Comments on: FM 100 Hue Test

By: missy

missy — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 12:23:23 +0000

The monitor calibration thing isn’t necessary because the important thing is the relation of each colour to each other not to some external printing source.

I have scored 0 on a few different computers in different light conditions – tungsten/fluoro/day-light. Just because I was curious to see if it was possible in all conditions, all variations etc.

By: DamiÃ¡n

DamiÃ¡n — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 20:41:33 +0000

I scored 14 the first time, then 4 the second time right away after the first try. According to it I have issues in the yellow-green area or something.

By: M. Belloulid

M. Belloulid — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 04:51:55 +0000

That was a fun and interesting test. I was concerned lately that my ability to discern color was diminishing– I guess not! I was able to get a perfect score…

By: karyn

karyn — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 18:09:22 +0000

I loved this! I got a 4, and what was interesting is I had errors in one little section of the green/yellow hue range. Very interesting exercise. Thank you for sharing!

By: Czek

Czek — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 19:23:42 +0000

Argh! I’ve tried twice and I just cannot reach less than seven… I’ll be optimistic and say it’s probably because of my screen settings ;-p
My daughter (6 in 20 days) scored an impressive 19!
Thanks for the advice. I loved the test (as well as all the gems you find for us over the net.)
Thanks for everything

Czek

By: Charley Parker

Charley Parker — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 03:24:26 +0000

I do believe the quality of the monitor, and perhaps its settings (as opposed to calibration for matching printed color) can make a difference.

If the monitor is not good at displaying subtle variations in hue, or is not operating a a high enough level of contrast, it could reduce the observer’s ability to detect subtle hue variations.

If I get chance, I may try the test on my much cheaper HP Windows monitor and compare the results to the experience on my Apple Cinema Display.

By: Daniel van Benthuysen

Daniel van Benthuysen — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 02:17:39 +0000

Well, I did not score zero. I found it takes some getting used to. I’ve now taken it four times in two days and each time my score was twice as good as the previous. Maybe I was tired when I did it the first time. Or maybe I should stick to etching and drawing rather than painting…

Like you Charley, I don’t think it matters what kind of calibration one’s monitor has or hasn’t. It’s an abstract test wherein the colors are relative only to each other. I do think there may be something to the idea that colors emitted in the virtual world of a backlit cathode ray tube or LCD screen may be rather different (easier to compare? harder to compare?) than comparing hues in the normal world of reflective surfaces around us.

By: Charley Parker

Charley Parker — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 02:02:04 +0000

Actually, I think the exercise would be of most use to someone who scored less than perfect, in the form of its ability to highlight the color range in which the most confusion occurred, allowing one to study that color range in particular.

By: Matt Weld

Matt Weld — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 01:35:01 +0000

Very cool test. I scored a zero (perfect), too. I don’t know what I would have done if I hadn’t. Daggers to the eyes? Salt? Leap off the roof? Stare at the sun? Thanks for sharing it with us! http://www.matthewweld.com http://www.matthewweld.blogspot.com

By: Charley Parker

Charley Parker — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 01:32:17 +0000

True, the test isn’t set up for accurate representation of specific colors on screen, but it should work within the relative conditions of most monitors, as it’s self-contained, not referring to external colors.