What Background: White or light charcoal or something else?

[Asher Kelman]

Cem,

As you and Bart both point out, There are a number of kinds of issues here that we canaddress:

Fashion: As Bart ponts out, but we are gong to try to avoid that. I'm not prepared to push any changes for the sake of "fashion" as we have a beautiful interface.

Persons with disabilities/claimed difficulties:We would be up to date to pay attention and so far we haven't found a way to address this.

Better Presentation of Images: Only recently with the appearance of dark images with key points that are light, (Wayne Oakes work) Bright images ,(Cem's snow scenes), pale images, (Wendy Thurman's soft Kabul image), The almost light grey Railways scene from india and so many others, I realized that the bright background might be interfering with the experience of the photograph.

One easy solution for posting photographs I've discovered is the use of a dark enough grey matte to tone down one's attention the the white page. That, right now, we all can do. This the photographer can do for him/herself. If people complain the picture is too light, chances are you need a matte to tone down the jump in luminance between the b.g. and the photograph. For this, the photographer is absolutely in charge. But PLEASE, no thick wooden/metal frames that become stronger elements than the actual photograph. We're not a frame shop!

Text Remains a Puzzle: I have no idea what the physiologists have actually proven, one way or another about white text on black/ charcoal.

So what are we left with: When you post you mage, if it's pale o dark with other areas of subtle light, consider a 1.-4 cm charcoal matte only sufficiently dark to cut down the contrast and allow the details of your picture to be enjoyed.

As for the pages themselves? We're going to leave them as they are until we have something that gives us the best of both worlds: the OPF design and the flexibility some folk might want on how to view OPF.

I'm going to look at dGrin and see how good or bad their interface is.

Asher

 

[Steve Robinson]

Greetings All. I'd like the choice of medium gray or charcoal BG with black or white text. I do like Asher's brown headings though but I'm not sure they'll be as prominent with a gray BG. I find the charcoal BG to be less of a distraction. Just my ¢¢.

 

[Paul Abbott]

I've always been a great advocate of a dark grey background for displaying images. The results speak for themselves.

 

[nicolas claris]

One easy solution for posting photographs I've discovered is the use of a dark enough grey matte to tone down one's attention the the white page. That, right now, we all can do. This the photographer can do for him/herself. If people complain the picture is too light, chances are you need a matte to tone down the jump in luminance between the b.g. and the photograph. For this, the photographer is absolutely in charge. But PLEASE, no thick wooden/metal frames that become stronger elements than the actual photograph. We're not a frame shop!
As for the pages themselves? We're going to leave them as they are until we have something that gives us the best of both worlds: the OPF design and the flexibility some folk might want on how to view OPF.

Folks I think this is the more clever advice to follow…
While Bart has clearly explained why a dark bg is counter productive in terms of viewing.
I have explained for long that the white bg is OPF's BRAND.

With whatever style, one won't be able to do is to force viewers to see in a way or the other (clear or dark), because the viewer decides of the style.

Let photographers to frame their pictures with whatever frame color they wish, otherwise the photog's wish (I want my pics to be seen with pink (or re, or yellow, or muddish) environement) will be lost by the choice of the viever's style.

So one may implement whatever color sheme (good luck for that!) one won't succeed with such proposal... and OPF will lose its visual identity…

 

[Antonio Correia]

... and OPF will lose its visual identity…

Agree ...

 

[Asher Kelman]

Nicolas,

The way I understand it, Bart's good point in terms of viewing on a darker b.g. is that one tricks oneself! One resets one's black point and the picture seems actually brighter that it really is! That I think is the essence of Bart's warning.

However, I don't think Bart implied that the viewing experience, itself is diminished.

Our dilemma is more one of branding, not of how best to view images. If a charcoal/grey b.g. was harmful to the viewing experience then it's hard to believe that most modern editing software packages use a charcoal b.g. as the default.

Still, one cannot make changes in the b.g. without having a bouquet of colors that can work with our logo designs, so well no matter what is chosen by the viewer. So, right now I'm getting people's views. If we could come up with such a solution of color palettes that work and protect our identity, that will be great.

