Alt Tag GagAlt Tag GagAlt Tag GagAlt Tag Gag

Alt Tag GagAlt Tag GagAlt Tag GagAlt Tag Gag

Alt Tag GagAlt Tag GagAlt Tag GagAlt Tag Gag

Alt Tag GagAlt Tag GagAlt Tag GagAlt Tag Gag

Alt Tag GagAlt Tag GagAlt Tag GagAlt Tag Gag

Alt Tag GagAlt Tag GagAlt Tag GagAlt Tag Gag

Alt Tag GagAlt Tag GagAlt Tag GagAlt Tag Gag

Alt Tag GagAlt Tag GagAlt Tag GagAlt Tag Gag

Alt Tag GagAlt Tag GagAlt Tag GagAlt Tag Gag

 

   

Darker Blue Text: #000066; 000.000.102

Tip: To read text on a particularly bad background, try selecting the text!
Having been aware of this field since childhood, I've always tried to make sure that anything I do is readable in spite of having a background. Thus the backgrounds we use are either hand-picked or hand-crafted or both (a background we grabbed from somewhere but was unacceptable so we fixed it to our standards).

For this example, we created a background graphic that has many things going against it. First, it is very busy. A good background will have a subtle variation and image elements that are larger than the largest characters to be used in the text -- or it will be so fine (such as a speckled pattern) that the images will be smaller than the characters (for example, one of the image elements might easily fit inside the bowl of a lowercase "o"). This pattern was deliberately created so that the image elements are approximately the same size as the letters themselves. Secondly, the pattern contains horizontal lines. Now, one every six to twelve lines of text, if it's subtle enough, might be okay (we have a few "tile" tiles [yup!] which were created with great skill). This pattern might underline the text were it a pixel taller on our system (but probably not on yours). Thirdly, industry standard aims to make the variations in luminance no more than 25 percent, and to try to make that at one end of the spectrum or the other (dark, with light text or light, with dark text). Our standard is much stricter. We go by the 1 to 240 scale of luminance, and 25 percent would be a range of 60. We shoot for a luminance 240 range of 30 or less with an absolute max of 48 or less (one increment in WebSafe, such as #CCFFCC to #FFCCFF). In addition, we try to place the 30 range at or near 15 to 75 or 165 to 225. At times, we see images that go substantially outside of these parameters and still provide a relaxed, high contrast environment for reading. These three patterns have a range of 32, just over our max. (These image have a total luminance of 192 to 224; the gray scale values are, darkest: #CCCCCC or 204.204.204; median: #DDDDDD or 221.221.221, lightest: #EEEEEE or 238.238.238; we avoided making the lightest color white, that is, #FFFFFF or 255.255.255.

Even with all this awareness, caution, and effort, we still get a few complaints (perhaps two complaints per year, if that). Surely we've fielded no more than seven or eight color and background complaints since we got tired of hearing people complain that black on white is boring (which was a comparatively common complaint).

  

Darkest Blue Text: #000033; 000.000.051

Tip: To read text on a particularly bad background, try using Select All.
Having been aware of this field since childhood, I've always tried to make sure that anything I do is readable in spite of having a background. Thus the backgrounds we use are either hand-picked or hand-crafted or both (a background we grabbed from somewhere but was unacceptable so we fixed it to our standards).

For this example, we created a background graphic that has many things going against it. First, it is very busy. A good background will have a subtle variation and image elements that are larger than the largest characters to be used in the text -- or it will be so fine (such as a speckled pattern) that the images will be smaller than the characters (for example, one of the image elements might easily fit inside the bowl of a lowercase "o"). This pattern was deliberately created so that the image elements are approximately the same size as the letters themselves. Secondly, the pattern contains horizontal lines. Now, one every six to twelve lines of text, if it's subtle enough, might be okay (we have a few "tile" tiles [yup!] which were created with great skill). This pattern might underline the text were it a pixel taller on our system (but probably not on yours). Thirdly, industry standard aims to make the variations in luminance no more than 25 percent, and to try to make that at one end of the spectrum or the other (dark, with light text or light, with dark text). Our standard is much stricter. We go by the 1 to 240 scale of luminance, and 25 percent would be a range of 60. We shoot for a luminance 240 range of 30 or less with an absolute max of 48 or less (one increment in WebSafe, such as #CCFFCC to #FFCCFF). In addition, we try to place the 30 range at or near 15 to 75 or 165 to 225. At times, we see images that go substantially outside of these parameters and still provide a relaxed, high contrast environment for reading. These three patterns have a range of 32, just over our max. (These image have a total luminance of 192 to 224; the gray scale values are, darkest: #CCCCCC or 204.204.204; median: #DDDDDD or 221.221.221, lightest: #EEEEEE or 238.238.238; we avoided making the lightest color white, that is, #FFFFFF or 255.255.255.

