3 ms·

This tool deals with total colour loss, but does not allow for things like deuteranomaly which is far more common than Deuteranopia. Include a slider to simula

This tool deals with total colour loss, but does not allow for things like deuteranomaly which is far more common than Deuteranopia. Include a slider to simulate reduction in cones. As someone with deuteranomaly it's amazing how many interfaces just don't quite work.

Agentlien 5y ago
In general I agree and have found it really hard to find tools which work well for different degrees of impaired colour vision. I've tried a few apps which are supposed to show how things look for me and the results are almost always not quite right. I will say that I can barely tell the difference between the original example image on this page and the deuteranopia one. According to tests I have a moderate deuteranomaly.
asicsp 5y ago
Seems like it used to be available before: >Firefox 81 removed unnecessary simulations for protanomaly, deuteranomaly, and tritanomaly, and added a simulation for achromatopsia (no color).
- bipson 5y ago
  I guess it doesn't serve a purpose. Considering that these are developer tools, *anomaly-variants could be considered "milder" forms of the *anopia-variants, and further come in various degrees. Further, people with the *anomaly variants can have severe headaches with certain color-schemes, and the best thing to avoid any misunderstandings, is to check for "safe-for-anopia", or/or use a scheme that avoids these altogether, which will also serve everyone on the *anomaly-spectrum. But that's just my speculation.
  - tgv 5y ago
    But it's like using polyfills and all that: if you don't want 100% coverage, you can at least play safe for 99%.
- quitit 5y ago
  I believe this is a reasonable change because there aren’t situations where accessibility would only want to partly solve the colour blindness issue. This is demonstrated by the way many readers with colour-blindness are still able to still see differences in the demonstration imagery. The real issue is using a colour photo like the one used in the article because this doesn’t demonstrate the effect of low contrast - a demonstration of lost contrast is much better with bodies of text against problematic background colours, since there is an immediately obvious reduction in legibility, rather than a bit of flourish in a photo.

Agentlien 5y ago

In general I agree and have found it really hard to find tools which work well for different degrees of impaired colour vision. I've tried a few apps which are supposed to show how things look for me and the results are almost always not quite right. I will say that I can barely tell the difference between the original example image on this page and the deuteranopia one. According to tests I have a moderate deuteranomaly.

asicsp 5y ago

Seems like it used to be available before: >Firefox 81 removed unnecessary simulations for protanomaly, deuteranomaly, and tritanomaly, and added a simulation for achromatopsia (no color).

bipson 5y ago
I guess it doesn't serve a purpose. Considering that these are developer tools, *anomaly-variants could be considered "milder" forms of the *anopia-variants, and further come in various degrees. Further, people with the *anomaly variants can have severe headaches with certain color-schemes, and the best thing to avoid any misunderstandings, is to check for "safe-for-anopia", or/or use a scheme that avoids these altogether, which will also serve everyone on the *anomaly-spectrum. But that's just my speculation.
- tgv 5y ago
  But it's like using polyfills and all that: if you don't want 100% coverage, you can at least play safe for 99%.
quitit 5y ago
I believe this is a reasonable change because there aren’t situations where accessibility would only want to partly solve the colour blindness issue. This is demonstrated by the way many readers with colour-blindness are still able to still see differences in the demonstration imagery. The real issue is using a colour photo like the one used in the article because this doesn’t demonstrate the effect of low contrast - a demonstration of lost contrast is much better with bodies of text against problematic background colours, since there is an immediately obvious reduction in legibility, rather than a bit of flourish in a photo.