Asher

 

[nicolas claris]

Still, one cannot make changes in the b.g. without having a bouquet of colors that can work with our logo designs, so well no matter what is chosen by the viewer. So, right now I'm getting people's views. If we could come up with such a solution of color palettes that work and protect our identity, that will be great.

Whatever the frame will be will fit or not fit, as ado/don't an awfull image.
THE PHOTOGRAPHER has to decide if she/he wants a frame, as he/she has decided what (and how to) to be photographed.
Styles AREN'T the solution. Just because they are the viewer's choice, and this could be against the photg's choice.

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Nicolas,

The way I understand it, Bart's good point in terms of viewing on a darker b.g. is that one tricks oneself! One resets one's black point and the picture seems actually brighter that it really is! That I think is the essence of Bart's warning.

Hi Asher,

When I added:

To make sure there is no misunderstanding, I don't mind a dark application/workspace background, as long as one understands that an image will look brighter than perhaps intended under other viewing conditions, and I usually view my postprocessing work in a (non-typically) darkened room if it's critical ...

I was talking about the workspace of a post processing application. I prefer to also work in a darkened room, but I'm aware that the image may look lighter than intended, so one must avoid overcorrecting the brightness caused by the viewing conditions.

Viewing images in a galery is something a bit different, especially when also lots of text is involved, like in a forum. My eyes are reasonably good (120% of average vision, 20/16 vision in the fractional feet system), but white letters on a dark background are harder to read than dark letters on a light background and it is more of a strain on my eyes (dilated pupils require more active/accurate focusing).

However, I don't think Bart implied that the viewing experience, itself is diminished.

In a way it is, see the earlier remarks.

Our dilemma is more one of branding, not of how best to view images. If a charcoal/grey b.g. was harmful to the viewing experience then it's hard to believe that most modern editing software packages use a charcoal b.g. as the default.

I think you are giving the software industry more credit than they deserve. BTW, my Photoshop CS3 has a light grey workspace, right out of the box. I prefer that to a charcoal background as well, because it gives me a visual confirmation about what neutral grey looks like. It is easier to detect a color cast in the image with such a reference at hand. It also makes it easier to estimate how the image will look on someone's internet page.

Cheers,
Bart

 

[Asher Kelman]

Maybe what would be idea would be a dimming control if one needs it to look at a particular image and it would last only as long as one moused over an icon. That would allow us to vary how we look at things but not alter how it's presented or the esthetics of the OPF site.

I'm looking at some other websites to find out what the experience is like for extended use of text on a dark platform. It appears very pleasant to use initially. There's a sense of restfulness. However, after a while it is not so uplifting. It might be that the darker b.g. has an effect not just on how one appreciates the content but can set a mood. That's scary!

So I'm thinking of a solution that's flexible and dynamic.

Asher

 

[Steve Robinson]

Hi All. This is an interesting thread to read through and then think about. Nicolas may be right about OPF's identity being the white background and I must say it does look very good. Having said that I would like to see an option to have a charcoal or a gray card shade of color to place photographs on. Perhaps the brown already used by OPF. I've read that Ansel Adams preferred a medium background to showcase his B&W prints and did not like white BGs. Just more of my ¢¢.

 

[Brandon Harris]

Hello.

Sorry to make my first post on this forum a whinge, but I felt I had to put in my $0.02. The very first thing I did when signing up was go straight to the User CP change the colour scheme, because the default one is (sorry to be so blunt) just awful. I find it very hard on the eyes. All the other colour schemes seem to be almost identical with the exception of the text colour. I'd love to see one much darker and with more contrast.

Thanks,
Adam

I registered a few weeks back, and this is the first thing I did myself. No offense intended, but the current color scheme is unusable for me. I've come back every now and then to see if the option is available for a grey or darker background, and when I don't see it, I leave again, and decide to check back in another week or two. I just have other forums where I can spend my time that don't leave me with a headache for the next hour after using their website.

Now I don't pretend I'm anyone special, and that my presence warrants some special color change. I have read the thread and see that this scheme is somewhat attached the OPF's identity / brand, and that's fine as well. I would mention though, that if I'm not participating in the forum because of the color scheme, who else is not doing so as well, and who decides to not even register because of this?