Even with all this awareness, caution, and effort, we still get a few complaints (perhaps two complaints per year, if that). Surely we've fielded no more than seven or eight color and background complaints since we got tired of hearing people complain that black on white is boring (which was a comparatively common complaint).

 

Black Text:   #000000;   000.000.000

Tip: To read text on a particularly bad background, try using Select All.
Having been aware of this field since childhood, I've always tried to make sure that anything I do is readable in spite of having a background. Thus the backgrounds we use are either hand-picked or hand-crafted or both (a background we grabbed from somewhere but was unacceptable so we fixed it to our standards).

For this example, we created a background graphic that has many things going against it. First, it is very busy. A good background will have a subtle variation and image elements that are larger than the largest characters to be used in the text -- or it will be so fine (such as a speckled pattern) that the images will be smaller than the characters (for example, one of the image elements might easily fit inside the bowl of a lowercase "o"). This pattern was deliberately created so that the image elements are approximately the same size as the letters themselves. Secondly, the pattern contains horizontal lines. Now, one every six to twelve lines of text, if it's subtle enough, might be okay (we have a few "tile" tiles [yup!] which were created with great skill). This pattern might underline the text were it a pixel taller on our system (but probably not on yours). Thirdly, industry standard aims to make the variations in luminance no more than 25 percent, and to try to make that at one end of the spectrum or the other (dark, with light text or light, with dark text). Our standard is much stricter. We go by the 1 to 240 scale of luminance, and 25 percent would be a range of 60. We shoot for a luminance 240 range of 30 or less with an absolute max of 48 or less (one increment in WebSafe, such as #CCFFCC to #FFCCFF). In addition, we try to place the 30 range at or near 15 to 75 or 165 to 225. At times, we see images that go substantially outside of these parameters and still provide a relaxed, high contrast environment for reading. These three patterns have a range of 32, just over our max. (These image have a total luminance of 192 to 224; the gray scale values are, darkest: #CCCCCC or 204.204.204; median: #DDDDDD or 221.221.221, lightest: #EEEEEE or 238.238.238; we avoided making the lightest color white, that is, #FFFFFF or 255.255.255.

Even with all this awareness, caution, and effort, we still get a few complaints (perhaps two complaints per year, if that). Surely we've fielded no more than seven or eight color and background complaints since we got tired of hearing people complain that black on white is boring (which was a comparatively common complaint).

       

    Darkest Red Text:   #330000;   051.000.000

    Tip: To read text on a particularly bad background, try using Select All.
    Having been aware of this field since childhood, I've always tried to make sure that anything I do is readable in spite of having a background. Thus the backgrounds we use are either hand-picked or hand-crafted or both (a background we grabbed from somewhere but was unacceptable so we fixed it to our standards).

    For this example, we created a background graphic that has many things going against it. First, it is very busy. A good background will have a subtle variation and image elements that are larger than the largest characters to be used in the text -- or it will be so fine (such as a speckled pattern) that the images will be smaller than the characters (for example, one of the image elements might easily fit inside the bowl of a lowercase "o"). This pattern was deliberately created so that the image elements are approximately the same size as the letters themselves. Secondly, the pattern contains horizontal lines. Now, one every six to twelve lines of text, if it's subtle enough, might be okay (we have a few "tile" tiles [yup!] which were created with great skill). This pattern might underline the text were it a pixel taller on our system (but probably not on yours). Thirdly, industry standard aims to make the variations in luminance no more than 25 percent, and to try to make that at one end of the spectrum or the other (dark, with light text or light, with dark text). Our standard is much stricter. We go by the 1 to 240 scale of luminance, and 25 percent would be a range of 60. We shoot for a luminance 240 range of 30 or less with an absolute max of 48 or less (one increment in WebSafe, such as #CCFFCC to #FFCCFF). In addition, we try to place the 30 range at or near 15 to 75 or 165 to 225. At times, we see images that go substantially outside of these parameters and still provide a relaxed, high contrast environment for reading. These three patterns have a range of 32, just over our max. (These image have a total luminance of 192 to 224; the gray scale values are, darkest: #CCCCCC or 204.204.204; median: #DDDDDD or 221.221.221, lightest: #EEEEEE or 238.238.238; we avoided making the lightest color white, that is, #FFFFFF or 255.255.255.

