Ann Torrence wrote:I've showed this to the DH before. He's a color vision scientist. He says not to feel badly if you do poorly, as the test is greatly dependent on your monitor's accurate rendition of colors. As a photog, I can tell you that very few monitors have accurate color. It's fun, but it's no diagnosis.
Ann Torrence wrote:@Jennifer, they say 1 in 8 males has some color deficiency. That does not explain all of their difficulties in matching clothes, however.
Jennifer Wadsworth wrote:
I've always thought they should make adult "Granimals" for men - remember those clothes for kids? Kids could match the animals on the clothing and know that if they picked a zebra and a zebra, they would match.
Jennifer Wadsworth wrote:@Ann - maybe your husband can clarify something for me? I remember reading an article years ago that said something to the effect that because people (especially kids) spend more and more time inside in front of screens, they are losing some ability to distinguish shades of color? Any truth to this?
Ann Torrence wrote:... but still not as good as a trout or a sparrow, both of which have six or seven kinds of cones.
Judith Browning wrote:I scored a 38. I have cataracts now so i think that maybe makes it harder to distinguish more subtle ranges even though I have always worked with close color ranges in weaving and other fiber work.
I've never tried something like that before...it was was fun and now I need to go stretch my neck a bit from peering at the screen for so long.