While branding and visual identity are important, it's my opinion that when the brand hinders the acceptance and use of the actual product (the forum), it's not succeeding as a brand. Perhaps allowing a charcoal grey background temporarily, and then measuring it's usage might give more insight as to how useful it is, and how it impacts OPF's overall visual identity.

Thanks! See you in a few more weeks.

Brandon

 

[Antonio Correia]

... Thanks! See you in a few more weeks. Brandon

Very interesting perspective and proposal Brandon
See you in a few more weeks

 

[Cem_Usakligil]

Hi Brandon,

I registered a few weeks back, and this is the first thing I did myself. No offense intended, but the current color scheme is unusable for me. I've come back every now and then to see if the option is available for a grey or darker background, and when I don't see it, I leave again, and decide to check back in another week or two. I just have other forums where I can spend my time that don't leave me with a headache for the next hour after using their website.

Now I don't pretend I'm anyone special, and that my presence warrants some special color change. I have read the thread and see that this scheme is somewhat attached the OPF's identity / brand, and that's fine as well. I would mention though, that if I'm not participating in the forum because of the color scheme, who else is not doing so as well, and who decides to not even register because of this?

While branding and visual identity are important, it's my opinion that when the brand hinders the acceptance and use of the actual product (the forum), it's not succeeding as a brand. Perhaps allowing a charcoal grey background temporarily, and then measuring it's usage might give more insight as to how useful it is, and how it impacts OPF's overall visual identity.

Thanks! See you in a few more weeks.

Brandon

You state that the color scheme is unusable for you. How is that so? Why is it a problem?

If whether you visit a web site or not depends on their (css) stlyling, then the content of that web site must be less important to you than it's style. Otherwise you would not let the style issues hinder you from visiting.

 

[Cem_Usakligil]

Very interesting perspective and proposal Brandon
See you in a few more weeks

And when exactly are we going to "see" you again in OPF Antonio?

 

[Antonio Correia]

LOL
Cem, I really don't know...
Thank you for asking. Kind of you

 

[Brandon Harris]

Hi Brandon,


You state that the color scheme is unusable for you. How is that so? Why is it a problem?

If whether you visit a web site or not depends on their (css) stlyling, then the content of that web site must be less important to you than it's style. Otherwise you would not let the style issues hinder you from visiting.

Hi Cem,

As I mentioned, I get (eye strain) headaches from the bright white background after using it for more than a few minutes. It seems from previous posts that I'm not unique in this regard.

Please don't make assumptions on what is important to me when viewing a website.

I am respectfully making a suggestion that it seems others have mentioned in the past, and stating my reasons for this suggestion. Allowing the user to choose a darker background seems perfectly sensible to me, but if the administration and members here decide that this somehow negatively impacts the content provided, then that's certainly their prerogative. While I would be happy to participate here at OPF, there are many other forums which don't have a white / bright background available. I'll continue to use the others, and in the meantime hope that OPF will allow for a darker background eventually, but I certainly recognize I have no influence over that decision.

Brandon

 

[Cem_Usakligil]

Hi Brandon,

Sorry to read that you have eye strain/headache issues, that explains why you have made this request. I did not assume anything, otherwise I would not have asked the reasons why. Thanks for explaining it patiently to me.

Re. your request, it was perfectly reasonable, I haven't got any issues with it. I hope you'll stick around even if a solution cannot be provided on the short term. BTW, since you are an IT person (according to your registration details), perhaps you can use Mozilla Firefox which allows you to override the color scheme of any web site locally for yourself. You can have a light text/dark bg OPF easily if you try. I did test it and it is doable. Just my 0.02...

Hi Cem,

As I mentioned, I get (eye strain) headaches from the bright white background after using it for more than a few minutes. It seems from previous posts that I'm not unique in this regard.

Please don't make assumptions on what is important to me when viewing a website.

