X-Rite's "Test Your Color IQ." I almost aced this, leaving room for you to beat my score. Not much room, but room. See how you do. As Colin says, it's not much fun, but it's revealing. I'll post my score tomorrow, after you've had a chance to take the test yourself if you're so inclined.
________________________
Mike (Thanks to Steve Weeks, who got it from Colin Jago at Auspicious Dragon)
Mike's score—damn those blue-greens!
If you didn't score as well as many of those who left comments, note that voluntary reporting of performance-based tests will skew toward those who did well...the colloquial term is "bragging."People reporting scores in double digits probably would score well on a test for something called "honesty."
Both Ctein and I noticed on this test that there are slight luminance variations between some of the tiles, which can tend to throw you off. I'm more sensitive to luminance than I am to chroma. I was aware of my uncertainty in the region in which I showed error.
I'm going to close the comments soon because we're getting too many, and it's a chore for me to approve and post large numbers of comments.
11
The best part was when my wife walked into the room, saw what I was doing, and said, "you're such a geek."
True dat,
Posted by: Joe Sawicki | Friday, 03 October 2008 at 11:04 PM
Challenging - I bet monitor quality has a bearing on it!
My score was 8 (best 0, worst 1462 (apparently))
M, 40-49 age range
Posted by: Simon | Friday, 03 October 2008 at 11:36 PM
158 (50+ age range)
I was very curious to try this as I've known since I was about 19 years old that I was to some degree red/green "color blind." It does not seem to have affected my life much but it might explain why I am partial to black & white photographs more than color photographs.
Doug
Posted by: Doug | Friday, 03 October 2008 at 11:53 PM
I'm in the same demographic as Simon with the exact same score. (8)
Would be interesting if they gave an average score for the demographic.
I'm curious if I would have done better with a - an S-IPS rather than a S-PVA based monitor, b - any other light on in the room other than the 40w equivalent "natural" fluorescent or c - less beer.
Tom
Posted by: Tom | Friday, 03 October 2008 at 11:55 PM
16. Seems like I can go on producing color art :)
Posted by: Andreas Manessinger | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 12:01 AM
Very much to my amazement, scored a perfect "0". What I can't understand now is how I manage to leave the house in the morning wearing one blue sock and one black one.
Posted by: Bill Corbett | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 12:02 AM
In the 20-29 bracket I scored a 0. I was pretty surprised actually, it looked like a lot of the hues didn't match. I did this test with my Samsung 245t (S-PVA panel) calibrated with a Pantone Huey Pro if it's worth mentioning. I want to try it on my CRT now....
Posted by: Chris | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 12:09 AM
got a 4
20-29 range, damn and blast... of course I am on a laptop, I'm in a super rush, I'm beat, and its 1 in the morning; so that'll be my excuse for now.
Posted by: James P. Jones | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 12:20 AM
Whew. I wish to thank members of the Apple Cinema Display Academy, the Spyder2 Pro, all my commercial customers out there who have demanded the best in color correction from me over the years, and of course my mom and dad. I stand on their genetic shoulders.
I will treasure this perfect score as long as I can remember it, which in my age group (50-59) will be one or two weeks.
:-)
Posted by: Stephen Gillette | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 12:21 AM
I got a perfect score as well for the 20-29 range...non calibrated Dell XPS m1330. I think the secret is to stand back and try to look at it as a smooth gradation and pick out the ones that don't seem right.
Posted by: michael | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 12:53 AM
I got a four and I'm 53
I still use a crt though, a "korea data systems" that a neighbor was throwing out that is surprisingly good
Interestingly enough there are about four of the greenish blocks in the second row that I couldn't quite decide on in the Aston Martin green section, and sure enough those were the ones I seem to have missed.
Posted by: hugh crawford | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 01:08 AM
7, and I'm quite unhappy with my current monitor.
Posted by: Adrian | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 01:20 AM
mine :P
Your score: 7
Gender: Male
Age range: 40-49
Posted by: sabawa | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 01:23 AM
0!
When I was an ophthalmology resident I learned about the Farnsworth-Munsell Hue Discrimination Test, but never actually sat down to take it.
Looks like my Macbook Pro has pretty accurate color...
Posted by: Blake Shaw | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 01:23 AM
Another 4, in the 30-39 demographic. On a Macbook Pro laptop (calibrated, though). What I find especially interesting is not really the absolute score, but to know where in the hue range I made the mistakes.
