6 ms·

Paper isn't typically a pure "#FFFFFF" white and if you'd bothered to read the article instead of rage quitting after the sub-heading you'd realise that the art

Paper isn't typically a pure "#FFFFFF" white and if you'd bothered to read the article instead of rage quitting after the sub-heading you'd realise that the article is advocating exactly the same point you are. Let me quote it for you: > On a light or white background, body text should be black. In many cases it is more appropriate to reduce contrast by darkening the background. As an example a white #FFF background is really too bright for comfortable reading, a background such as #e8e2dd provides a less fatiguing background. Sorry if I come across blunt but if you're going to be critical about an article then at least read more than the sub-heading first.

Hnrobert42 4y ago
First, GP didn’t rage quit, but merely said they almost did. Second, accusing posters of not reading articles is against the Hacker News guidelines. Third, I bring all this up because the vitriol of your comment is no fun to read and brings down the site.
- hnlmorg 4y ago
  Normally I'd agree with all of your points but the article is really clear about lowing the page brightness and not the page contrast. They even had an infographic to illustrate their point: https://miro.medium.com/max/1400/1*xOhOFGLr6o4AsGhlACweSQ.png https://miro.medium.com/max/1400/1*xOhOFGLr6o4AsGhlACweSQ.pn... At no point were they making any of the suggestions the GP are criticising them for.
- coldtea 4y ago
  On the contrary, I find that the "vitriol" was a good balance to the "rage quitting" disclaimer raising the rage level for no reason. It's an article about text legibility. We should be able to take it or leave it or refute it without rage. (Whether they rage quit or "merely said they almost did" is same difference).
jraph 4y ago
> Paper isn't typically a pure "#FFFFFF" white Paper can be very white and bright if well lit. Much more than a typical LED/LCD screen. If your screen is brighter than a white sheet of paper, it's probably too bright and you are probably tiring your eyes. The only moment when a sheet of paper is darker than my screen is when I'm in my bed, in a completely dark room watching or reading something, and that's not known as a very good thing to do for the eyes (and for the body posture neither by the way). I'm not buying the fact we should darken the background of a text. I think we should let people reduce the brightness of their screen instead.
- marginalia_nu 4y ago
  This is modern bleached paper. Regular paper (or parchment since we're talking 1000 years) is anywhere from beige to light gray.
- atoav 4y ago
  Everything¹ can be brighter than a screen if you just shine enough light onto it. The main issue with pure black and white on screens is typically contrast. Modern screens can have a much, much higher absolute difference between the brightest white and the blackest black. There is such a thing as too much contrast. Typical ergonomic workspace regulations (like the ASR in Germany for example) will tell you how much contrast any given type of workspace environment should have between the brightest and the darkest point for a reason. Now someone with an old, washed out TFT might get a much different contrast when viewing a #000 #FFF page of text than someone with a modern HDR display if this is not accounted for in software. Now you could say they need to adjust their screen – but text is not the only thing people view on screens. Why would you throw away image and color fidelity, because some website doesn't fit that setup? We are on computers, why not just support different contrast levels like we do with dark mode? --- ¹ except maybe black holes
  - Myndex 4y ago
    I guess what I wrote about adaptation didn't some across as clearly as I had hoped. Adapting to the ambient light and reading on paper which is never more than 90% DIFFUSE reflectance (typically 80% for paperbacks, and 70% for newspaper) is not at all like having polarized light beamed straight into your ocular medium to collide with your retina at well over 100% of the ambient adaptation level. Or words to that effect. > _There is such a thing as too much contrast._ Yes, there is absolutely such a thing as too much contrast, however, I hesitate to say this as it is so often misunderstood—spatial frequency is the key factor to determine first. The contrast needed for small thin body text is very different than that needed for a large bold headline. The thing that some find confusing is thinking that too much contrast with a light background means making the small thin text lighter grey, when in fact the text should stay darker tha #303030, and lower the luminance of the background to #e6e2dd. I say as much in the article.
coldtea 4y ago
>Sorry if I come across blunt but if you're going to be critical about an article then at least read more than the sub-heading first. In general, nothing useful ever came after an "I've stopped reading at" disclaimer.
- ycombinete 4y ago
  So we can stop reading at “I stopped reading at”?
  - inglor_cz 4y ago
    Yes, but we shouldn't comment on such a text. The # of articles that I personally haven't commented on because I found them impossible to read them to the end is probably in tens of thousands.
  - coldtea 4y ago
    I do not stop when I meet this disclaimer. That's in fact how I come to the conclusion that nothing good ever comes after reading it :-)
micromacrofoot 4y ago
ink isn’t pure black either
- atoav 4y ago
  In CMYK 100% isn't pure black either, neither is rich black (C: 50%, M: 50%, Y: 50%, K: 100%)
rattray 4y ago
Many people read the headline, maybe subheader and intro paragraph, and then just skip to HN comments – or skip the article entirely and assume the submission title says it all. So IMO, both of you are contributing constructively here.
mrunkel 4y ago
The irony. Re-read what I wrote please. I said almost.

