Find the Odd Disk
123 comments
·April 20, 2025lucb1e
tennysont
I appreciate https://lucb1e.com/randomprojects/js/testformula.html, it's a cool idea!
lucb1e
Happy to hear, though note the file is without l (lowercase L) in the end (I guess autocorrupt is to blame here?). Fun fact: if you remove the filename, it'll show you all the crap in that directory, listing this file as being last modified in 2015-09-27. If past performance is an indicator, it should be stable to use for the next ten years as well :D
readingnews
Thanks for posting, I thought the same thing... my (useless data point of one) results showed 100% accuracy except the last four, which I thought "wow, I am just guessing now, can literally not see a difference".
noduerme
Got 18/20. I chalk that up to spending years as a graphic designer. I'd like to see a similar study about which text was perfectly kerned, or by how many pixels an element was off-center or misaligned. I can spot that on billboards a block away, and my life is therefore a constantly grating experience.
Marginally related. I paint oils as a hobby, and my studio gets northern light, usually overcast and cloudy, during the day. Differentiating tiny color variations under those conditions is very easy, and in general your objective "pitch perfect" impression of color is also pretty accurate. However, I've painted in the same room at night under a "warm" LED bulb, and been absolutely shocked at how wrong and blue everything turned out when seen in the light of day. Not just that, but the hues I intended to be close to one another are much farther apart than they appeared under LED lighting.
So if lighting conditions can shift not just your perception of a color, but also its relationship to the ones around it, then I think how much more does your screen gamma and range alter that? A fair test would be printed on the exact same Heidelberg in 4 colors.
nine_k
Regarding the LED lights: unless you use a lamp with CRI < 90, you see obvious, glaring color distortions, and some colors just "disappear", cannot be seen, because of the lack of a particular spectrum bands. Sadly, most inexpensive LED lamps have CRI around 80, and that light feeld definitely artificial, even if pleasant to the eye. A lamp with CRI 90 is okay, most things look natural, even though you can notice it's not sunlight. A lamp with CRI 95 is very fine, it's practically sunlight, and most tricky colors are visible well. I've never encountered a lamp with CRI, say, 97, but they exist and cost a lot.
(Source: doing object photography.)
jrapdx3
IME producing artwork that relies on subtle color relationships requires high quality, "full spectrum" illumination. Natural daylight is the obvious canonical option, but of course not always practical.
My studio gets very little natural light, so selecting optimum light sources is crucial. At one time the most practical option was D50 compliant fluorescent tubes, but these were only fairly acceptable.
Situation with LED lamps is also difficult. Even CRI 90 is inadequate, mainly poor red emission and excessive blue radiation. However D50 compliant LED fixtures are available if somewhat more expensive vs. typical LED lamps.
One vendor worth checking out is Waveform Lighting [0]. They offer several types of products with CRI 95 and CRI 99. I've been using their D50 'shop light' for several months and find it very satisfactory.
madaxe_again
Surely an incandescent bulb, being a black body radiator, has a CRI of 100? Yes, the temperature is low compared to sunlight, but the rendering is theoretically perfect.
I suppose if you want to get closer to sunlight, you need a carbon arc, which is only a few hundred degrees cooler and again, a perfect black body emitter.
jerf
Yes. An incandescent bulb is basically the reference for CRI 100. The parent of your poster is explicitly discussing non-incandescent technologies.
slowwriter
I got 19/20. Turned off True Tone and cranked the screen brightness. Half the time I didn’t know if it was just my eyes playing tricks on me, but it was interesting to notice how the colors seemed completely indiscernible for a few seconds and then suddenly one stood out.
01HNNWZ0MV43FF
Swear on me mum I saw a game about kerning and alignment years ago on HN or proggit and of course it's impossible to find on search
isp
> I'd like to see a similar study about which text was perfectly kerned, or by how many pixels an element was off-center or misaligned.
> Swear on me mum I saw a game about kerning and alignment years ago on HN
Can't Unsee - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27188989 - May 2021 (126 comments)
evulhotdog
I recall playing one that had to do with making sure the kerning was aligned…
pronoiac
Kern Type, perhaps? https://type.method.ac/
0xTJ
I also got 18/20, I was confident on most of them, blinking I found "reset" my vision and made it easier. This was on my relatively comfortable (not too bright) monitor.
rcxdude
Yeah, metamers are a trip and a bad LED bulb will really screw with the appearance of colors. If anything, screens are more consistent, but more limited.
zootboy
I wish this had a "I can't tell" option. A few of the really hard ones I got right, but I'd say it was more of a lucky guess than a genuine ability to discriminate the difference.
