Got 18/20. I chalk that up to spending years as a graphic designer. I'd like to see a similar study about which text was perfectly kerned, or by how many pixels an element was off-center or misaligned. I can spot that on billboards a block away, and my life is therefore a constantly grating experience.
Marginally related. I paint oils as a hobby, and my studio gets northern light, usually overcast and cloudy, during the day. Differentiating tiny color variations under those conditions is very easy, and in general your objective "pitch perfect" impression of color is also pretty accurate. However, I've painted in the same room at night under a "warm" LED bulb, and been absolutely shocked at how wrong and blue everything turned out when seen in the light of day. Not just that, but the hues I intended to be close to one another are much farther apart than they appeared under LED lighting.
So if lighting conditions can shift not just your perception of a color, but also its relationship to the ones around it, then I think how much more does your screen gamma and range alter that? A fair test would be printed on the exact same Heidelberg in 4 colors.
Regarding the LED lights: unless you use a lamp with CRI < 90, you see obvious, glaring color distortions, and some colors just "disappear", cannot be seen, because of the lack of a particular spectrum bands. Sadly, most inexpensive LED lamps have CRI around 80, and that light feeld definitely artificial, even if pleasant to the eye. A lamp with CRI 90 is okay, most things look natural, even though you can notice it's not sunlight. A lamp with CRI 95 is very fine, it's practically sunlight, and most tricky colors are visible well. I've never encountered a lamp with CRI, say, 97, but they exist and cost a lot.
IME producing artwork that relies on subtle color relationships requires high quality, "full spectrum" illumination. Natural daylight is the obvious canonical option, but of course not always practical.
My studio gets very little natural light, so selecting optimum light sources is crucial. At one time the most practical option was D50 compliant fluorescent tubes, but these were only fairly acceptable.
Situation with LED lamps is also difficult. Even CRI 90 is inadequate, mainly poor red emission and excessive blue radiation. However D50 compliant LED fixtures are available if somewhat more expensive vs. typical LED lamps.
One vendor worth checking out is Waveform Lighting [0]. They offer several types of products with CRI 95 and CRI 99. I've been using their D50 'shop light' for several months and find it very satisfactory.
Surely an incandescent bulb, being a black body radiator, has a CRI of 100? Yes, the temperature is low compared to sunlight, but the rendering is theoretically perfect.
I suppose if you want to get closer to sunlight, you need a carbon arc, which is only a few hundred degrees cooler and again, a perfect black body emitter.
I got 19/20. Turned off True Tone and cranked the screen brightness. Half the time I didn’t know if it was just my eyes playing tricks on me, but it was interesting to notice how the colors seemed completely indiscernible for a few seconds and then suddenly one stood out.
This is absolutely brilliant! And an example of why every time I come up with an idea, I should check to see whether someone else had made it before. But brilliant.
I got 100/100 on the first six, except for "Yves" where I got 70/100. I think they're wrong on that one. From any distance, the v should really nestle beneath the Y.
Gonna send this to all my design nerd friends, thank you.
I also got 18/20, I was confident on most of them, blinking I found "reset" my vision and made it easier. This was on my relatively comfortable (not too bright) monitor.
Yeah, metamers are a trip and a bad LED bulb will really screw with the appearance of colors. If anything, screens are more consistent, but more limited.
Marginally related. I paint oils as a hobby, and my studio gets northern light, usually overcast and cloudy, during the day. Differentiating tiny color variations under those conditions is very easy, and in general your objective "pitch perfect" impression of color is also pretty accurate. However, I've painted in the same room at night under a "warm" LED bulb, and been absolutely shocked at how wrong and blue everything turned out when seen in the light of day. Not just that, but the hues I intended to be close to one another are much farther apart than they appeared under LED lighting.
So if lighting conditions can shift not just your perception of a color, but also its relationship to the ones around it, then I think how much more does your screen gamma and range alter that? A fair test would be printed on the exact same Heidelberg in 4 colors.