5 ms·

> "Yes, it’s true that a team at Google couldn’t decide between two blues, so they’re testing 41 shades between each blue to see which one performs better. " A

by dejb 18y ago

> "Yes, it’s true that a team at Google couldn’t decide between two blues, so they’re testing 41 shades between each blue to see which one performs better. " Actually the evolutionist in me thinks this is pretty cool but I can still understand why a designer would want to quit.

axod 18y ago
I guess it depends on if you trust the majority making the right decision. I think often that just leads to mediocracy. 41 shades does seem a bit of a gimmick. I doubt it really matters that much, or that most people can even tell the difference.
- teej 18y ago
  It's impractical for most businesses, but when you're at Google scale, a 0.1% difference in conversion can be huge.
- ryanwaggoner 18y ago
  I guess it depends on if you trust the majority making the right decision. When you're running a business and the decision is whether or not to convert, trusting the majority is the only decision. If others see it as mediocrity, so be it.
- dminor 18y ago
  I think the point he's making isn't about the correct way to choose a shade of blue, it's that real design work encompasses far more than picking colors.
  - jfarmer 18y ago
    That's true. Design is not about shades of color and pixel widths. But it also sounds like he resists having his designs put through the ringer of empirical analysis.
- jfarmer 18y ago
  It's Wal-Mart vs. Whole Foods. Which would you rather be? Both answers are fine, of course, the important thing is the "why."
- snprbob86 18y ago
  If you can test A and B, you'd test 2 colors. Or maybe 3. But when you have to test many things (not just shades of blue) and you run tests of A, B, C, D, and so on, all the time... I'm sure they could test HUNDREDS of shades if blue just as easily as they can test 3.
pxlpshr 18y ago
From a designer's perspective, this is an example of engineers over-thinking a problem in a space they don't belong. It's absolutely stupid and a complete waste of time for the simple reason that electronic color is not consistent. A majority of the users will see a different shade of blue depending on their display settings. A very small percentage of the population will see the color that's intended. And if he's just being sarcastic, my opinion still applies. :)
- dejb 18y ago
  This lack of consistent colour presentation is actually an advantage for Google's approach over the designed based one. Their approach is optimising across the population of 'end colour presentations'. Even if 50% of users happened to see it shades of aqua then the best 'aqua' presentation would also be incorporated into the result with a 50% weighting. A designer would find it very difficult to weight all the of presentations proportionately even if he knew about them whereas Google's method doesn't even need to know about the variations. Let's face it you never really know what peoples internal representations of colours are. Of course this type of testing only works where you can measure the results and the number of options to be tested are low compared with the number of tests. If you look at the whole layout of a page then then there are just too many dimensions for this type of testing to be practical. A designer could perhaps argue that changing the background colour, the border colour and using a bigger red button would be the best option. A designer could also argue that they are optimising for 'overall experience' rather than some measurable metric like clicks. I think this all goes to show why both designers and 'measurement geeks' need to work together on these things.
  - pxlpshr 18y ago
    You make good points that I partially agree with, however I still don't believe this is optimal for a few reasons. End-user design is about creating a usable experience and often deriving an emotion to make them want to do it again, a process that relies on color combinations, layout, typography, etc. -- the complete package. I'm less attached to GOOG webapps because they lack subtle things such as sound feedback. I've found sound to be critical in software usability, far more important than very minor color discrepancies. That is, when software goes outside of very basic operations, and requires more attention from the end-user. (Fighting about the shade of blue makes me puke in my mouth at the thought of such a corporate cliche). Furthermore, this type of color testing would need to be extended to cover cultural differences to be truly effective. Colors will trigger completely different responses in China, Japan, France, etc, often the exact opposite of American counterparts. Honestly, I think the engineers have a place AFTER a design has been released and there is data to mine and analyze that takes into account the entire product presentation as a whole. Interjecting them in the design process too soon and giving their opinion overriding power is a mistake. It's akin to slapping memcache on your back-end before you've done an ounce of optimization on your queries.

by dejb 18y ago

axod 18y ago

I guess it depends on if you trust the majority making the right decision. I think often that just leads to mediocracy. 41 shades does seem a bit of a gimmick. I doubt it really matters that much, or that most people can even tell the difference.

teej 18y ago
It's impractical for most businesses, but when you're at Google scale, a 0.1% difference in conversion can be huge.
ryanwaggoner 18y ago
I guess it depends on if you trust the majority making the right decision. When you're running a business and the decision is whether or not to convert, trusting the majority is the only decision. If others see it as mediocrity, so be it.
dminor 18y ago
I think the point he's making isn't about the correct way to choose a shade of blue, it's that real design work encompasses far more than picking colors.
- jfarmer 18y ago
  That's true. Design is not about shades of color and pixel widths. But it also sounds like he resists having his designs put through the ringer of empirical analysis.
jfarmer 18y ago
It's Wal-Mart vs. Whole Foods. Which would you rather be? Both answers are fine, of course, the important thing is the "why."
snprbob86 18y ago
If you can test A and B, you'd test 2 colors. Or maybe 3. But when you have to test many things (not just shades of blue) and you run tests of A, B, C, D, and so on, all the time... I'm sure they could test HUNDREDS of shades if blue just as easily as they can test 3.

pxlpshr 18y ago

From a designer's perspective, this is an example of engineers over-thinking a problem in a space they don't belong. It's absolutely stupid and a complete waste of time for the simple reason that electronic color is not consistent. A majority of the users will see a different shade of blue depending on their display settings. A very small percentage of the population will see the color that's intended. And if he's just being sarcastic, my opinion still applies. :)

dejb 18y ago
This lack of consistent colour presentation is actually an advantage for Google's approach over the designed based one. Their approach is optimising across the population of 'end colour presentations'. Even if 50% of users happened to see it shades of aqua then the best 'aqua' presentation would also be incorporated into the result with a 50% weighting. A designer would find it very difficult to weight all the of presentations proportionately even if he knew about them whereas Google's method doesn't even need to know about the variations. Let's face it you never really know what peoples internal representations of colours are. Of course this type of testing only works where you can measure the results and the number of options to be tested are low compared with the number of tests. If you look at the whole layout of a page then then there are just too many dimensions for this type of testing to be practical. A designer could perhaps argue that changing the background colour, the border colour and using a bigger red button would be the best option. A designer could also argue that they are optimising for 'overall experience' rather than some measurable metric like clicks. I think this all goes to show why both designers and 'measurement geeks' need to work together on these things.
- pxlpshr 18y ago
  You make good points that I partially agree with, however I still don't believe this is optimal for a few reasons. End-user design is about creating a usable experience and often deriving an emotion to make them want to do it again, a process that relies on color combinations, layout, typography, etc. -- the complete package. I'm less attached to GOOG webapps because they lack subtle things such as sound feedback. I've found sound to be critical in software usability, far more important than very minor color discrepancies. That is, when software goes outside of very basic operations, and requires more attention from the end-user. (Fighting about the shade of blue makes me puke in my mouth at the thought of such a corporate cliche). Furthermore, this type of color testing would need to be extended to cover cultural differences to be truly effective. Colors will trigger completely different responses in China, Japan, France, etc, often the exact opposite of American counterparts. Honestly, I think the engineers have a place AFTER a design has been released and there is data to mine and analyze that takes into account the entire product presentation as a whole. Interjecting them in the design process too soon and giving their opinion overriding power is a mistake. It's akin to slapping memcache on your back-end before you've done an ounce of optimization on your queries.