Stop the Page, I Want to Get Off
Comments: 8
Why on earth did DesignObserver go with light-coloured type on a dark grey background? I’d love to read it, and read it I would … if only the page would stop moving. Am I somehow particularly sensitive to this?
It’s not quite as bad as ArsTechnica (read a story, look away from the screen, and — behold! — the world through Venetian blinds), but I find it irritating enough that it sours a visit. Such a drag considering there’s a lot on that site you’ll want to read.
•••
Posted to General Rants, Other Places • 2003.11.11 (Tue) • 19:03
Comments
Posted by MacDara 2003.11.11, 19:19
I see what you mean about the moving thing … maybe it’s the screen flicker, maybe one registers the flicker more with fine pale text on a dark background. Then again, I know myself that with the opposite (my site has a lot of white space) I often get dazzled by the background rather than the text … anywho, just a thought.
Posted by pixelkitty 2003.11.11, 19:27
no, I have the same problem. the words and letters swim and dance and little sparks of bright areas appear at whim.
Posted by Erik J. Barzeski 2003.11.11, 23:13
I’d just like to know why anyone with “design” in the name can’t actually “design” anything, instead settling for a rather bland copy of an MT default stylesheet.
Posted by Jean 2003.11.11, 23:19
I agree with you, Erik. Seems that a minimum of effort could have been put in the creation of something a bit less, well, bland. Good content, but they should practice what they preach (meaning good design).
Posted by Richard 2003.11.12, 02:19
I have the same problem. I read Ars a lot and any site with white text on a dark background hurt my eyes. And my monitor is set up correctly.
Posted by riccard0 2003.11.12, 06:27
I think designers should watch some of these samples so to avoid unpleasant effects (or to use them with some knowledge).
Posted by Sam 2003.11.16, 09:24
I was under the impression that for emissive displays (like monitors), the eye had a better time reading light text on dark background than vice versa. I know that is true for myself!
Why do you think terminal windows tend to use white text and a black background by default? Because it doesn’t stress your eyes as much. For me, reading black text on a white background produces a bit of ‘bloom’ as the white over-saturates my eyes or something. I don’t really mind either way, as long as there is significant contrast, but I’m surprised to see so many people complaining about the dark background/light text thing.
I notice a distinct difference in how my eyes and head feel if I spend a lot of time typing on the computer (writing, either prose or code), if I am using a text editor with a black background, or one with a white background. The ones with the white background make things much worse for me in the long run.
Oh, and sometimes bland is good! There is something to be said for simplicity.
Posted by Chris Hester 2003.11.22, 08:29
“Why do you think terminal windows tend to use white text and a black background by default?”
Because screens suffered from static areas burning into the CRT. Remember those well-used terminals that had menus on the top or bottom which you could still make out even when they were off? So the background had to be black. (Besides, they didn’t have white back then - only green (and orange later I believe). Now who’d want to view black text on a green background?)
I totally disagree about reading text on a black background being better. It screws up my eyes, which see trails of lines after a few minutes. That’s why PCs come with text set in black text on white backgrounds. It mirrors print I guess, but is sure easier on the eyes.
If you must use a black background, at least use a grey or pastel colour for the text. (See Stopdesign.) Anything but white. The contrast is too painful.
Post a comment:
Send This Story to an Enemy
• • •