I am respectfully making a suggestion that it seems others have mentioned in the past, and stating my reasons for this suggestion. Allowing the user to choose a darker background seems perfectly sensible to me, but if the administration and members here decide that this somehow negatively impacts the content provided, then that's certainly their prerogative. While I would be happy to participate here at OPF, there are many other forums which don't have a white / bright background available. I'll continue to use the others, and in the meantime hope that OPF will allow for a darker background eventually, but I certainly recognize I have no influence over that decision.

Brandon

 

[Asher Kelman]

Hi Cem,

As I mentioned, I get (eye strain) headaches from the bright white background after using it for more than a few minutes. It seems from previous posts that I'm not unique in this regard.

Please don't make assumptions on what is important to me when viewing a website.

I am respectfully making a suggestion that it seems others have mentioned in the past, and stating my reasons for this suggestion. Allowing the user to choose a darker background seems perfectly sensible to me, but if the administration and members here decide that this somehow negatively impacts the content provided, then that's certainly their prerogative. While I would be happy to participate here at OPF, there are many other forums which don't have a white / bright background available. I'll continue to use the others, and in the meantime hope that OPF will allow for a darker background eventually, but I certainly recognize I have no influence over that decision.

Brandon

Hi Brandon,

You're not alone in wanting a toned down page. Most, folks still appear have no issue with the current presentation. For pictures, as shown above, a light gray option can be an advantage. But as you read below, meeting requests is not as simple as one might think!


To everyone,

We've received a number of similar requests and the issue is that we need to serve those, (including myself, BTW), who are more comfortable with a less bright b.g for the page and the unity of style of the forum. We are getting advice from a major design company. The original design was the generous work, a gift of skill and experience, from the heart, by Nicolas Claris and his team at M&N in Bordeaux, France. I have not wanted to alter it as it has served us very well. I also have such respect for and devotion to Nicolas himself. So until now, we've set aside any other suggestions. After all, we can't change for every person who comes along.

Notwithstanding these important considerations, on balance, there are now enough requests, and my own comfort, that it's worthwhile revisiting this as we go to a new stage in OPF. The plan is to strengthen appeal more to long term goals of photographers, such as

• Finding our strengths
  
• Improving portfolios
• Expanding horizons
  
• Building collections or series of work

We will always be open for any photographer with passion and/experience to help us all. However, we want to celebrate and encourage the photographer's developed personal vision. We want to use well the generous help from our technical experts. In accomplishing these goals, the viewing experience of pictures themselves becomes increasingly more significant. Meanwhile we have to protect the text and work that has gone into OPF until now.

So if we can have our OPF identity carried on but have choices that work for the physiology of the experience, (not fashion) then we could have a trial of choices. This is not a trivial challenge. We will address this and give tribute to the OPF we have now. This process of consultation is not for the future but actively going on right now. Any further ideas are welcome. Solutions have to fit in with usability as well as current OPF branding.

Thanks for addressing you concerns to us. Please PM me so I can delve more into your own particular concerns.

Thanks,

Asher

 

[Asher Kelman]

Hi Brandon,

Sorry to read that you have eye strain/headache issues, that explains why you have made this request. I did not assume anything, otherwise I would not have asked the reasons why. Thanks for explaining it patiently to me.

Re. your request, it was perfectly reasonable, I haven't got any issues with it. I hope you'll stick around even if a solution cannot be provided on the short term. BTW, since you are an IT person (according to your registration details), perhaps you can use Mozilla Firefox which allows you to override the color scheme of any web site locally for yourself. You can have a light text/dark bg OPF easily if you try. I did test it and it is doable. Just my 0.02...

Cem,

This is a could be quick fix for now. Could you give us a guide to do this. Also is it possible other browsers?

Asher

 

[Doug Kerr]

Hi, Asher,

Not at all to throw cold water on the desires of others, but I have read black copy on a white background for about 70 years now and it still suits me.

Best regards,

Doug

 

[Asher Kelman]

.....
I have read black copy on a white background for about 70 years now and it still suits me.

Exactly! As I said most folks have no complaints with the text. Some however get bad headaches or eye strain with a white page.