    Even with all this awareness, caution, and effort, we still get a few complaints (perhaps two complaints per year, if that). Surely we've fielded no more than seven or eight color and background complaints since we got tired of hearing people complain that black on white is boring (which was a comparatively common complaint).

       

    Darker Red Text:   #660000;   102.000.000

    Tip: To read text on a particularly bad background, try using Select All.
    Having been aware of this field since childhood, I've always tried to make sure that anything I do is readable in spite of having a background. Thus the backgrounds we use are either hand-picked or hand-crafted or both (a background we grabbed from somewhere but was unacceptable so we fixed it to our standards).

    For this example, we created a background graphic that has many things going against it. First, it is very busy. A good background will have a subtle variation and image elements that are larger than the largest characters to be used in the text -- or it will be so fine (such as a speckled pattern) that the images will be smaller than the characters (for example, one of the image elements might easily fit inside the bowl of a lowercase "o"). This pattern was deliberately created so that the image elements are approximately the same size as the letters themselves. Secondly, the pattern contains horizontal lines. Now, one every six to twelve lines of text, if it's subtle enough, might be okay (we have a few "tile" tiles [yup!] which were created with great skill). This pattern might underline the text were it a pixel taller on our system (but probably not on yours). Thirdly, industry standard aims to make the variations in luminance no more than 25 percent, and to try to make that at one end of the spectrum or the other (dark, with light text or light, with dark text). Our standard is much stricter. We go by the 1 to 240 scale of luminance, and 25 percent would be a range of 60. We shoot for a luminance 240 range of 30 or less with an absolute max of 48 or less (one increment in WebSafe, such as #CCFFCC to #FFCCFF). In addition, we try to place the 30 range at or near 15 to 75 or 165 to 225. At times, we see images that go substantially outside of these parameters and still provide a relaxed, high contrast environment for reading. These three patterns have a range of 32, just over our max. (These image have a total luminance of 192 to 224; the gray scale values are, darkest: #CCCCCC or 204.204.204; median: #DDDDDD or 221.221.221, lightest: #EEEEEE or 238.238.238; we avoided making the lightest color white, that is, #FFFFFF or 255.255.255.

    Even with all this awareness, caution, and effort, we still get a few complaints (perhaps two complaints per year, if that). Surely we've fielded no more than seven or eight color and background complaints since we got tired of hearing people complain that black on white is boring (which was a comparatively common complaint).

         

       

    Darker Blue Text: #000066; 000.000.102

    Tip: To read text on a particularly bad background, try using Select All.
    Having been aware of this field since childhood, I've always tried to make sure that anything I do is readable in spite of having a background. Thus the backgrounds we use are either hand-picked or hand-crafted or both (a background we grabbed from somewhere but was unacceptable so we fixed it to our standards).

    For this example, we created a background graphic that has many things going against it. First, it is very busy. A good background will have a subtle variation and image elements that are larger than the largest characters to be used in the text -- or it will be so fine (such as a speckled pattern) that the images will be smaller than the characters (for example, one of the image elements might easily fit inside the bowl of a lowercase "o"). This pattern was deliberately created so that the image elements are approximately the same size as the letters themselves. Secondly, the pattern contains horizontal lines. Now, one every six to twelve lines of text, if it's subtle enough, might be okay (we have a few "tile" tiles [yup!] which were created with great skill). This pattern might underline the text were it a pixel taller on our system (but probably not on yours). Thirdly, industry standard aims to make the variations in luminance no more than 25 percent, and to try to make that at one end of the spectrum or the other (dark, with light text or light, with dark text). Our standard is much stricter. We go by the 1 to 240 scale of luminance, and 25 percent would be a range of 60. We shoot for a luminance 240 range of 30 or less with an absolute max of 48 or less (one increment in WebSafe, such as #CCFFCC to #FFCCFF). In addition, we try to place the 30 range at or near 15 to 75 or 165 to 225. At times, we see images that go substantially outside of these parameters and still provide a relaxed, high contrast environment for reading. These three patterns have a range of 32, just over our max. (These image have a total luminance of 192 to 224; the gray scale values are, darkest: #CCCCCC or 204.204.204; median: #DDDDDD or 221.221.221, lightest: #EEEEEE or 238.238.238; we avoided making the lightest color white, that is, #FFFFFF or 255.255.255.

