I love the “nothing in nature is true black so don’t use #000000” argument.
Correct, nothing is, and your #000000 won’t be either once it’s shown on a physical screen.
Correct, nothing is, and your #000000 won’t be either once it’s shown on a physical screen.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31421666
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31420938 (397 points by marban 1 day ago, 376 comments) - https://tangledweb.xyz/please-stop-using-grey-text-3d3e71acf...
Your comment about Reddit, in addition to be outside HN's guidelines, is however totally wrong. I don't frequently browse Reddit, I don't have any account there, that cannot be some Reddit infiltration so I suggest you to consider another analysis. Of this thread of course, but of HN in general.
A better analogy for your comment would be in a Twitter conversation, you replying to an OP with a quote tweet of a similar comment you made in the past. Yes, I do find those annoying.
I'm really not concerned whether the severe drop in SNR comes primarily from entryists from Reddit, Twitter, or some obscure web forum (likely it's diffuse). But on its face, the rise of jokes, puns, and other low-effort comments - having to collapse threads to find the comments with something useful to add to the convo - is very reminiscent of Reddit threads, where entertainment and cheap memetics are valued equally or greater than logos. HN used to distinguish itself by obliterating that type of cruft, with a "lurk moar" sting, but it no longer does thanks to lazy gatekeeping.
Now I'm not going to change any of this by pointing it out - the horse bolted years ago and closing the stable door won't change anything now - but you should know the "signals" you're intent on following are worthless as they're from a Reddit-lite entity, not HN classic.
There’s a massive difference between the contrast of that outdoors on a shitty panel (where you’re lucky to get 5:1 contrast) and indoors in a light-controlled environment (where 200:1 contrast is easily reached).
And yes, that 200:1 contrast can get painful, especially if you’ve got astigmatism.
There are knobs for these on most displays.
If you bought a monitor at any point in the past 18 years that can’t show enough contrast, that’s on you.
What you described here is greatly related to The Gell-Mann Amnesia.
The thing about pure black isn't that it's unnatural, but that when paired with white its contrast can actually be uncomfortable and less accessible than a slightly toned down color combination (especially on full brightness).
Then turn down the brightness. Pure black/white should never be uncomfortable, if it is then your monitor needs adjusted. In fact I suspect a lot of this stupid low-contrast trend comes from designers who don't know that and are trying to compensate for it in software.
Monitors come with the brightness set ridiculously high so they'll look good in a showroom (and possibly to make the backlight wear out faster, but that's another rant...), but it's definitely not where normal use should be, unless you're in direct sunlight.
On all my computers? And my phone? And my tablet? And my...
You could say the same about sites where the body text is set unreadably small. "Just zoom in!" It does not persist across devices, sessions, users etc the way a well-designed site would.
I don't know what ultra HDR monitor you're using or what light sensitivity issue you may have, but I don't want to have to install addons in my browser because you can't find the brightness slider.
> I don't want to have to install addons
Sounds like you don't need to, you're happy changing the setting in many places (every device), than one (a stylesheet)
> because you can't find the brightness slider
"Make the user fix it" was the old thinking. Now we consider a more robust set of platforms, devices and users.
But now I need to change my settings or your site's stylesheet to make your text readable
> "Make the user fix it" was the old thinking. Now we consider a more robust set of platforms, devices and users.
Exactly, that's why you choose clearly contrasting text over blurry grey-on-white so that every device can display the text comfortably according to the characteristics and preferences set by the manufacturer (or the user, if the user disagrees with the manufacturer about what constitutes "too much contrast")
> every device can display the text comfortably according to the characteristics and preferences set by the manufacturer (or the user, if the user disagrees with the manufacturer)
Right, every device; seems complicated, requires intervention. That or, design the site well.
What a bunch of doublespeak BS for "now we want to keep the users stupid and unknowing."
Users aren't unknowing, they know how to adjust the brightness whether the site is designed well or not. I said one was "changing the setting in many places."
Can you find a citation for that statement? WCAG 2.1[0] mentions minimum contrast, but not maximum. The success criterion page itself is written in #000 on #fff. :)
https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/Understanding/contrast-minimum...
However, I agree with the generell sentiment that in modern web design, contrast is often too low.
A lot of high contrast combinations are less accessible and even if it doesn't make the text illegible, too much contrast is going to be a strain on the eyes for most people.
Generally, WCAG AA or AAA is enough for most people and you hit that already with #555 on a white background. Something like #1a1a1a is close to the darkest I'd use in most cases.
Why wouldn't people who need less contrast simply reduce the contrast on their monitors, though?
It seems to me as though designing for those who need low contrast excludes those who need high contrast, but not the other way around.
From your link:
> The solution for contrast sensitivity
> If you feel that your child may be suffering from this issue, the first thing to do is test some tinted acetate sheets placed over the page of text.
Because I don't want to make everything else look worse just to lower contrast in text?
And support for low contrast doesn't mean excluding others, it can just be a setting. Like Windows has been doing for a long time with its high-contrast mode. Websites and apps are increasingly adopting dark themes, next we should push for a switch between high and lower contrast. It's just as easy from a technical standpoint. Browsers are already pretty far, letting the user set specific fonts and font sizes, and Firefox' reader mode and its options are great as well.
If a site provides a widget where contrast can be beefed up, probably part of the dark-mode / light-mode widget, that seems OK.
As far as I can tell based on what I've read, there can be a conflict between users with accessibility needs, where you may want as high contrast as possible, and typical users, where excess contrast may impair readability in some cases. The WCAG minimums are within the realm of reasonable for both sets of users though, so there isn't really an excuse not to meet those minimums.
For those with fuzzy vision (obviously an extremely common situation), contrast is reduced naturally when the black and white bleed into each other. Reducing contrast harms those users, belying your "actually less accessible" assertion.
But hey, at least it had some contrast I guess?
That being said, it's easy using the prefers-contrast CSS property to override that to #000000 for people who are hard of sight.
It's supported by edge, safari, chrome, opera but it's a bit finnicky in Firefox.
Dark greys didn't have this effect.
I suspect a lot of these "dark grey text" conventions may be related to this hardware issue.
Edit: note this is per-subpixel, so you need to set some value in each color channel.
this comment reminds of the statement made by Jobs about the round corners in the physical world.
;)