Freak_NL
Quite. With the odds being 1 to 3 you'll pick the right one when you have to click one at random to proceed, the results get skewed.
layer8
This is from the creator of the ScienceClic YouTube channel [0]:
“As part of the next video, which will be out in a few weeks, l'd like to invite you to take part in an experiment about color perception. If you don't experience color blindness, l'd greatly appreciate it if you could take this test. Feel free to try it as many times as you like, think about it as a game!”
nkrisc
Would be interesting to get some basic analysis of my results. From a glance it appeared that the ones I missed (6) tended towards red. The low saturation ones and green ones I found to be easiest, but was there any actual significance of the distribution of my errors? Simply too small a set to say?
hilbert42
I got the same number wrong but I've passed every Ishihara test ever thrown at me. I did this test on a cheap mobile that's not calibrated, so it's anyone guess what its gamma and transfer curves are like.
One should only take such tests seriously if one's using a properly calibrated monitor and it's viewed under ideal viewing conditions.
robertclaus
Interesting! All of my misses were blue leaning a bit towards violet.
kamma4434
Same here. The blues/purples were all alike. Reds and greens were easier.
tripdout
17 out of 20. Was super easy until #10 and I had to stop and think more carefully (which was actually my first mistake), and then I got #14 and #15 wrong. The score was about what I expected, though - would've been surprised if it was <15 correct.
I wonder how much of this would come down to screen calibration / color accuracy? If everything's consistently off in 1 direction I guess not much, but I would imagine certain shades might appear effectively the same on some cheaper screens?
blueflow
How much of the result is vision accuracy and how much is dependant of the display?
schobi
There is certainly also a device limitation. I would expect that with less than full 24 bits of color, some fields might just look the same and the results do not depend on your vision any more.
Let's say the device has a "24 bit color display". What about eye protection color shifting? This limits the color space used could reduce the effective remaining bit depth. Or maybe they do temporal dithering to get more bit depth? Or maybe the 24 bits are already achieved with temporal dithering?
It does not need to be a calibrated display, but a cheap tablet in sunlight will be worse than a color grading monitor in a reference environment.
I hope they also register the devices used and analyze the statistics on that.
hilbert42
As I've mentioned, you can't take this seriously unless you've a properly calibrated monitor.
wtallis
Calibrating a monitor is intended to ensure that colors on your monitor closely match colors on an ideal reference monitor. That's not the same thing as ensuring that two different colors on the same monitor actually show up differently; that's a much looser quality standard, because even a badly mis-calibrated monitor may still show both colors as distinct wrong colors.
I would only expect poor calibration to break this test for colors near the edge of the display's gamut, or if there's a drastic-enough shift that the color space's lack of perceptual uniformity means a numerical difference that should have been visible ends up in a different part of the color space where that same numerical difference is not perceptible.
hilbert42
Well, I initially ran the test on my cheap vivo phone when I switched to my Motorola the difference was very noticeable, there's obvious color crushing/reduced visible color gamut on the vivo, they're like chalk and cheese when compared side by side.
BTW, I used to calibrate color grading equipment for the film processing industry and the controls were strict, 18% gray walls, D65 calibration sources, densitometric equipment, Ishihara tests for me, etc. so I'm well aware of the issues.
zamalek
I think you mean gamut? Calibration would only make the discs have the most correct color, not discernible colors.
nuancebydefault
What stood out a lot in this exercise is that when looking at, versus near a disc, its luminance (or maybe the color as well) is perceived as changing. Almost the same i have when staring at not too bright stars, they seem to disappear when staring directly on them.
And related, I once had an 'eye migrane'. During that half an hour, the figures of a clock disappeared the moment i looked at them.
Liftyee
I experienced this too. IIRC the brightness-sensitive rod cells are more concentrated in your peripheral vision while your central vision has more colour-sensitive cone cells. This makes the centre of your vision less sensitive to dim objects, so you can see them only while looking indirectly (and they "disappear" when staring at them)
Another related effect is flickering of badly designed lighting only in my peripheral vision. When looking directly at the lights they look fine, but when the lights are in my peripheral vision they appear to flash distractingly. I think the peripheral vision is optimised to detect fast changes/movements. At least, that makes sense based on evolution.
moebrowne
This is referred to as 'Averted Vision'
nuancebydefault
The flickering i see as well when looking near my ali express outdoor LED light strip, from the corner of my eyes. The sub-components of the PWM seem to emerge as well.
fallinghawks
I'm curious how the eye migraine is related. I had one many, many years ago. It was a smallish (palm at arm's length) oval in the center of my vision that looked like snow on an analog TV, accompanied by a feeling of overwhelmed by all the colors of the products on the shelves (I was in a grocery). It stuck around for about half an hour for me as well.