    Even with all this awareness, caution, and effort, we still get a few complaints (perhaps two complaints per year, if that). Surely we've fielded no more than seven or eight color and background complaints since we got tired of hearing people complain that black on white is boring (which was a comparatively common complaint).

      

    Darkest Blue Text: #000033; 000.000.051

    Tip: To read text on a particularly bad background, try using Select All.
    Having been aware of this field since childhood, I've always tried to make sure that anything I do is readable in spite of having a background. Thus the backgrounds we use are either hand-picked or hand-crafted or both (a background we grabbed from somewhere but was unacceptable so we fixed it to our standards).

    For this example, we created a background graphic that has many things going against it. First, it is very busy. A good background will have a subtle variation and image elements that are larger than the largest characters to be used in the text -- or it will be so fine (such as a speckled pattern) that the images will be smaller than the characters (for example, one of the image elements might easily fit inside the bowl of a lowercase "o"). This pattern was deliberately created so that the image elements are approximately the same size as the letters themselves. Secondly, the pattern contains horizontal lines. Now, one every six to twelve lines of text, if it's subtle enough, might be okay (we have a few "tile" tiles [yup!] which were created with great skill). This pattern might underline the text were it a pixel taller on our system (but probably not on yours). Thirdly, industry standard aims to make the variations in luminance no more than 25 percent, and to try to make that at one end of the spectrum or the other (dark, with light text or light, with dark text). Our standard is much stricter. We go by the 1 to 240 scale of luminance, and 25 percent would be a range of 60. We shoot for a luminance 240 range of 30 or less with an absolute max of 48 or less (one increment in WebSafe, such as #CCFFCC to #FFCCFF). In addition, we try to place the 30 range at or near 15 to 75 or 165 to 225. At times, we see images that go substantially outside of these parameters and still provide a relaxed, high contrast environment for reading. These three patterns have a range of 32, just over our max. (These image have a total luminance of 192 to 224; the gray scale values are, darkest: #CCCCCC or 204.204.204; median: #DDDDDD or 221.221.221, lightest: #EEEEEE or 238.238.238; we avoided making the lightest color white, that is, #FFFFFF or 255.255.255.

    Even with all this awareness, caution, and effort, we still get a few complaints (perhaps two complaints per year, if that). Surely we've fielded no more than seven or eight color and background complaints since we got tired of hearing people complain that black on white is boring (which was a comparatively common complaint).

     

    Black Text:   #000000;   000.000.000

    Tip: To read text on a particularly bad background, try using Select All.
    Having been aware of this field since childhood, I've always tried to make sure that anything I do is readable in spite of having a background. Thus the backgrounds we use are either hand-picked or hand-crafted or both (a background we grabbed from somewhere but was unacceptable so we fixed it to our standards).

    For this example, we created a background graphic that has many things going against it. First, it is very busy. A good background will have a subtle variation and image elements that are larger than the largest characters to be used in the text -- or it will be so fine (such as a speckled pattern) that the images will be smaller than the characters (for example, one of the image elements might easily fit inside the bowl of a lowercase "o"). This pattern was deliberately created so that the image elements are approximately the same size as the letters themselves. Secondly, the pattern contains horizontal lines. Now, one every six to twelve lines of text, if it's subtle enough, might be okay (we have a few "tile" tiles [yup!] which were created with great skill). This pattern might underline the text were it a pixel taller on our system (but probably not on yours). Thirdly, industry standard aims to make the variations in luminance no more than 25 percent, and to try to make that at one end of the spectrum or the other (dark, with light text or light, with dark text). Our standard is much stricter. We go by the 1 to 240 scale of luminance, and 25 percent would be a range of 60. We shoot for a luminance 240 range of 30 or less with an absolute max of 48 or less (one increment in WebSafe, such as #CCFFCC to #FFCCFF). In addition, we try to place the 30 range at or near 15 to 75 or 165 to 225. At times, we see images that go substantially outside of these parameters and still provide a relaxed, high contrast environment for reading. These three patterns have a range of 32, just over our max. (These image have a total luminance of 192 to 224; the gray scale values are, darkest: #CCCCCC or 204.204.204; median: #DDDDDD or 221.221.221, lightest: #EEEEEE or 238.238.238; we avoided making the lightest color white, that is, #FFFFFF or 255.255.255.

