Show HN: Colorvote.io – ranking all sRGB web colors by popularity
colorvote.io
colorvote.io
There is just too many colours, especially in this color space, and it is sort of hard for humans to really differentiate them. Thus spread out the vote based on average human visual perception differentiability capabilities.
Also this color space (R x B x G box color space) spends too many bits on low intensity and high intensity colors. When a color is near white or black, we can not easily tell the hues apart.
A much better color space to vote on would be something akin to the Pantone color list or paint swatches. Way less colors but still roughly covering the whole color space.
Similar to those "these boxes/squares are the same color" illusions.
Isn’t that what the gamma is for?
It is exactly the opposite of a weak vote for nearby colors.
Of course, "nearby colors" depends on which axis (or axes) of the color space is/are changing, the rates of change, and what is the criterion for ordering the aspects of color.
Historically, voting on colors is a strong tradition in color science.
Because color is a property of human perception not a property of the external world...turn out the lights and the apple isn't red any more.
> It is exactly the opposite of a weak vote for nearby colors.
Surely that is demonstrably false in cases where you could experimentally prove that two adjacent colors are below the voter's threshold of color discrimination.
Or to be Wittgensteinian, that’s not how “of different colors” is used in ordinary language.
In terms of additive color science, different combinations of RGB (or XYZ) light can produce the same color perception.
In part because the human visual system (green cones) has a negative response to a particular frequency band and additive light can’t have negative green values.
At the edge of current color science is accounting for tetra-chromatic perception…not to be confused with tetra-chromatic response which occurs in about 1% of humans.
Which is all to say that there’s a lot of baggage to a logical argument based on voting.
The premises that several colors can be different despite humans believing the colors are the same color requires that color is an independent property of external objects.
The premise that voting is a way of studying color requires that color is a property of human perception.
The discipline of color science operates on the second premise because the discipline of color science is scientific.
The first premise has been the road to philosophical skepticism in Western philosophy for more than two millennia.
Although it appears in physics courses everywhere, there is nothing special about the visible spectrum except that it happens to be what we see...which is to say that partitioning the universe into infrared, visible, and ultraviolet is not based on properties independent of humans in the way that mass, force, and frequency are.
Because color only exists in the context of the human visual system from a scientific perspective. Or to put it another way, color is derived from human physiology. And that's why it is scientific to vote on it.
Of course for the same reasons we talk about the sun rising and setting, the tides flowing in and out, and the ancients distinguished between Hesperus and Phospherus, ordinary non-scientific language treats color as a property of things similar to mass because tedious pedants aren't much fun at parties.
In ordinary language it is also the case that choosing a color involves explicit rejection of closely related colors that are a little too warm, I-think-it-will-be-too-dark, or something-a-bit-more-red.
Choosing a color involves high discernment. When you find the right shade of blue, you have condemned all other shades as wrong.
Fortunately, nobody cares.
That would have made a lot more sense than what they're doing. I'd really like to see the outcome of that. Not this random comparison.
While certainly different individuals are going to vote on colors differently, I doubt that the aggregate results would resemble randomness.
I think it's not really relevant to select colours in a void. Colours are good for a purpose. This is especially relevant on websites. I love yellow but I would hate it when it's used for text on a white background. Stuff like that.
it would be fairly easily to implement, although probably quite expensive in either cost or time
Could use sampling and still get reliable estimates?
I'd imagine you get white and black in one or two, but then what?
I bet some pretty interesting graphs could be drawn with the results
Though I would also be interested to see what the most popular background colors are. My money's on white and off-white.
I don't think anyone would be mad.
In my defense I'm outside with a ton of glare...
Would be nice to see percentages/total users. It might be only used by 5 accounts of the same person.
My top bar color is #ccff99.
(Joking aside it is behind a karma limit for some reason)
The observations of the other comments would be strange indeed, if it were. Looking back through old discussions, it turns out I'd misremembered a mix of speculating comments as fact. Most conclusively, the order is now completely different to when the page was discussed last month:
https://web.archive.org/web/20220615213203/https://news.ycom...
16 million collars aren't that many compared to large-scale internet systems. If you got 160 million+ votes you'd start getting meaningful results without any averaging.
At the moment it seems to be always white, maybe if it's always the opposite color on the color wheel that might offset it? Or maybe just have the text on a white card on the edge of the screen so you can focus on the color itself?