Posted by: stephan mantler | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 01:26 AM
I often seem to struggle with colour casts in my pictures so I had been thinking that I'm must be colour impaired... but apparently not, because I got a perfect 0!
Posted by: Minna | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 01:46 AM
4! not bad for me..... 40-49, apple cinema display......
Posted by: tofu | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 01:56 AM
4
Male, 35yrs, on a 15" MBP that hasn't been calibrated in about three months. Fell down in the earthy terracotta tones.
Keen to try again on my old CRT later today.
Posted by: Michael | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 01:57 AM
4, age range 60-69
I was pretty sure I'd aced it , until I looked at the score.
Wonder if the scoring is based on shifts, so you could get a 4 with one chip four spaces wrong, or four chips each one space off...
Not as hard as getting Mike's anti-robot number posting gizmo -- I fail that about once a week.
JC
Posted by: John Camp | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 02:01 AM
First go 13 [best and only in my age group - 60+]
Posted by: Allan Moult | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 02:22 AM
did a 32 30-39
Posted by: Ruddy Roye | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 02:30 AM
I'm 68 years old and scored a perfect "0" - made my day!
Posted by: K.Harrington | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 02:41 AM
Hah! Picture perfect. :-) Zero. Age group 40-49. No matrix - CRT.
There is an even harder test, with areas all put together, not in a line. Of course, I have no idea where it is.
Posted by: erlik | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 02:53 AM
I got a 0. I never had my monitor calibrated (DELL 2407WFP-HC V2). (20-29 age group)
Posted by: Fero Mastic | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 02:58 AM
Not much fun first thing in the morning and only on my second coffee. Perhaps I should try it again in the evening when I do most photo processing.
Age 57, score 8.
Cheers, Robin
Posted by: Robin P | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 03:11 AM
CRT: 8
LCD: 22
Male, 40-49
Posted by: ash | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 03:30 AM
16
I had to leave it for a few minutes because my brain started playing tricks after staring at it for a few minutes.
Posted by: Jernej | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 03:44 AM
Mmmm I got a 21 (age range 60-69)Maybe that's why I have always preferred B&W over the last 40 years!
Posted by: Marten Collins | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 03:48 AM
Got a 0 8-)
40-49 range (actually i'm just 40 and I'm beginning to hate those age categories)
I think my very old but calibrated Hitachi CRT display is for something in that score. I think i will try again with a friend's (calibrated) LCD, it could be interesting...
Posted by: Fred Fund | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 04:12 AM
4 with a bad hangover. A weakness in the greens, apparently. Male, 30 - 39. Do I get a prize?
Posted by: James | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 04:45 AM
I got 7 which amazes my wife who claims that I can't tell brown from olive green.
Posted by: David | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 05:16 AM
My score was 4. I'll be 47 in January.
Posted by: Matti Sulanto | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 05:20 AM
Age: 64
Score: 4
Monitor: LaCie Electron blue IV (CRT), older than me in dog/hardware years ...
Posted by: Eric Kellerman | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 05:30 AM
It was fun!
On a non-calibrated, cheap CRT monitor,
Score: 3
(Age Group: 40-49)
Posted by: Aravind Nair | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 05:34 AM
A paltry 28, from the 40-49 age bracket.
Clearly, I need a better monitor. (That being much less disturbing a prospect than better eyes!)
Posted by: Graydon | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 05:40 AM
I have to give the exact same comment as Bill Corbett, a perfect score yet currently wearing two different coloured socks! Tested on an uncalibrated macbook btw.
Posted by: Joostvanderborg | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 05:54 AM
I got 7 on an uncalibrated Dell laptop screen. I'm 19.
Matthew
Posted by: Matthew Allen | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 06:28 AM
I scored a 4. I thought this would be harder than that with a three-year-old consumer LCD screen, which is not calibrated.
M, 20-29 age range.
Posted by: Tapani Linnaluoto | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 06:29 AM
I just felt the need to paraphrase:
"We don't need no stinkin tests.."
Which might say more about me..........
Bron
Posted by: Bron Janulis | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 07:20 AM
Scored 11 in my age group (30-39).
Posted by: David Vatovec | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 07:44 AM
Male 50 year old (as of last week) and got a 0 as well - a bit stunned to be honest. Maybe there's another career out there for me.
Posted by: Kazi | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 07:47 AM
64
(30-39)
It looks like my seven year old Sony has to go...