Hnrobert42 4y ago

First, GP didn’t rage quit, but merely said they almost did. Second, accusing posters of not reading articles is against the Hacker News guidelines. Third, I bring all this up because the vitriol of your comment is no fun to read and brings down the site.

hnlmorg 4y ago
Normally I'd agree with all of your points but the article is really clear about lowing the page brightness and not the page contrast. They even had an infographic to illustrate their point: https://miro.medium.com/max/1400/1*xOhOFGLr6o4AsGhlACweSQ.png https://miro.medium.com/max/1400/1*xOhOFGLr6o4AsGhlACweSQ.pn... At no point were they making any of the suggestions the GP are criticising them for.
coldtea 4y ago
On the contrary, I find that the "vitriol" was a good balance to the "rage quitting" disclaimer raising the rage level for no reason. It's an article about text legibility. We should be able to take it or leave it or refute it without rage. (Whether they rage quit or "merely said they almost did" is same difference).

jraph 4y ago

> Paper isn't typically a pure "#FFFFFF" white Paper can be very white and bright if well lit. Much more than a typical LED/LCD screen. If your screen is brighter than a white sheet of paper, it's probably too bright and you are probably tiring your eyes. The only moment when a sheet of paper is darker than my screen is when I'm in my bed, in a completely dark room watching or reading something, and that's not known as a very good thing to do for the eyes (and for the body posture neither by the way). I'm not buying the fact we should darken the background of a text. I think we should let people reduce the brightness of their screen instead.

marginalia_nu 4y ago
This is modern bleached paper. Regular paper (or parchment since we're talking 1000 years) is anywhere from beige to light gray.
atoav 4y ago
Everything¹ can be brighter than a screen if you just shine enough light onto it. The main issue with pure black and white on screens is typically contrast. Modern screens can have a much, much higher absolute difference between the brightest white and the blackest black. There is such a thing as too much contrast. Typical ergonomic workspace regulations (like the ASR in Germany for example) will tell you how much contrast any given type of workspace environment should have between the brightest and the darkest point for a reason. Now someone with an old, washed out TFT might get a much different contrast when viewing a #000 #FFF page of text than someone with a modern HDR display if this is not accounted for in software. Now you could say they need to adjust their screen – but text is not the only thing people view on screens. Why would you throw away image and color fidelity, because some website doesn't fit that setup? We are on computers, why not just support different contrast levels like we do with dark mode? --- ¹ except maybe black holes
- Myndex 4y ago
  I guess what I wrote about adaptation didn't some across as clearly as I had hoped. Adapting to the ambient light and reading on paper which is never more than 90% DIFFUSE reflectance (typically 80% for paperbacks, and 70% for newspaper) is not at all like having polarized light beamed straight into your ocular medium to collide with your retina at well over 100% of the ambient adaptation level. Or words to that effect. > _There is such a thing as too much contrast._ Yes, there is absolutely such a thing as too much contrast, however, I hesitate to say this as it is so often misunderstood—spatial frequency is the key factor to determine first. The contrast needed for small thin body text is very different than that needed for a large bold headline. The thing that some find confusing is thinking that too much contrast with a light background means making the small thin text lighter grey, when in fact the text should stay darker tha #303030, and lower the luminance of the background to #e6e2dd. I say as much in the article.

coldtea 4y ago

>Sorry if I come across blunt but if you're going to be critical about an article then at least read more than the sub-heading first. In general, nothing useful ever came after an "I've stopped reading at" disclaimer.

ycombinete 4y ago
So we can stop reading at “I stopped reading at”?
- inglor_cz 4y ago
  Yes, but we shouldn't comment on such a text. The # of articles that I personally haven't commented on because I found them impossible to read them to the end is probably in tens of thousands.
- coldtea 4y ago
  I do not stop when I meet this disclaimer. That's in fact how I come to the conclusion that nothing good ever comes after reading it :-)

micromacrofoot 4y ago

ink isn’t pure black either

atoav 4y ago
In CMYK 100% isn't pure black either, neither is rich black (C: 50%, M: 50%, Y: 50%, K: 100%)

rattray 4y ago

Many people read the headline, maybe subheader and intro paragraph, and then just skip to HN comments – or skip the article entirely and assume the submission title says it all. So IMO, both of you are contributing constructively here.

mrunkel 4y ago

The irony. Re-read what I wrote please. I said almost.