Were the instructions confusing?
I got a 20, which I think is pretty good considering how badly I did on the face recognition tests, how poorly I dress myself, and how my dad has to read stoplights by the order of the lights.
I didn't have trouble with the instructions and I didn't adjust my monitor.
some shapes doing some fucking shit
I didn't adjust my monitor either and I don't think anyone could possibly have trouble with the instructions.
I got a 39 but I didn't really care.
The afterimages in my eyes were trippy but I did the tests super fast and I was like "this is easy!" and "the right one just pops out to me" and "I'm going to be a color GENIUS" but I only got a 26.
No, I didn't have trouble with the instructions, I just did my best.
I was a-teasing you for your terrible score, Mins.
You took the cheap tour of Vietnam.
Is Minivet colorblind or just color-astigmatic?
Although apparently I do because I'm almost as good as heebie, I got a 4. Missed 4 in a row right at the purple-pink end.
I scored a zero. "You have perfect color vision!" it says.... Finally, something I am good at!
28. Bad in the middle of the greens. Like 12 I found it very easy as I was doing it.
Then I tried again and got 12. Greens and light blues killed me.
I was irritated that I didn't win, and now, looking at the rest of the scores, I'm mainly depressed that I'm not even average...58.
But I did it in like seven seconds, so I mean, if I studied...
20
I thought I was doing better than that
I didn't have enough willpower to finish, so only did the first one 753.
I got a 4. I wish it meant I was good at actually using color.
Got 16. Not bad.
19. I suspect there's quite a bit of inaccuracy in the test results if you don't have a color-calibrated monitor. Some of the color differences on the test seemed very fine, and uncalibrated monitors can differ quite a bit from "correct" color display in ways that we're good at not noticing.
12 here. I think of myself as fairly good with color, what with having to look at printer's proofs and tell graphic designers what to do, but I guess not.
I suspect there's quite a bit of inaccuracy in the test results if you don't have a color-calibrated monitor. Some of the color differences on the test seemed very fine, and uncalibrated monitors can differ quite a bit from "correct" color display in ways that we're good at not noticing.
Indeed, the purpose of the test appears to be to sell monitor-calibrating software.
31: I wonder if the block of trouble I had in the light greeny-browns is a result of a poorly calibrated monitor.
52.
I didn't adjust my monitor; I really couldn't see a difference at all in some of the blues. I guess it's not best to be in lowly lit room, and tired, either. I'll try again tomorrow.
Right after I had the cataract-clouded lens in my right eye replaced with an artificial lens, all the colors were more vibrant for my right eye. Apparently your lenses yellow as you age.
36: that's why old pictures are sepia.
79. Was feeling impatient though. Also, a bit tipsy.
Wait, really? I just realized that low scores are better. I'm kind of stunned. Not because I thought I rocked it (as I said, impatient and tipsy), but because I thought I got the big chunks correct.
I'll have to try again later.
I have perfect color vision, bitchez.
I'm not racist enough to attempt that test.
I got 84. This is immensely reassuring (and yes, I know that they're using it to sell a product). My whole life I haven't seen what people try to tell me about colors. Fortunately I don't often have to choose my own clothes.
I find color stuff incredibly difficult, and this was no exception. I spent real time on it and it was a struggle.
I can't tell scores from comment number references.
I got a 3, but it only makes me that much more envious of Blandings and Spike.
Maybe everyone who got great scores would do worse if they calibrated their monitors.
I got a 42. Aside from the ones at the edge, all of the slides were indistinguishable from 2 or sometimes 3 others, so that's what I expected.
I tried it on my phone and got a 972 because I couldn't make the tiles move. I had to hit Calculate Score without having moved a single piece.
I also got a 0 and it seemed pretty damn easy. Kept wondering what the catch was since I do not do well on most visual tests. Are people moving questionably-placed tiles one to the left and/or right because that always seemed to clear up any confusion for me.
Are people moving questionably-placed tiles one to the left and/or right because that always seemed to clear up any confusion for me.
I did this and it usually cleared up the confusion, but not always. I suspect my monitor is not perfectly calibrated.
Did it again, trying a bit harder, and got a 16.
Remember, dudes tend to be worse at color vision.
There wasn't an enormous amount of overlap between the first and the second trials in the ones I got wrong.
53: True but I had it on the lowest difficulty setting.
Did it twice and got widely varying scores. I know that this monitor is so-so. It doesn't do that well on gray-scale tests such as those used at DPR.
53: You found me out, I'm actually a 42-year old woman sitting in my underwear in my basement.
But definitely not masturbating to Jean Craighead George (My Side of the Mountain, which was very influential on me as a kid, and Julie of the Wolves).
I guess conceivably my monitor could be at fault - it's rather new. But it's at least partly me: I perceived those as very, very fine gradations and kept changing my mind.
11, going kind of quickly. I wish it would say what the distribution in the population is-- based on the scores people are reporting here, most cluster in the low end, with a few serious outliers.
20 is exactly right. And I organized my CDs by color spectrum back in college.
The test doesn't display correctly (the blocks don't fit on one line) on Internet Explorer which is my default browser. It works on Firefox and I scored 4 with problems in the blue purple region. Don't know if I should blame my eyes or my monitor.
Internet Explorer which is my default browser
Don't troll the blog, Shearer.
I used to have my bookshelf organized by color. It was pretty awesome.
||
Hahhhh motherfuckers. That class with the two fifteen hour exams? Aced that fucker.
|>
67: Huzzah! I raise a can of cheap beer in your honor.