{
"winner": "#e28b20",
"useragent": "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/103.0.5060.114 Safari/537.36 Edg/103.0.1264.49",
"loser": "#997e79",
"time": "20220711T161234",
"inner-width": 3840,
"uuid": "4f076d53-5d84-4b4d-923e-803db7ca6150",
"color-a": "#e28b20",
"color-b": "#997e79",
"inner-height": 2040
}Obviously, the best color is #BADA55
[0] - https://www.colourlovers.com/colors/most-loved/all-time/meta
There's lots of room for different types of analyses here!
2. Black
3. Colours (mostly blue)
Still disappointed?
2. Light grey
3. Some other light grey
...
235. dark grey
236. slightly bluish dark grey
237. slightly yellowish dark grey
...
Keeping track of this would also show interesting trends over time. Do web designers favour 'hard' colours or pastels? Do they favour blue or less melatonin-generating colours. Stuff like that.
I'm on mobile. The phone was perhaps a little over a foot from my face. It's a sunny day in a room with a South facing window. I have a warmish LED light on (3000K).
- I don’t think the ordering relation is acyclical if no specific usage scenario is given for the color.
- After grading a dozen of color pairs or so and then looking at the rankings, I noticed that I had Smart Invert Colors turned on and had thus voted on the inverted colors. (I noticed because it seemed unlikely to me that most of the highest-ranking colors would be shades of brown. ;))
I only noticed the first time because there was a gorgeous gold/purple combination that I wanted to save, which makes me think there might be another layer of combination that can be saved which is worst/best combinations of colour.
The “best” colours also seem really bad, I wonder if what they appear next to gives false results. Still, interesting idea!
The takeaway seems to be that color preferences are highly subjective to the point that you might just be getting noise.
Also how is it that people are even seeing the same colors for this to have happened? Even with birthday problem seems unlikely that two of the exact same hex colors would end up on the two very short lists. Are you sure you're shuffling these?
Or - could you ever tell the difference between "Amateur Rockstar Bright Pink" (#ff1aab) and "Pink Soul Of Heart" (#ff1bab) even if your life depended on it?
The fact that 24-bit RGB can represent 16 million colors does not mean our vision is capable of telling such number of colors apart from each other. Creating a coherent and concise naming system for all them could be an interesting (and perhaps quite challenging) technical task, but I don't believe crowd-sourcing those will yield any usable results. Or - how many colors with "poop" in their name do you think is acceptable? https://colornames.org/search/results/?type=partial&query=po...
And how about "asdf" (the first four letters on the home row of a QWERTY keyboard - an age-old internet troll version of "foobar")? https://colornames.org/search/results/?type=partial&query=as...
The problem with anything crowd-sourced is always that without moderation the results are garbage, and moderation is generally expensive or at least requires passionate volunteers. Crowd-sourcing 16 million unique color names is bound to be problematic and very difficult to moderate.
I actually gave this a second thought as a technical problem. The CSS defines 140 color names. It would probably not be infeasible to crowd-source / invent 4,096 base color names spread out exactly evenly across the 3-dimensional RGB space (e.g. "maroon", "deep sky blue", "slate gray" and so on.) If we could then further name 64 "tints" (like "reddish", "dark bluish", "purple hazed"), one could express about 250,000 colors with base color + tint pairs (like "reddish deep sky blue" or "purple hazed maroon"). This should be already sufficient for expressing almost all colors normally needed for UI designs etc.
If even more fidelity was somehow desired, one could then add one more of the 64 tints from the same vocabulary with some qualifier, like 'slightly'. So e.g. "slighly purple hazed dark bluish slate gray". This system could express the full RGB space, and there would be always possibility to find a closeby very similar color with shorter name - e.g. "slight dark bluish reddish deep sky blue" => "reddish deep sky blue" => "deep sky blue".
Joking aside I agree with you that it is useless to name 16 million colors but I appreciate the futile effort.
Now I'm imagining a site where you have a standard format(Like a page with body, borders, headers, links, banners, etc, or just an abstract arrangement of 2-5 colors), and people make pallets and vote on them.
> But which one of these motherfuckers is the best color?
> Together, we've voted on 0.27834177017211914% of all colors.
> (Don't worry, we'll get there.)
Good news is, you are completely right and the author agrees. It is a joke. Which brings us to the bad news — but it's a monday which is hard enough so I'll let it slide.
That would at least make it interesting to keep voting and seeing the map fill out.
Mobile vs desktop, OLED votes vs. LCD votes, indoors vs sunlight etc. would also be interesting to compare.