What's My ΔE_OK JND? 4th July Edition

Measure how patriotic you really are by seeing how close to Old Glory Blue you can get. Your country needs you to find the line where DISASTEROUS algae green meets BIG BEAUTIFUL OLD GLORY BLUE. Click on the line between them. Reflect on your success.

Too patriotic? You can play the original What's My JND instead.

Let's go

ΔE_OK

Your ΔE_OK JND

Either you have superhuman cone cells or you got very lucky. I'm going with lucky. This is absurdly below the theoretical JND. Your monitor is doing something weird. Or both. This shouldn't be possible. I'm not saying you cheated, but not not saying that. Okay, either you're a mantis shrimp in a trenchcoat or your display has a secret wide-gamut mode nobody told me about. Suspiciously impressive. Okay this is genuinely impressive. You're well below the standard JND of 0.02. The CIE should be sending you a job offer. Or at least a certificate. You're seeing differences that most colour scientists would call noise. If you're not already calibrating displays for a living, you're leaving money on the table. Genuinely remarkable. You sailed past the theoretical human limit like it owed you money. I'd accuse you of cheating but I don't actually know how you'd cheat at this. Very nice. Comfortably below the 0.02 JND that the colour science people say is the limit. You'd make an excellent paint-chip inspector. Is that a job? It should be. Better than most. You can see differences that half the population would swear don't exist. Your opinions about colour palettes are now legally binding. Solidly below the standard JND. You probably get unreasonably annoyed when someone says two slightly different blues are 'the same colour'. You're right, by the way. They're wrong. Right around the 0.02 JND, which is where most humans land. The CIE would be proud. You are a perfectly calibrated observer. Well done being average, I guess. Textbook human vision. The colour science papers were written about people exactly like you. That's a compliment. Probably. You've landed smack on the theoretical JND for human vision. Statistically normal. Perceptually unremarkable. I mean that in the nicest possible way. Slightly above the standard JND. Not bad! Most people who actually try end up here. You can tell colours apart when it matters, and you're not wasting your life squinting at imperceptible differences. Honestly that's a win. A bit above the standard JND, but honestly, the differences you missed were genuinely tiny. You're well within 'normal human' territory. Whatever that means. Look, the colours you couldn't tell apart? Neither could most people. You've got better things to do than split hairs over sub-perceptual colour differences. You can spot a colour difference when it's, you know, actually different. But I get the sense your heart isn't really in this one. Maybe solitaire instead? I'll be honest, some of those were pretty obvious. But hey, maybe your screen brightness is set to 'candle in a fog'. Ambient lighting matters more than people think. Not your strongest showing. In your defence, staring at a screen all day does genuinely fatigue your colour perception. That's science, not an excuse. Well, it's a bit of an excuse. Before you worry: display calibration, ambient lighting, screen brightness, and whether you've been staring at code for 9 hours all affect this. Get some sleep and try again. Are you using a potato for a display? Turn your brightness up, close your other 400 tabs, and come back fresh. It'll go better. I hope. Rough. But look, I once failed a colour vision test because the room had fluorescent lighting. Environment matters. Try again in a dark room with your brightness cranked. Or don't. I'm not your mum. Read the post about this. Play the original.