Or I need new eyes
Posted by: Sean | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 07:54 AM
I am surprised I got a perfect score! I took a screen shot of the score screen as proof, so that I can brag about it to my wife :)
Posted by: Yu-Lin Chan | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 07:55 AM
My score was zero.
Posted by: Ted Johnson | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 07:57 AM
Forgot to mention I am 43 years of age.
Posted by: Yu-Lin Chan | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 07:57 AM
I did this a few weeks ago and scored a 12 I bet if I did this at night with no lights on I would get them all.
Posted by: charlie d | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 08:02 AM
4 (30-39)
* On a beat up old CRT that hasn't been calibrated in a long, long while, which I need to replace.
To be honest I'm quite relieved by that score, after staring at the those color patches for a while I was beginning to wonder if I've slightly color blind my whole life and never realized it.
After getting that score, now I wish I'd spent a little bit more time on the later patches, because there was something in there that was bothering me, but I couldn't quite figure it out right away.
Posted by: Peter | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 08:06 AM
I got 81, 30-39 age range...
I'm red/green colour blind, so I didn't expect to do very well, I wish it would show exactly which tiles were in the wrong places.
Posted by: Stuart | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 08:23 AM
I scored 4. Non calibrated, violettish old Apple Cinema. I don't know if I should be happy because I got a low score of scared because I got it on a crappy monitor. What does that tell you about my "eyes calibration"?
Posted by: Mauricio Salazar | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 08:35 AM
I got a 20, which is disappointing as I was sure I aced the thing. All of my misses were in the blue/green area of the spectrum and clumped into two small groups.
In my defense, I am getting old (40-49 age group).
Posted by: Chuck | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 08:43 AM
I got a 7 in 20-29 age group on a calibrated laptop display.
Posted by: Colin Thomas | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 08:44 AM
Another 16 here.
My mistakes were highly clustered. I'm going to try on another screen and see if the pattern repeats.
Posted by: Nigel | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 08:48 AM
0
I too will treasure a perfect score in the 50-59 age group. I've always said my old Apple monitor is calibrated within an inch of its life and I guess it is.
Posted by: Peter Cameron | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 08:59 AM
Perfect score on a Dell M1710 laptop monitor (male 20-29 bracket). I just took my time. I found the last 2 bars trickier than the first two. High score of 1520 so it says, though the bar graph only goes to 99. It would be interesting if they put you into a percentile of respondents.
Posted by: shootfirst | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 09:07 AM
It's a 0 with not a single moment of hesitation . Funny: just found out that my monitor technology is in the same age group as me (first trinitron TV: 1969). Any chance for a DSLR with a CRT screen on the back? It's micro four thirds format ready :)
Posted by: Antoni Maczynski | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 09:08 AM
0
Male, 60-69
Samsung SyncMaster 920T calibrated with a ColorVision Spyder2 about a month ago.
I was surprised!
Posted by: John | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 09:52 AM
First time I score zero on a test to get told it is perfect.
Odd too, since I was pretty sure I got half a dozen squares that I could not manage to place in the right position.
Apparently my MacBookPro, for all its fault, has a decent screen (at least for playing home decorator with little colour patches).
Now let's try the test again to see how high I can score !-)
Posted by: Cyril | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 09:59 AM
Nailed it! 30-39 bracket, scored a perfect 0.
Posted by: Mark Troyer | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 10:00 AM
I scored eight and zero. The first time, scoring eight, I didn't ever attempt to swap two adjacent tiles that already looked okay in their current, default arrangement. The second time, I did and that made a big difference . The result of the first test (8) also point out that my weakness is also in the blue-green area.
Posted by: Bahi | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 10:30 AM
Luckily scored a "0". Must be those bilateral lens implants a few years ago for cataracts! I'm using a ViewSonic CRT monitor calibrated with a Colorvision Spyder 2. Age: 57.
Posted by: Rod Graham | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 10:30 AM
Got a 20.
Perhaps I should now go out to buy a more expensive camera to compensate? I am convinced that if I have more megapixels in my camera, I can ace this test.
Posted by: Jack M | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 10:44 AM
Got a 23 using my Macbook screen (uncalibrated), age 54.
I'm in agreement the blue-greens are the hardest.
Posted by: Stephen Scharf | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 11:05 AM
12. Uncalibrated Fujitsu-Siemens laptop (which I'm now thinking I may need to calibrate). Age 40-49.
Actually, I wonder how much effect the monitor calibration has. I admit I thought I'd got them all right, but who didn't when the hit the button?
