Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / General / Vision / July 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Contrast computer screen - B/W vs. W/B

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
byteschreck@googlemail.com - 16 Jul 2006 17:26 GMT
Which contrast scheme is best for long hours in front of the computer
screen?

I have used black text on a white background for the past few years for
my programming work.

Recently, I installed a ClearType font from Microsoft specifically
designed to reduce programmers' eye-strain ("Consolas") which had an
incredible effect on my eyes; they are now much less tired after a long
day of work.

However, I still feel there is room for improvement. Any information
highly appreciated.
Rev Jessie James - 17 Jul 2006 02:50 GMT
I have done alot of work with various text on various backgrounds.

Personally I prefer black text (000000H) on a medium grey background
(C0C0C0H) or slate background (B9C8C4H).

> Which contrast scheme is best for long hours in front of the computer
> screen?
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> However, I still feel there is room for improvement. Any information
> highly appreciated.
byteschreck@googlemail.com - 17 Jul 2006 12:24 GMT
Very nice colors. I noticed you can change the background color
systemwide in the display settings (in Windows, of course).

> Personally I prefer black text (000000H) on a medium grey background
> (C0C0C0H) or slate background (B9C8C4H).
Charles - 17 Jul 2006 03:45 GMT
> Which contrast scheme is best for long hours in front of the computer
> screen?
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> However, I still feel there is room for improvement. Any information
> highly appreciated.

I don't have any answers, but thanks for mentioning Cleartype.  I
didn't even realize it was an option on my computer... what a
difference!

As the other poster said, I find it much less straining to use
something other than white behind black text, like light grey or beige.
Rev Jessie James - 17 Jul 2006 04:30 GMT
ClearType actually blurs the text generating a somewhat softer image of the
characters. If a display does not have the type of fixed pixels that
ClearType expects, text rendered with ClearType enabled may actually look
worse than type rendered without it.  Displays that have no fixed pixel
positions, such as crt displays, may be harder to read if ClearType is
enabled.

If you want  further options for cleartype, you can download the cleartype
tuner powertoy directly from microsoft.

http://www.microsoft.com/typography/ClearTypePowerToy.mspx

> I don't have any answers, but thanks for mentioning Cleartype.  I
> didn't even realize it was an option on my computer... what a
> difference!
byteschreck@googlemail.com - 17 Jul 2006 11:59 GMT
That is misleading. It does not "blur" anything - it uses the subpixels
each LCD pixel consists of, thereby increasing the text resolution
three-fold.

> ClearType actually blurs the text generating a somewhat softer image of the
> characters.
Rev Jessie James - 18 Jul 2006 02:44 GMT
I agree, smoothing is probably better term.  Depending on the font, size,
and monitor characteristics it can be easier on the eyes..

There is a nice image on wiki that shows a magnifaction of text (c) with
cleartype and (d) without cleartype.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/1e/ClearTypePixels2.jpg

> That is misleading. It does not "blur" anything - it uses the subpixels
> each LCD pixel consists of, thereby increasing the text resolution
> three-fold.
>
> > ClearType actually blurs the text generating a somewhat softer image of the
> > characters.
The Real Bev - 31 Jul 2006 00:38 GMT
> I agree, smoothing is probably better term.  Depending on the font,
> size, and monitor characteristics it can be easier on the eyes..
>
> There is a nice image on wiki that shows a magnifaction of text (c)
> with cleartype and (d) without cleartype.
> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/1e/ClearTypePixels2.jpg

Ewww.  The upper set is annoyingly blurry.  Personally, I favor the
Trebuchet font with capitals roughly 1/8" high, using dark blue
(#000063) letters on a light blue (@ceceff) background.

>> That is misleading. It does not "blur" anything - it uses the
>> subpixels each LCD pixel consists of, thereby increasing the text
>> resolution three-fold.
>>
>>> ClearType actually blurs the text generating a somewhat softer
>>> image of the characters.
Signature

Cheers,
Bev
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Once you've provoked a few people into publicly swearing they are going
 to hunt you down and kill you, the thrill wears off."  -Elric of Imrryr

Dennis Roark - 22 Jul 2006 18:24 GMT
"Charles" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in news:kRCug.39057$FQ1.1018
@attbi_s71:

>> Which contrast scheme is best for long hours in front of the computer
>> screen?
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>> However, I still feel there is room for improvement. Any information
>> highly appreciated.

ClearType with an LCD screen is helpful.  ClearType does not work well
with CRT screens.  Something else to do is to go to the advanced
properties settings of your video adaptor and lower the Gamma setting to
between .5 and .6.  On an LCD screen using ClearType, this can
significantly improve the appearance and readability of text.  The
colors will also become more "vibrant", less washed out.

Signature

Dennis Roark

denro@sio.NOSPAMmidco.net
Starting Points:
http://sio.midco.net/denro/www

 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.