3 ms·

> Color perception is a tricky thing as anyone who has ever painted a house knows. Also, 8% of men have some form of colorblindness.

lb1lf 3y ago
As part of that subgroup, I think 'colorblindness' is a stigmatising term. I prefer 'chromatographically challenged'. I'll lead myself out.
- elzbardico 3y ago
  The same here. Things for me are pretty much in color as if in a giant OLED screen. It is just that some very specific hues of yellow and green look different to me compared to standard vision people.
- data-ottawa 3y ago
  I’ve never really liked “colourblind” as a term because I can see colour, just differently, which always surprises people in the “oh, what colour is this” game they play after finding out. I’m not a fan of “chromatographically challenged”, I would prefer colour vision defficiency even to it. Dichromat, or anomalous trichromatic are accurate, but I don’t think people will adopt them…
ahahahahah 3y ago
Yes. And of course that was accounted for when choosing the color and in fact was one of the areas where the turquoise choice clearer outperformed other choices. Read more here: https://wiki.unece.org/download/attachments/75532788/AVSR-03-02e.pdf?api=v2 https://wiki.unece.org/download/attachments/75532788/AVSR-03...
- happytiger 3y ago
  They had actually evaluated aqua and purple, and chose aqua because it was more visible? This isn’t critical road information. Why does it need to use the most visible spectrum, and the spectrum closest to blue/green confusion possibilities?
- data-ottawa 3y ago
  I’m not sold on their methodologies. They examined one colour, then changed it in the final selection to be more green (which was one of the suggestions). After shifting that original turquoise from the paper into green it’s now in the central neutral point at which the largest groups of colourblind people cannot differentiate it from white, which is the colour used for reversing lights (and also a light in the taillight group). In this paper they should have reviewed the new suggested colour as well; the original turquoise does not have the same confusion with white light, so they’ve effectively taken the pros from a previous result and mixed them into the pros from their hypothetical changed result, without reexamining the new one.

lb1lf 3y ago

As part of that subgroup, I think 'colorblindness' is a stigmatising term. I prefer 'chromatographically challenged'. I'll lead myself out.

elzbardico 3y ago
The same here. Things for me are pretty much in color as if in a giant OLED screen. It is just that some very specific hues of yellow and green look different to me compared to standard vision people.
data-ottawa 3y ago
I’ve never really liked “colourblind” as a term because I can see colour, just differently, which always surprises people in the “oh, what colour is this” game they play after finding out. I’m not a fan of “chromatographically challenged”, I would prefer colour vision defficiency even to it. Dichromat, or anomalous trichromatic are accurate, but I don’t think people will adopt them…

ahahahahah 3y ago

Yes. And of course that was accounted for when choosing the color and in fact was one of the areas where the turquoise choice clearer outperformed other choices. Read more here: https://wiki.unece.org/download/attachments/75532788/AVSR-03-02e.pdf?api=v2 https://wiki.unece.org/download/attachments/75532788/AVSR-03...

happytiger 3y ago
They had actually evaluated aqua and purple, and chose aqua because it was more visible? This isn’t critical road information. Why does it need to use the most visible spectrum, and the spectrum closest to blue/green confusion possibilities?
data-ottawa 3y ago
I’m not sold on their methodologies. They examined one colour, then changed it in the final selection to be more green (which was one of the suggestions). After shifting that original turquoise from the paper into green it’s now in the central neutral point at which the largest groups of colourblind people cannot differentiate it from white, which is the colour used for reversing lights (and also a light in the taillight group). In this paper they should have reviewed the new suggested colour as well; the original turquoise does not have the same confusion with white light, so they’ve effectively taken the pros from a previous result and mixed them into the pros from their hypothetical changed result, without reexamining the new one.