View Full Version : Horrible black web sites.

Eric Richards
20-10-2004, 11:40 PM
Something that might interest you all the maximum time you should be exposed to loud sound, looks like we need a few "below 75 dB zones"

as from this comment
"OK, So what's this mean for my hearing?
Sounds less than 75 dB have no significant effect on our hearing. "
from http://www.myhometheater.homestead.com/splcalculator.html

But why the horrible black web sites?
as in http://www.abelard.org/hear/hear.htm

20-10-2004, 11:46 PM
>But why the horrible black web sites?
>as in http://www.abelard.org/hear/hear.htm

Check your monitor settings Eric, it's a friendly black on mine ;)

Eric Richards
20-10-2004, 11:52 PM
Interesting comment about Bill Clinton,

If I click and drag my mouse other the text to highlight it, I can read it better.

21-10-2004, 12:19 AM
Strange - it's easy to read here, Firefox, and a 19" Sony G420

Eric Richards
21-10-2004, 12:46 AM
No mine is only a old 15"

21-10-2004, 12:51 PM
>But why the horrible black web sites?

A perfect example of extremely poor web design.
Interesting content though

21-10-2004, 02:09 PM

21-10-2004, 03:48 PM
>But why the horrible black web sites?



Graham L
21-10-2004, 04:34 PM
There are a lot of sites around which do "clever", "designed", things like darkblue text on black, or even white text on bright yellow. Sometimes the content is good, but I'm afraid that I can't be bothered. If they want people to read the results of their hard work (or cut&paste ;-)) there's an easy way to ensure that: make it legible.

Pete O\'Neil
21-10-2004, 04:46 PM
Looks perfectly fine to me

21-10-2004, 04:48 PM
How true
What amazes me, is the fact that even if the site builder hasn't got a designers bone in his entire body, even he must realise that it's hard to read, it's not exactly rocket science.
"This is hard to read", "This isn't hard to read" Simple
They have obviously gone to a lot of trouble & spent many hours building the site you'd think aftre the first 50or so hrs of staring at that, they'd think to themselves, "This is downright ugly!"

Never ceases to amaze me how many sites around are just like that one.

21-10-2004, 04:56 PM
Obviously they have no problems with their eyesite only their ears. They should make the page scroll sideways instead of up and down to piss even more people off.

21-10-2004, 05:02 PM
I must be missing something,Its a black site with white text?

As easy to read as black on white.

21-10-2004, 05:06 PM
>As easy to read as black on white.

Probally even easier, I dont think we can see black, so all we are looking at are the words.

21-10-2004, 05:12 PM
You mean to say that colours are made up of light where as black is the complete absence of light so is not a colour?

All nice and well but doesnt change the fact that we percieve it as just another colour.

Anyhow,can someone please explain what it is about the above linked site that people are having difficulties with?

Not trying to be a smart arse (if i was i could do much better) i just had no problem reading the site.....

21-10-2004, 05:15 PM
Yes 45South, it was a very warm day. Good thing because we've had particularly nasty weather.

21-10-2004, 05:16 PM
Warm day down South?

What happened,the frost soften?


21-10-2004, 05:20 PM
Whats that about a mouth? Eh?

Oh, its you Metla. :D

Billy T
21-10-2004, 09:04 PM
The problem with blue on black is that the human eye cannot focus on low-luminance blue. If the blue is a pure hue, we rely on the outline provided by the background colour to provide the edge definition, so dark blue on white is easily readable. The same applies to black on white, we don't see the letters at all, we see their outline in white (which is effectively the same thing I guess).

I wrote some notes on this a year or so back for another purpose, and this is as good a place as any to recyle them. Not that web designers would take any notice, they most likely work darkened rooms where the lack of ambient light compensates for the problems their designs cause others.

Colour perception and resolution of detail:
The light we see impinges on special receptor nerve cells in the eye called "cones". There are three types of cones: those that perceive long wavelengths (red), those for medium wavelengths (green), and those for short wavelengths (blue). There are many more red and green receptors in the eye than there are blue, the ratio being 1 blue for every 14 red and green receptors in the periphery of the retina, dropping to 1 in 20 in the central area. There are no blue cones at all in the very center of the retina where our highest visual acuity occurs.

Why is blue the poor cousin?
Red, green and blue light are more or less equally spaced across the electromagnetic spectrum, with red having the longest wavelength of 650 nanometres (nM) green is in between at 550 nM and blue has the shortest wavelength at 450 nM.

While the human eye is readily able to see blue as a colour, it does not use blue light to resolve high-resolution detail as it does with green and red light. This is because short wavelengths of light (blue) have a different "index of refraction" from medium wavelengths (green) and long wavelengths (red) wavelengths and therefore they have a different focal point within the eye.

Because red and blue are of widely disparate wavelengths and focal points, if the human eye were to try to focus on red and blue objects at the same time, they would both appear to be out of focus. In fact, for resolution purposes the human eye ignores blue, which causes difficulties in focusing on and resolving blue detail.

Colour VS luminosity (brightness) perception:
The human visual system processes the information viewed by the eye via several different information channels. Two of these channels are called chrominance and luminance, and can be used to illustrate the special characteristics of these channels and the role they play in how we perceive or "see" the colour we call blue.

The chrominance (or colour) visual channel perceives colours only and has a lower resolution (or ability to identify detail) than the luminance (or brightness) channel. Resolution is not important in perceiving colour and we are always able to identify the colour of an object regardless of the resolution.

The luminance channel tells us the relative brightness between two areas in the field of view. This involves contrasts and requires higher resolution, however because blue has a different index of refraction, higher resolution can best be achieved if it is excluded. Accordingly, the luminance channel takes its input primarily from the red and green cones, with very little input from blue and as a result, blue colors appear dark to us.

Effects of colour imbalance on the human eye:
Because the eye has virtually abandoned the ability to focus on blue in order to preserve its ability to focus sharply on green and red, if working on a screen with a predominance of black and red, black and blue, or magenta, your eyes are unable to resolve a sharp image and significant eyestrain can result.


Billy 8-{)

21-10-2004, 09:13 PM
What resolution is your monitor metla? I find it difficult to read at 1024x768.
www.paradise.net.nz is another

Dolby Digital
21-10-2004, 09:24 PM
Bugger, I like my stereo reasonably loud (whats that you say?)

22-10-2004, 01:17 AM
This is a photo (http://sal.neoburn.net/imagef1/files/black_screen_Rob99.jpg) of mine, it is much better than the photo makes out, you may need to adjust your monitor settings