Posted by: Chris | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 11:06 AM
I did this on my laptop and thought it wouldn't work well due to colour calibration issues. Turns out I didn't have to worry because it tells me "I have perfect colour vision" - got "0". I'm in the 40-49 age range. This surprised me actually.
Posted by: Chris S | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 12:06 PM
0, imac lcd monitor, calibrated with colorsync, age 59. If you spend 30 years making custom type C prints, you will have perfect color vision, and be obsolete.
Posted by: Seth Kantrowitz | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 12:09 PM
I also got a 4, with my problem area also being the blue-greens. Using a calibrated Samsung SyncMaster 226CW. Age 26.
Posted by: Brian Auer | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 12:26 PM
Scored 16. As a somewhat color-blind 61 year-old male, I'm more than pleased. I noticed some of the middle hues in the top row shifting from red to green, but by concentrating I got them under control. Did the same thing during many years of professional color printing. Ended up missing some of the blue-greens.
Posted by: latent_image | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 12:38 PM
Zero! :)
Male, 30. Philips 200WP7 MVA panel. Eye-calibrated.
Looks like not all patches had the same luminosity, making things a little more difficult.
Posted by: Dorin Nicolaescu-Musteaţă | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 12:46 PM
Hey, I printed my score off - no cheating here mister! :))
Posted by: K.Harrington | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 12:47 PM
* Your score: 0
* Gender: Male
* Age range: 30-39
* Best score for your gender and age range: 0
* Highest score for your gender and age range: 1464
...:)
I took only 5 minutes to complete the test...
(I have calibrated old 19 inch CRT Nokia)
Posted by: Matjaž Lužnik | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 12:52 PM
"Hey, I printed my score off - no cheating here mister! :))"
I didn't mean that anyone was cheating--I merely meant that people who report on their own performance even when that performance is poor probably have a predisposition to honesty. The more self-regarding thing to do in such a case (although also not lying, certainly) is simply not to report.
Mike J.
Posted by: Mike J. | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 01:13 PM
I also got a zero, age 29. I did have to stop for a moment, though, since the stripes started to do the "burning in" thing to my eyes that's so popular for optical illusions.
Oh, and I'm currently in the office on an uncalibrated 20" imac under fluorescent light.
I don't think calibration actually has much of an influence here unless the monitor has a very dramatic colour shift (or unless you were doing the left half of the stripes on one and the right half on another monitor) since any colour cast would influence all the tiles the same way and just shift everything the same amount – or am I thinking wrong here?
Posted by: Judith W | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 02:50 PM
30! (Age 73)
Posted by: Bill Mitchell | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 03:14 PM
I don't belive it, but... I DID mastered this test. My score iz 0. On the LCD screen.
Tadaaaaaa!
:D
Posted by: Bernard Piechal | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 03:50 PM
Scored an 8 in the 60-69 group.
Posted by: Richard | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 04:02 PM
Did the test, clicked on the result, found a result of 3 and the white bars at the bottom put me in the middle of my age range, I thought. ( 60, male) With no indication of whether 3 was high or low, I thought, "oh well , average -that's OK for me", then saw the others' results, and felt a lot better!!!! Went out and photographed my nashi tree in full blossom in this Australian spring!!! Life is good!
Posted by: Bruce | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 04:11 PM
Score: 0
Male, 30-39
MacBook Pro, eye-balled the calibration. Now if I could just use my new found super-power for evil.
Posted by: Michael | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 04:27 PM
This one goes to 11, in the 20-29 range. Best 0, worst 1520.
I guess I'm not THAT bad.
How much do you think a good quality and well calibrated monitor would affect the scoring?
Posted by: Thiago Silva | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 05:13 PM
I got a 17 on a questionable (but calibrated) HP laptop display. Age 20-29
As much as I'd like to blame it on the display, I wonder if calibration and color accuracy really affect the outcome of this test. It seems like as long as the colors are accurate relative to each other, that it doesn't really matter if they match some predefined standard. Anyone know for sure?
Posted by: Andre | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 06:04 PM
Woohoo. Got my zero. 46y male. As a test I had my 19 year old daughter who has just had four years of highschool art. Beat her!
Posted by: Omar | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 06:44 PM
I got a 0 as well, and the only evil I can see coming from this is that I have no excuse for missing on the colors anymore.
