conscious workspace. Maybe new color qualia would show up.

lbenes 11y ago

If you enjoyed this article, I recommend the PBS series, The Brain with David Eagleman. You can watch all the episodes on their Roku channel or their website[1]. The episode "What is Reality?" covers how everyone's brain creates a unique internal model of reality. [1] http://video.pbs.org/program/brain-david-eagleman/ http://video.pbs.org/program/brain-david-eagleman/

tritium 11y ago

My God. That video of the monkey compulsively pecking away at that touch screen for rewards... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEeU8CV_3Mo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEeU8CV_3Mo That video hits so much closer to home than it should. I see a lot more of myself in that monkey than is comfortable.

xacaxulu 11y ago

Years ago I applied (and was accepted) to a special assignment in the US Marines that required perfect vision including color vision. I took a few weeks leave, went to Canada (so there'd be no US medical records) and got lasik and ChromaGen contact lenses. Passed all the vision tests. For me this was the only thing that stood between me and a very cool assignment. Edit: I eventually passed the Ishihara test (colored dots) where I previously failed it.

pmoriarty 11y ago

I'm looking forward to the day that people with "normal" vision are able to see currently invisible colors. It doesn't look like this technology would allow that, but perhaps gene therapy or some other technology might. We might even naturally evolve that capability, and there has been some evidence that already there are some people who have that mutation. There was a RadioLab episode about that,[1] which included discussion of the possibility that in Homer's time humans did not have the ability to see blue. [1] - http://www.radiolab.org/2012/may/21/sky-isnt-blue/ http://www.radiolab.org/2012/may/21/sky-isnt-blue/

mikekchar 11y ago
I didn't listen to the episode, but I'm a little sceptical. Traditionally, in Japanese there was no word for green, only blue (aoi in Japanese). The forest is blue, the ocean is blue, the sky is blue, etc. Green (midori) was only added to the language in recent times. Even now the green light on a traffic light is called "aoi" (blue) in Japanese. It's not that Japanese people are not able to distinguish between green and blue, it's that linguistically the colours are broken down differently. If you have a discussion about the colours of the forest, for instance, even now many people will insist that the deep, dark green of pine needles is "aoi" (blue) and that midori (green) is more on the yellow end of green (for example new shoots). So you might be tempted to think that maybe it is the same -- they couldn't see blue and therefore green and blue had the same name. However, the kanji for geen, 緑, has existed for thousands of years and is used in many Japanese words. For example, 緑茶 means "green tea" (as opposed to oolong tea, for instance). So even though the concept of green existed and there was a character for writing it, if you were to ask people 100 years ago (or just ask older people now) what colour "green tea" is, they would say "blue". So I think it is entirely possible that Homer simply didn't use the word "blue" because he categorized colour differently. It's not necessarily the case that he couldn't see it. Well... I guess Homer was blind.... but you get my point ;-)
- abrowne 11y ago
  More about "grue" in other languages: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distinction_of_blue_and_green_in_various_languages https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distinction_of_blue_and_green_...

BuckRogers 11y ago

I'm colorblind[0] and already knew about the professors in Washington state doing gene therapy on this. I'm eager to join in the human trials when they begin, but my understanding from friends who are scientists that the legal hurdles of such a thing is enormous. My mother found out when as a child I said "wow the grass sure is red today". I've never really seen green grass other than in a painting. Grass varies of course, but it's closer to a reddish for sure though on average. I can't really tell when it's brown and dying very easily either. It's pretty difficult to explain to someone that you "don't know" what color something is really. I'm not interested in Enchroma though, you can't add lost information. I'm sure it helps differentiate between shades. Just as you can't upscale a 640x480 image to 4K without adding the missing information. I'd like to try them on to test, but without that I can't send these people ~$400 for something that seems dubious to begin with. I did just learn this from the Enchroma page- "something as ordinary as peanut butter, which should look brown, appears to be green for someone with color blindness!" I had no idea peanut butter was brown. I remember seeing a Sesame Street episode as a kid in the mid 80s where they showed a peanut butter factory, noting the color as a child. I always thought it was greenish/tan. I would love to see the world how it is to everyone else before I die at least. [0]http://enchroma.com/test/result/strong-deutan/?completed=1&result=strong+deutan&pts=1.32&dts=1.32&tts=0.225 http://enchroma.com/test/result/strong-deutan/?completed=1&r...