My point of view: For me, however, it's the background to certain pictures that benefits from a less bright wall. As you must have noted, I feel that presentation of a picture one wants to experience well, means taking care to respect it. A picture should be given clear territory. That means one first separates it from everything else by adequate space. Pictures slammed against the left edge or crowded with others, especially "foreign" thematically to the picture one wants to enjoy, is IMHO, counterproductive.

Feel free to add a generous grey matt or other color, if your picture is dim or bright or you consider your picture might benefit. Please don't imprison photographs in thick black frames! We're not a frame shop! In no way must the matt be stronger than the picture.

The text is an entirely different issue. Glad you eyes are still young!

Asher

 

[Cem_Usakligil]

Hi Asher,

Cem,

This is a could be quick fix for now. Could you give us a guide to do this. Also is it possible other browsers?

Asher

This is quite straightforward if one knows a little bit of css. If not, it can still be applied as I'll explain here.

The prerequisite:
You should use Firefox browser, it does not work with other browsers. Firefox is available on all OS platforms so this should be no problem for the Mac owners.

Procedure:
1) Create a usercontent.css file as described here and here. You should create this file in the chrome directory which resides underneath your firefox profile directory. Typically, this will be:
a) for OS X: <home>/Library/Application Support/Firefox/Profiles/>random characters>.default/chrome/
b) for windows xp: %appdata%\Mozilla\Firefox\Profiles\<random characters>.default\chrome
b) for windows vista/7: %appdata%\roaming\Mozilla\Firefox\Profiles\<random characters>.default\chrome

In this file, adjust the colors using css syntax to your taste. Mark any changes you have made with the "!important" suffix. At the beginning of the file, enter this text: "@-moz-document url-prefix('http://www.openphotographyforums.com/forums/')"

For those of you who don't know how to do this, I have done a quick and dirty version which can be downloaded from the following link. Right-click on the link and use the "save link as" option to save it to the chrome directory as explained above.

Download Cem's quick and dirty usercontent.css

2) Restart Firefox. This should do it.

If all went well, the OPF pages should now look like this:

Mind you, this is not perfect, there are some places where text is difficult to read or the background is lighter when composing replies, etc. But for the majority of browsing, it should be fine as shown above.

HTH.

 

[John Angulat]

Cem, unbelievable!
Awesome!

 

[John Angulat]

Installed!
Took me longer to find the subdirectory than anything else.
A breeze!
I'm SO used to the "old" look this is going to take some getting used to.
Everyone - follow Cem's quick and dirty method - it'll take about 5 minutes tops.
Nothing to lose!
Don't like it, delete the CSS file!

 

[Asher Kelman]

Well, who is willing to sign up to commit to using this for the next month and then reporting as we go on what's good and what's an issue. I appreciate so much your generous work. Actually the color scheme look pretty good, but obviously not as good as our branded look yet.

At present we need to get user experience.

Design is another matter.

Just how do you like your pictures on such a b.g.?

Make sure you center your photographs and allow two empty lines above and below so each image has it's own space or territory, unimpeded by the side of the box or any text or other pictures.

Then we can see how it works.

So there's text reading, picture experience and lastly our design and branding. Nothing is being changed right now. We just want to know about user experience.

Asher

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Well, who is willing to sign up to commit to using this for the next month and then reporting as we go on what's good and what's an issue. I appreciate so much your generous work. Actually the color scheme look pretty good, but obviously not as good as our branded look yet.

At present we need to get user experience.

Hi Asher,

Perhaps my opinion (not user experience with this CSS adjustment since I use IE not FF) about dark backgrounds in general is known (I'm opposed), but I wonder how are you going to manage the user experience bit?

Design is another matter.

Quite so. Do we want to create yet another me-too dark background experience, or are we different?

Just how do you like your pictures on such a b.g.?

Make sure you center your photographs and allow two empty lines above and below so each image has it's own space or territory, unimpeded by the side of the box or any text or other pictures.

I agree that people should be aware of the effects of presentation if they post quality images.

Therefore I'll re-iterate some practical drawbacks of a dark background. In general, dark backgrounds make images look lighter than they are. They cause more distracting reflections especially on glossy surface screens. They cause the eye's pupils to open, and thus reduce visual acuity/resolution, especially when the ambient viewing conditions are relatively dim. This loss of resolution can add to eye fatigue, especially when small font text is involved.