    Even with all this awareness, caution, and effort, we still get a few complaints (perhaps two complaints per year, if that). Surely we've fielded no more than seven or eight color and background complaints since we got tired of hearing people complain that black on white is boring (which was a comparatively common complaint).

         

      Darkest Red Text:   #330000;   051.000.000

      Tip: To read text on a particularly bad background, try using Select All.
      Having been aware of this field since childhood, I've always tried to make sure that anything I do is readable in spite of having a background. Thus the backgrounds we use are either hand-picked or hand-crafted or both (a background we grabbed from somewhere but was unacceptable so we fixed it to our standards).

      For this example, we created a background graphic that has many things going against it. First, it is very busy. A good background will have a subtle variation and image elements that are larger than the largest characters to be used in the text -- or it will be so fine (such as a speckled pattern) that the images will be smaller than the characters (for example, one of the image elements might easily fit inside the bowl of a lowercase "o"). This pattern was deliberately created so that the image elements are approximately the same size as the letters themselves. Secondly, the pattern contains horizontal lines. Now, one every six to twelve lines of text, if it's subtle enough, might be okay (we have a few "tile" tiles [yup!] which were created with great skill). This pattern might underline the text were it a pixel taller on our system (but probably not on yours). Thirdly, industry standard aims to make the variations in luminance no more than 25 percent, and to try to make that at one end of the spectrum or the other (dark, with light text or light, with dark text). Our standard is much stricter. We go by the 1 to 240 scale of luminance, and 25 percent would be a range of 60. We shoot for a luminance 240 range of 30 or less with an absolute max of 48 or less (one increment in WebSafe, such as #CCFFCC to #FFCCFF). In addition, we try to place the 30 range at or near 15 to 75 or 165 to 225. At times, we see images that go substantially outside of these parameters and still provide a relaxed, high contrast environment for reading. These three patterns have a range of 32, just over our max. (These image have a total luminance of 192 to 224; the gray scale values are, darkest: #CCCCCC or 204.204.204; median: #DDDDDD or 221.221.221, lightest: #EEEEEE or 238.238.238; we avoided making the lightest color white, that is, #FFFFFF or 255.255.255.

      Even with all this awareness, caution, and effort, we still get a few complaints (perhaps two complaints per year, if that). Surely we've fielded no more than seven or eight color and background complaints since we got tired of hearing people complain that black on white is boring (which was a comparatively common complaint).

         

      Darker Red Text:   #660000;   102.000.000

      Tip: To read text on a particularly bad background, try using Select All.
      Having been aware of this field since childhood, I've always tried to make sure that anything I do is readable in spite of having a background. Thus the backgrounds we use are either hand-picked or hand-crafted or both (a background we grabbed from somewhere but was unacceptable so we fixed it to our standards).

      For this example, we created a background graphic that has many things going against it. First, it is very busy. A good background will have a subtle variation and image elements that are larger than the largest characters to be used in the text -- or it will be so fine (such as a speckled pattern) that the images will be smaller than the characters (for example, one of the image elements might easily fit inside the bowl of a lowercase "o"). This pattern was deliberately created so that the image elements are approximately the same size as the letters themselves. Secondly, the pattern contains horizontal lines. Now, one every six to twelve lines of text, if it's subtle enough, might be okay (we have a few "tile" tiles [yup!] which were created with great skill). This pattern might underline the text were it a pixel taller on our system (but probably not on yours). Thirdly, industry standard aims to make the variations in luminance no more than 25 percent, and to try to make that at one end of the spectrum or the other (dark, with light text or light, with dark text). Our standard is much stricter. We go by the 1 to 240 scale of luminance, and 25 percent would be a range of 60. We shoot for a luminance 240 range of 30 or less with an absolute max of 48 or less (one increment in WebSafe, such as #CCFFCC to #FFCCFF). In addition, we try to place the 30 range at or near 15 to 75 or 165 to 225. At times, we see images that go substantially outside of these parameters and still provide a relaxed, high contrast environment for reading. These three patterns have a range of 32, just over our max. (These image have a total luminance of 192 to 224; the gray scale values are, darkest: #CCCCCC or 204.204.204; median: #DDDDDD or 221.221.221, lightest: #EEEEEE or 238.238.238; we avoided making the lightest color white, that is, #FFFFFF or 255.255.255.

