User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Drax Cave/@comment-188432-20130108231223/@comment-188432-20130201052641
Eladkse wrote: While I love the darker background, I just don't think it is going to work contrast-wise.
This has haunted me for about two weeks. I've literally been spinning a colour wheel ever since. I've gone to BestBuy and moved through a rack of different computers, where I've only been able to see some variability, not the full-on I-can-barely-read-this-thing syndrome you reported. I've gone to the Apple Store, where no monitor in the joint had a problem at all.
I've now gone through the design and made sure that, except for the infoboxen and pre and one or two other special cases, white means ordinary text and blue only means clickable text. And then I've examined it under several colour blindness emulators.
I honestly still can't see the problem, but it does appear to me that I've made the blue more distinct from the white without making the blue fail against the background. To me, it's even clearer what's a "blue link", what's a "red link" and what's neither.
As you can see to the right, I've taken screenshots of our site's Terry Nation article and Wikipedia:Terry Nation. Now these are monochromatic shots, mind you, to test the worst kind of colour blindness. The settings are exactly the same for both shots and neither has been retouched in any way. To my eye, you can actually tell where the links are on our site, but you can't tell at all what the blue links are at Wikipedia.
Since I've never clearly seen the problem across several different monitors, browsers and operating systems, I really do need your help. Am I still off base? Do the pictures at right tell me something other than, "we've got better contrast than Wikipedia"? Honestly, I'm not saying you're crazy or even in the same ballpark as "wrong". All I'm saying is that I don't see what you see, so I need you to tell me what you see.
