Testing Your Color Vision: What Do You See?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the effectiveness of color vision tests, specifically the Ishihara test and images from Wikipedia. Participants express mixed experiences with the test images, noting that while the Ishihara test is considered the industry standard for diagnosing color blindness, the Wikipedia images are deemed too bright and faint, making them difficult to interpret. One contributor mentions their ability to identify numbers in the Ishihara test but struggles with the Wikipedia images, highlighting the variability in color perception across different monitors. The conversation also touches on personal experiences with color vision testing, including a reference to a specific type of color blindness, deuteranopia, which affects green cone vision. Overall, the consensus leans towards the Ishihara test being more reliable for assessing color vision.
Biology news on Phys.org
the first reference was okay.. I can see all the numbers as normal vision.

The wikipedia images appear faint.. the colors (of the numbers) in each image appear to be (1) light blue (2) pink (3) green and (4) purple. After staring at them for awhile I was able to identify 3 out of 4 correctly (when you click on image they give the answer)
 
The wikipedia images are really bad, they are much to bright. The Ishihara test should be the way to go. But on a computer monitor you never know for sure, because of the different kinds of monitors and the different video settings.
 
Wow, those wikipedia ones are pretty subtle all right. I've been tested before and have good colour vision (you need it to work in the photo industry), but I can barely see them enough to make out the right numbers.
 
The Ishihara tests are the "industry standard" and are used in both clinical and research seetings to dignose the type of colorblindness on has. The wikipedia images are pretty bad, but the accompanying info seems correct. I am a deuteranope who is missing the gene for green cones (I had the testing done as part of a research project on campus).
 
Chagas disease, long considered only a threat abroad, is established in California and the Southern U.S. According to articles in the Los Angeles Times, "Chagas disease, long considered only a threat abroad, is established in California and the Southern U.S.", and "Kissing bugs bring deadly disease to California". LA Times requires a subscription. Related article -...
I am reading Nicholas Wade's book A Troublesome Inheritance. Please let's not make this thread a critique about the merits or demerits of the book. This thread is my attempt to understanding the evidence that Natural Selection in the human genome was recent and regional. On Page 103 of A Troublesome Inheritance, Wade writes the following: "The regional nature of selection was first made evident in a genomewide scan undertaken by Jonathan Pritchard, a population geneticist at the...
Back
Top