Some of these effects may not be apparent immediately, but subconsciously they hurt the viewing experience.

Also in general (medical conditions aside), when people get headaches with a white background, perhaps their display is set too bright (due to those other look-alike dark background websites), or their viewing surroundings are too dark. Like Doug suggested, during my entire life I also never had any problems reading from white paper.

I'll tell you, I also set the background of my CaptureOne Raw converter to something much lighter for reasons of getting a better preview, brightness and colorwise.

Of course, taste also plays a role, as do strategic positioning considerations, but I'll steer clear from those in a public forum.

Cheers,
Bart

 

[Asher Kelman]

Quite so. Do we want to create yet another me-too dark background experience, or are we different?

Bart,

Thanks for your input and your experience on effects of a dark b.g. Ideally, just for the picture, (ignoring text readability), one might even consider a "dimmer" so one can adjust the brightness depending on the picture. We could have options of a large auto-matte to fit any picture with a dimmer. The screen shouldn't be brighter than a picture that's supposed to be bright and a dim picture is embedded in a too bright b.g. there can be problems with the viewing experience. That would allow us to separate picture experience from reading issues.

I make the b.g of my computers for editing a light grey. There's no issue with "real" brightness. I already use a dim room for calibration of my monitor and grey or black shirt to stop color spill. Final level of brightness must be decided on printing. Yes, one can think the image is already bright enough on the computer screen but that can happen anyway. We're not talking about a black screen but something with the bright experience removed.

My idea is to hear opinions. Just because I'm open to new ideas doesn't mean I would alter what we have and like without great care. Any new design would then have choices but they would all work with an updated logo if we wanted a choice in background intensity.

In considering possibilities, your warnings are worth looking at again:

I agree that people should be aware of the effects of presentation if they post quality images.

Therefore I'll re-iterate some practical drawbacks of a dark background. In general, dark backgrounds make images look lighter than they are. They cause more distracting reflections especially on glossy surface screens. They cause the eye's pupils to open, and thus reduce visual acuity/resolution, especially when the ambient viewing conditions are relatively dim. This loss of resolution can add to eye fatigue, especially when small font text is involved.

Some of these effects may not be apparent immediately, but subconsciously they hurt the viewing experience.

Also in general (medical conditions aside), when people get headaches with a white background, perhaps their display is set too bright (due to those other look-alike dark background websites), or their viewing surroundings are too dark. Like Doug suggested, during my entire life I also never had any problems reading from white paper.

I wonder whether screens, like fluorescent displays, oscillate in intensity?

I'll tell you, I also set the background of my CaptureOne Raw converter to something much lighter for reasons of getting a better preview, brightness and colorwise.

So what do you choose?

Thanks for your well-informed input,

Asher

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

So what do you choose?

Usually color Medium (or Light, depending on the image).
Having a grey reference surrounding the image helps to spot color casts.

Of course Color editing triggers different requirements than an image viewer or a text viewer, but I do use a brighter background.

Cheers,
Bart

 

[Doug Kerr]

In general, dark backgrounds make images look lighter than they are. They cause more distracting reflections especially on glossy surface screens. They cause the eye's pupils to open, and thus reduce visual acuity/resolution, especially when the ambient viewing conditions are relatively dim. This loss of resolution can add to eye fatigue, especially when small font text is involved.

These are of course the reason why major standard color spaces contemplate a certain surround ambiance for viewing (although there are a number of paradoxes in those specifications).

In any case, by way of general reference, the sRGB standard contemplates a delivered white point illuminance of 80 cd/m^2 with a surround of reflectance 0.20 illuminated at 200 lx.

If we work through the photometric equations, that comes out to a surround luminance of 12.7 cd/m^2, or about 16% of the white point luminance.

That would be a surround at about RGB 112,112,112, about like so:

But the overall environment illuminance is also a factor - not just the luminance of the immediate surround.

Best regards,

Doug

 

[Doug Kerr]

Here's an example (surround at sRGB 112,112,112):

Here's one with an image with a different tonal scale:

Best regards,

Doug