Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2024 Poal.co

887

EDIT: found a cleaner version (pic8.co)

A computer only shows a limited number of shades so this test is limited to "normal" ranges of human perception.

You see less than 20 color nuances: you are a dichromats, which means you have 2 types of cones only. You are likely to wear black, beige, and blue. 25% of the population is dichromat.

You see between 20 and 32 color nuances: you are a trichromat, you have 3 types of cones (in the purple/blue, green and red area). You enjoy different colors as you can appreciate them. 50% of the population is trichromat.

You see between 33 and 39 colors: you are a tetrachromat, like bees, and have 4 types of cones (in the purple/blue, green, red plus yellow area). 25% of the population is tetrachromat.

## [EDIT: found a](#red) [cleaner version](https://pic8.co/sh/2IR2HK.png) > A computer only shows a limited number of shades so this test is limited to "normal" ranges of human perception. > You see less than 20 color nuances: you are a dichromats, which means you have 2 types of cones only. You are likely to wear black, beige, and blue. 25% of the population is dichromat. > You see between 20 and 32 color nuances: you are a trichromat, you have 3 types of cones (in the purple/blue, green and red area). You enjoy different colors as you can appreciate them. 50% of the population is trichromat. > You see between 33 and 39 colors: you are a tetrachromat, like bees, and have 4 types of cones (in the purple/blue, green, red plus yellow area). 25% of the population is tetrachromat.
You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (22).
[–] • 4 pts

I haven't color calibrated my monitors in a long time since I no longer do graphics work on a regular basis, but I see 38 color bands. The whole image is suffering from JPG compression distortion particularly in the color space so there are definitely some color artifacts I ignored in the counting of what I can see. I'm not sure if I'm a tetrachromat or not, but I do have a very good ability to discern color across the spectrum, particularly when dealing with reflective color rather than transmissive color (pigments versus dyes for example).

I used to have a site bookmarked that had a very nice color perception test that required you to rearrange a spectrum of colored squares by red to blue by perceived hue angle. There were a lots of squares and the angle differences between hues was very small so the test really did help to find your color range sensitivity. I'm going to try to find it since it would be interesting to take the tests again to see if my eyesight and color perception have degraded with age by a lot. I'll post it if I find it again, provided it still exists some 10+ years later.

[–] • 3 pts

I can see 44, plenty of them are even gradients

[–] • 3 pts

I can see 44, plenty of them are even gradients

The yellow region was less distinct to me, which would suggest I am not a tetrachromat, but I just pulled out a a color picker tool and swept across the image to see how big the angle steps are for comparison. The yellow region was very small steps in the angles compared to other hues and practically at the limit of the best human perception. Given that, I don't think many monitors could reproduce the colors distinctly which makes this more a test of your monitor's color rendering abilities than your color perception abilities.

It was actually better back in the days of CRT monitors with characterized phosphors and active color calibration equipment. I stayed on CRT monitors for a long time for that reason since early LCD displays really sucked at color reproduction, not that they're great these days though. I do miss my old Idek Iiyama CRT displays for graphics work. Samsung color just doesn't pop like the Ideks did.