4 ms·

Red and blue (like Jenkins, but that seems to be coincidental). That said, if you think color accessibility is about picking the right categories of colors you

by pluma 7y ago

Red and blue (like Jenkins, but that seems to be coincidental). That said, if you think color accessibility is about picking the right categories of colors you have a long way to go. The important thing is that the colors need to have sufficient contrast beyond mere hue. Light green and deep red is fine for me as a strong deutan (i.e. severely green blind) even though there are combinations of "red" and "green" that are practically indistinguishable for me.

rocqua 7y ago
Hmm, red-and blue makes sense, given that they are the furthest apart physically. Obviously accessibility is about more than picking colors, but if a complaint is 'this is a bad color pair' it is interesting to know what is a better pair. As for contrast beyond hue, does that include saturation? Because keeping luminance constant is an important part of keeping an interface legible. I'd say a red-blue default with full configurability might be the best approach.
- Sharlin 7y ago
  Red and blue are not ”the furthest apart”. Red and cyan, or blue and yellow, are complementary (180° separated on the color wheel). But color perception is more complicated than that. I believe something like orangish red and bluish green are distinct enough to most people with a red-green deficiency (including myself). The difference in ”blue content” makes them distinguishable.
  - rocqua 7y ago
    The actual wave-lengths are the furthest apart. Whilst that is not perceptually relevant, it is relevant to what happens when color-receptors fail. That is, as long as you have two different color receptors that respond differently to different wave-lengths, those will receive different signals from red and blue light.
    - Sharlin 7y ago
      The wavelengths that are furthest apart are red and violet. Which perceptually are close together, for red-green blind as well. But what does matter is picking the colors based on the corresponding receptors' peak sensitivity. The L receptors are most sensitive to red, and the S receptors to blue, so in that sense you're right. (Red-green blind or weak people lack the M receptors of have anomalous versions, respectively.)

by pluma 7y ago

rocqua 7y ago

Hmm, red-and blue makes sense, given that they are the furthest apart physically. Obviously accessibility is about more than picking colors, but if a complaint is 'this is a bad color pair' it is interesting to know what is a better pair. As for contrast beyond hue, does that include saturation? Because keeping luminance constant is an important part of keeping an interface legible. I'd say a red-blue default with full configurability might be the best approach.

Sharlin 7y ago
Red and blue are not ”the furthest apart”. Red and cyan, or blue and yellow, are complementary (180° separated on the color wheel). But color perception is more complicated than that. I believe something like orangish red and bluish green are distinct enough to most people with a red-green deficiency (including myself). The difference in ”blue content” makes them distinguishable.
- rocqua 7y ago
  The actual wave-lengths are the furthest apart. Whilst that is not perceptually relevant, it is relevant to what happens when color-receptors fail. That is, as long as you have two different color receptors that respond differently to different wave-lengths, those will receive different signals from red and blue light.
  - Sharlin 7y ago
    The wavelengths that are furthest apart are red and violet. Which perceptually are close together, for red-green blind as well. But what does matter is picking the colors based on the corresponding receptors' peak sensitivity. The L receptors are most sensitive to red, and the S receptors to blue, so in that sense you're right. (Red-green blind or weak people lack the M receptors of have anomalous versions, respectively.)