I also scored 0, but I'm sure Sifu's 67 represents some sort of equivalent achievement, so you go, girlfriend.
OK, I tried a different monitor and got an 8. All of the errors were in the green-blue category.
I was surprised to get a zero. I am good at color and faces, apparently.
I used to have my bookshelf organized by color. It was pretty awesome.
I did that once. It was okay.
I scored 4, all in one part of the green spectrum also. So either my monitor isn't great in that area, or that's an area where I'm less colour accurate. I knew when I was doing it that part of the third row looked off, but couldn't see exactly how.
I wonder if the test is responsive to monitor colour gamut, or if they've chosen colours well inside the sRGB colour space?
re: 67
Congratulations.
I got a 16, moving tiles intermittently while I did other things and then coming back to it. Some of it seemed right; some of it seemed wrong and I couldn't quite see why, even after moving tiles around that were next to each other and seemed just slightly off.
I promptly forgot what seemed right and what seemed wrong just after I clicked through to the score, so I don't know if there's any correlation between what I thought was right and what I did right or not.
22. A bell curve on the results page would be more helpful than the straight line.
Lee and I have a lot of arguments about colors and what they should be called, what matches and what doesn't. Plus we just draw our dividing lines in different places, so a wall (not at our house) she insists is purple is blue to me and neither of us is going to budge. I'm going to have her take this test, but maybe I should do it myself first and then not ask her to if I don't get a strong score. Hmm.
My wife and I have similar arguments. My colour vision is decent [see 75], I think. I expect it largely comes down to terminological differences that derive from having different first languages, but sometimes I find it hard to recognise her descriptions of things. Because she works in fashion/retail she's sure she's right and I'm just an ignorant bloke. I, on the other hand, think that because I work in techie stuff related to photography, that I am not at all ignorant in this area. Fun for all concerned.
I got 33. I stopped sorting when they got to looking ok, and didn't check every pair properly.
11: Opposite of Lucky Pierre?
I got 59. I might try it again on my work computer. I mean, who am I kidding, I'm totally going to do that instead of actual work.
33. Probably could have spent more time on it, though. I'm puzzled by the range - the score display makes it look like the score range is 0-99 (perfect to terrible), but people here are reporting scores in the hundreds and it says the worst score in my demographic is 1520?
(I have considered getting some color calibration toys, since I'm starting to play around with photos a bit more seriously).
15.
I didn't realize that there was a way to calibrate one's monitor for printing purposes. So this seems like an effective bit of internet advertising.
OK, I just don't have the patience required for this thing. By the time I'm done with rough ordering, I want to move on with my life. The reward of a better score isn't sufficient (even though I'm ashamed of my earlier score - color is part of my job!).
Also, I wish the squares were bigger. Oh wait, I can zoom my browser. Maybe I'll do more later.
I got 4, but I didn't rush. My errors didn't seem to come in any one region.
Wow, sort of. Home screen (netbook): 59. Work screen (desktop, dunno if it's calibrated etc.): 16.
Got a 124. I didn't try all that hard, lighting at work sucks, my monitor sucks, the only browser I can use at work is IE and not an up-to-date version of it at that, and my dad is red-green colorblind. (I'm at work and it's before noon, so at least I'm sober!) I'll try to remember to do it this afternoon or tomorrow morning at home and see how much difference better lighting, monitor, and browser makes.
I was wondering why everybody was so pleased to score 67, then I realised that ST had passed his marathon. Good show, that man.
I hope passing a marathon isn't like passing a kidney stone. (Yay Seafood-Tweety!)
My score is the highest, higher than Cyrus'.
What about posting diopters? I'm 20/400 in my weaker eye.
Retrospectively most foolish investment would be another one. I bought three coats out of a car trunk once, which turned out to be badly made knockoffs.
re: 86
Yes. I'm official 'colour expert bloke' at work so I do this at lot. You really need to colour calibrate the monitor, the printer, and the capture equipment (scanner, camera, or whatever) but it does really help. However, the gamut of monitors and paper are often quite different, so even if both are as accurately calibrated and profiled as possible there are still potential problems.
The problem we often have at work is people have PC monitors with the colour temperature at 9300K and the brightness cranked all the way up, and then complain that the manuscript images look too blue.
||
50 Shades of Grey, the audiobook, read by Gilbert Gottfried.
|>
4
Now I have no excuse for being unable to match colors in clothing.
95: I was at a bookstore (TOTALLY LOOKING FOR SOMETHING ELSE I PROMISE) and found out that the third book in that series is called Fifty Shades Freed which I think is probably particularly amusing to two commenters here.
||
NMM to Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau. (I couldn't bring myself to share that news in the filthy thread.)
|>
OK, I still don't have the patience to do all 4 strips, but after spending some time (not a lot) doing the pair swapping thing on the bottom strip, I got it to 0, which makes me feel better.
If I'm understanding the scoring correctly, having every single square off by exactly one slot would get you an 80, so that provides some context/scale for my 73 last night. Not only was I lazy and tipsy, I also didn't even think to do pair swapping - I just did a rough pass, and then a second pass moving ones that were obviously wrong. Presumably someone with better eyes would do better on that basis (especially the second pass), but I'm going to tell myself that everyone scoring in the single digits did at least some pair swapping.
I did the test again on my work computer and again got 12 (different errors, though).
214. I guess all the squares on the top row weren't actually the same color.