      Even with all this awareness, caution, and effort, we still get a few complaints (perhaps two complaints per year, if that). Surely we've fielded no more than seven or eight color and background complaints since we got tired of hearing people complain that black on white is boring (which was a comparatively common complaint).

           

       

         

      Darker Blue Text: #000066; 000.000.102

      Tip: To read text on a particularly bad background, try using Select All.
      Having been aware of this field since childhood, I've always tried to make sure that anything I do is readable in spite of having a background. Thus the backgrounds we use are either hand-picked or hand-crafted or both (a background we grabbed from somewhere but was unacceptable so we fixed it to our standards).

      For this example, we created a background graphic that has many things going against it. First, it is very busy. A good background will have a subtle variation and image elements that are larger than the largest characters to be used in the text -- or it will be so fine (such as a speckled pattern) that the images will be smaller than the characters (for example, one of the image elements might easily fit inside the bowl of a lowercase "o"). This pattern was deliberately created so that the image elements are approximately the same size as the letters themselves. Secondly, the pattern contains horizontal lines. Now, one every six to twelve lines of text, if it's subtle enough, might be okay (we have a few "tile" tiles [yup!] which were created with great skill). This pattern might underline the text were it a pixel taller on our system (but probably not on yours). Thirdly, industry standard aims to make the variations in luminance no more than 25 percent, and to try to make that at one end of the spectrum or the other (dark, with light text or light, with dark text). Our standard is much stricter. We go by the 1 to 240 scale of luminance, and 25 percent would be a range of 60. We shoot for a luminance 240 range of 30 or less with an absolute max of 48 or less (one increment in WebSafe, such as #CCFFCC to #FFCCFF). In addition, we try to place the 30 range at or near 15 to 75 or 165 to 225. At times, we see images that go substantially outside of these parameters and still provide a relaxed, high contrast environment for reading. These three patterns have a range of 32, just over our max. (These image have a total luminance of 192 to 224; the gray scale values are, darkest: #CCCCCC or 204.204.204; median: #DDDDDD or 221.221.221, lightest: #EEEEEE or 238.238.238; we avoided making the lightest color white, that is, #FFFFFF or 255.255.255.

      Even with all this awareness, caution, and effort, we still get a few complaints (perhaps two complaints per year, if that). Surely we've fielded no more than seven or eight color and background complaints since we got tired of hearing people complain that black on white is boring (which was a comparatively common complaint).

        

      Darkest Blue Text: #000033; 000.000.051

      Tip: To read text on a particularly bad background, try using Select All.
      Having been aware of this field since childhood, I've always tried to make sure that anything I do is readable in spite of having a background. Thus the backgrounds we use are either hand-picked or hand-crafted or both (a background we grabbed from somewhere but was unacceptable so we fixed it to our standards).

      For this example, we created a background graphic that has many things going against it. First, it is very busy. A good background will have a subtle variation and image elements that are larger than the largest characters to be used in the text -- or it will be so fine (such as a speckled pattern) that the images will be smaller than the characters (for example, one of the image elements might easily fit inside the bowl of a lowercase "o"). This pattern was deliberately created so that the image elements are approximately the same size as the letters themselves. Secondly, the pattern contains horizontal lines. Now, one every six to twelve lines of text, if it's subtle enough, might be okay (we have a few "tile" tiles [yup!] which were created with great skill). This pattern might underline the text were it a pixel taller on our system (but probably not on yours). Thirdly, industry standard aims to make the variations in luminance no more than 25 percent, and to try to make that at one end of the spectrum or the other (dark, with light text or light, with dark text). Our standard is much stricter. We go by the 1 to 240 scale of luminance, and 25 percent would be a range of 60. We shoot for a luminance 240 range of 30 or less with an absolute max of 48 or less (one increment in WebSafe, such as #CCFFCC to #FFCCFF). In addition, we try to place the 30 range at or near 15 to 75 or 165 to 225. At times, we see images that go substantially outside of these parameters and still provide a relaxed, high contrast environment for reading. These three patterns have a range of 32, just over our max. (These image have a total luminance of 192 to 224; the gray scale values are, darkest: #CCCCCC or 204.204.204; median: #DDDDDD or 221.221.221, lightest: #EEEEEE or 238.238.238; we avoided making the lightest color white, that is, #FFFFFF or 255.255.255.