Posted by: Kjell H A | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 07:36 PM
I'm 56 and scored 0. Makes me feel slightly better about myself while wearing 2.5 diopter glasses and watching annoying floaters any time I look at a white wall or blue sky. I dared my teenage kids to match me!
Posted by: Philip | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 09:30 PM
I foung that at least for me the quality and calibration of the monitor strongly affected the results of the test:
uncalibrated 15" CRT monitor - score 22
calibrated 20" LCD monitor - score 4.
Posted by: Mark Berman | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 10:46 PM
We've got Brett and now we're sending up the Giants next week to get you. How's that score?
Posted by: Richard | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 10:50 PM
Score of 7. Age 50. Crappy Dell laptop monitor.
Posted by: Bob R | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 11:36 PM
I did it really quickly and got a 2 then I tried to get a 0 by taking longer and being very careful and got a 28 then I tried again and got a 4 then I went really fast and got a 0. What does that mean?
Posted by: Edward Taylor | Saturday, 04 October 2008 at 11:42 PM
score 4 - 37 yrs old. Lacie Electron Blue CRT, not calibrated in a long time. Orangeish yellows is where i screwed up :)
Cool test, thanks Mike!
Posted by: steve e miller | Sunday, 05 October 2008 at 01:15 AM
Perfect score. 0. Flip the luminance errors back and forth to overcome them. I thought it was a trick when I was doing it.
Posted by: Arthur Haselden | Sunday, 05 October 2008 at 02:04 AM
44 — at age 60 male — an eye opener and a treat!
Posted by: Mike | Sunday, 05 October 2008 at 02:53 AM
Perfect zero for me in the 50-59 bracket! I was quite surprised as for some reason I thought wearing glasses from the age of 12 affected my vision! My wife as also surprised as we have many arguments on colours.
Posted by: Giorgio | Sunday, 05 October 2008 at 03:01 AM
Got a 4. 40-49. Dell XPS M1530 notebook display. I'm quite surprised.
Posted by: David | Sunday, 05 October 2008 at 08:22 AM
Scored a 4, 50-59 male. Monitor is an Apple Cinema 23" calibrated.
Posted by: Mike | Sunday, 05 October 2008 at 10:51 AM
An interresting observation here is that a lot of people got good score on uncalibrated screens, me included. Perhaps calibration isn't that important?
Joakim
0, 40-49yrs
Posted by: Joakim Ahnfelt | Sunday, 05 October 2008 at 11:01 AM
I thought it was my civil duty to report my score. Just because I'm, ahem, honest, modest, and have frickin' PERFECT COLOUR VISION!
Yup: 0.
Gender: Male
Age range: 30-39
I would like to point out that in the 3rd and 4th rows I found some squares that didn't seem to fit, according to my eyes, and the only reason I put them in the correct position is through elimination: everything else seemed in the correct place, so those had to go where I put them. I was surprised to get a perfect score when there where some squares that didn't "look right" to me.
But I still love B&W, so don't have me, Mike :-)
Posted by: Miserere | Sunday, 05 October 2008 at 11:34 AM
Wow -- you did really well. The best I could do was 15.
Maybe it is time to calibrate this display...
Posted by: Eric Hancock | Sunday, 05 October 2008 at 11:56 AM
I suppose that using the Digital Colormeter Utility for Mac isn't fair...
Posted by: Alfredo Pagliano | Sunday, 05 October 2008 at 01:45 PM
I photograph art, so i was a bit scared to take the test ... my ego needed a good score!
Thank god I got a 0
30-39
I use a callibrated and profiled Eizo L768 (an old one)
Posted by: Jeremy | Sunday, 05 October 2008 at 06:31 PM
23 in the uppermost end of the 30-39 category.
Can the lack of accuracy be tied to farsightedness? (-12 diopters)
Posted by: Doug Vaught | Monday, 06 October 2008 at 12:51 AM
4
I'm 32 and this was on a uncalibrated DELL 1800FP at work.
Posted by: Dion | Monday, 06 October 2008 at 03:44 AM
It would be nice if the distribution of results was shown - I suspect that the upper end of my demographic (M36 - max score 1464, but 99 is considered 'high') is caused by a rogue 'Submit' without completing the test (or without scripting enabled?).
FWIW, I managed a perfect zero (at work, on a bog-standard Dell LCD screen), so I can now justify my choice to work almost exclusively in colour! I'll have the warm&fuzzies all day now...
Posted by: Toby | Monday, 06 October 2008 at 05:52 AM