I've also had eye floaters which cause things to distort and can be hard to see through. For about 6 months I had a large one in the center of my left eye vision, which was a bit scary when I discovered I might not see a car reflected in my wing mirror.
twodave
I’ve had visual migraines ever since I started training hard with weights. Played sports in High School and never had one, but suddenly I’m doing CrossFit in my late 30s and an hour after a workout I get these sparkly jagged lines in my vision (both eyes!). It took a while to even be able to describe them, let alone figure out what they were. Thankfully there’s no pain and they clear up after a while, but I have noticed since this all started that I’m also a bit more sensitive to screen brightness. That HDR emoji article from the other day was kind of triggering.
z0r
Sounds like symptoms of impending retinal detachment - ex discussion https://www.reddit.com/r/myopia/comments/o7rhi3/retinal_deta...
gblargg
I had visual migraines for years, and was thankful they weren't full-blown... until I started getting headaches that lasted 18+ hours (pretty sure they're migraines). Now I'm just thankful I don't have multi-day-long ones.
alternatex
The symptoms you mention read like scintillating scotoma: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scintillating_scotoma
I've had it happen many times and it's usually followed by a regular headache. Quite terrifying the first few times it happened to me. Felt like I was losing my sight.
Spending the whole night gaming when I was younger would sometimes trigger it in the morning. Thanks to not having any more time for that, it hasn't happened in years.
nuancebydefault
Indeed the animated jitter in the meadow shown on Wikipedia is close to what i remember seeing. 'Cortical spreading depression' is said to be the cause.
RetroTechie
Similar experience. What surprised me: sometimes the odd-one-out was really quick/easy to see, and other times it took much longer & I thought "at the end, they'll say all disks were the same color".
Got 14/20
mrguyorama
For some of the easier ones, I was surprised by how aggressively my brain was making what seemed like "close" colors stand out. Like it was mentally "highlighting" the odd one out. I thought that was cool, but eventually the later ones were hard enough that the effect went away, and I was much less confident in my choices, and I got 3 mistakes, all in the last five rounds.
The way your brain manipulates your vision 24/7, with no way to get around that, is truly crazy to me. There's all sorts of effects in your visual system like edge detection and certain types of stimulus suppression that it's crazy we even feel like reality is coherent.
fallinghawks
19/20. The first many were very obvious. I missed #14 and I think right around there I started to slow down because the differences were getting smaller. Looking away and then coming back helped, I think. It seemed like if you look at them too long, whichever circle you're looking at seems to shift color and it becomes really hard to discern the difference.
archmaster
Interesting. Got 19/20 too, and also missed #14!
js2
The X-Rite Color Challenge and Hue Test:
Are you among the 1 in 255 women and 1 in 12 men who have some form of color vision deficiency? If you work in a field where color is important, or you’re just curious about your color IQ, take our online challenge to find out. Based on the Farnsworth Munsell 100 Hue Test, this online challenge is a fun, quick way to better understand your color vision acuity.
https://www.xrite.com/hue-test
(My memory is that the full test used to be online.)
red75prime
What is "color IQ"? Color identification quotient?
susam
19/20 - <https://i.imgur.com/GplfQbO.png>
By the way, I keep Night Shift enabled all the time: <https://i.imgur.com/LGkSlJZ.png>. I don't know how much it matters in a game like this.
See also <https://susam.net/myrgb.html> for a colour guessing game I wrote last year.
richrichardsson
> I don't know how much it matters in a game like this.
Probably significantly since it explicitly tells you to disable any blue light filters on your screen.
I think the website needs to be more explicit that this is trying to gather data and that deviating from the test parameters will skew the results.
havan_agrawal
Shouldn't there also be a few "control" challenges sprinkled in where all three are the same color and there's no "right" answer? If the test is implemented well and/or there is no human bias (either from the previous question or from the positioning of the circles), then you'd expect to see a uniform distribution of answers on the control. If there is bias (e.g. some innate preference for the top circle (say)), that should get adjusted for in the final analysis.
I was wondering if it got harder or if it's just random:
Plotting that first magic: https://lucb1e.com/randomprojects/js/testformula.htm#%24%28%... The "blacklist" parameter prevents that you get the same challenge twice. Note also that it submits every answer to the server (fine imo, but I think it would be even nicer if this was mentioned on the page)