      Even with all this awareness, caution, and effort, we still get a few complaints (perhaps two complaints per year, if that). Surely we've fielded no more than seven or eight color and background complaints since we got tired of hearing people complain that black on white is boring (which was a comparatively common complaint).

       

      Black Text:   #000000;   000.000.000

      Tip: To read text on a particularly bad background, try using Select All.
      Having been aware of this field since childhood, I've always tried to make sure that anything I do is readable in spite of having a background. Thus the backgrounds we use are either hand-picked or hand-crafted or both (a background we grabbed from somewhere but was unacceptable so we fixed it to our standards).

      For this example, we created a background graphic that has many things going against it. First, it is very busy. A good background will have a subtle variation and image elements that are larger than the largest characters to be used in the text -- or it will be so fine (such as a speckled pattern) that the images will be smaller than the characters (for example, one of the image elements might easily fit inside the bowl of a lowercase "o"). This pattern was deliberately created so that the image elements are approximately the same size as the letters themselves. Secondly, the pattern contains horizontal lines. Now, one every six to twelve lines of text, if it's subtle enough, might be okay (we have a few "tile" tiles [yup!] which were created with great skill). This pattern might underline the text were it a pixel taller on our system (but probably not on yours). Thirdly, industry standard aims to make the variations in luminance no more than 25 percent, and to try to make that at one end of the spectrum or the other (dark, with light text or light, with dark text). Our standard is much stricter. We go by the 1 to 240 scale of luminance, and 25 percent would be a range of 60. We shoot for a luminance 240 range of 30 or less with an absolute max of 48 or less (one increment in WebSafe, such as #CCFFCC to #FFCCFF). In addition, we try to place the 30 range at or near 15 to 75 or 165 to 225. At times, we see images that go substantially outside of these parameters and still provide a relaxed, high contrast environment for reading. These three patterns have a range of 32, just over our max. (These image have a total luminance of 192 to 224; the gray scale values are, darkest: #CCCCCC or 204.204.204; median: #DDDDDD or 221.221.221, lightest: #EEEEEE or 238.238.238; we avoided making the lightest color white, that is, #FFFFFF or 255.255.255.

      Even with all this awareness, caution, and effort, we still get a few complaints (perhaps two complaints per year, if that). Surely we've fielded no more than seven or eight color and background complaints since we got tired of hearing people complain that black on white is boring (which was a comparatively common complaint).

           

        Darkest Red Text:   #330000;   051.000.000

        Tip: To read text on a particularly bad background, try using Select All.
        Having been aware of this field since childhood, I've always tried to make sure that anything I do is readable in spite of having a background. Thus the backgrounds we use are either hand-picked or hand-crafted or both (a background we grabbed from somewhere but was unacceptable so we fixed it to our standards).

        For this example, we created a background graphic that has many things going against it. First, it is very busy. A good background will have a subtle variation and image elements that are larger than the largest characters to be used in the text -- or it will be so fine (such as a speckled pattern) that the images will be smaller than the characters (for example, one of the image elements might easily fit inside the bowl of a lowercase "o"). This pattern was deliberately created so that the image elements are approximately the same size as the letters themselves. Secondly, the pattern contains horizontal lines. Now, one every six to twelve lines of text, if it's subtle enough, might be okay (we have a few "tile" tiles [yup!] which were created with great skill). This pattern might underline the text were it a pixel taller on our system (but probably not on yours). Thirdly, industry standard aims to make the variations in luminance no more than 25 percent, and to try to make that at one end of the spectrum or the other (dark, with light text or light, with dark text). Our standard is much stricter. We go by the 1 to 240 scale of luminance, and 25 percent would be a range of 60. We shoot for a luminance 240 range of 30 or less with an absolute max of 48 or less (one increment in WebSafe, such as #CCFFCC to #FFCCFF). In addition, we try to place the 30 range at or near 15 to 75 or 165 to 225. At times, we see images that go substantially outside of these parameters and still provide a relaxed, high contrast environment for reading. These three patterns have a range of 32, just over our max. (These image have a total luminance of 192 to 224; the gray scale values are, darkest: #CCCCCC or 204.204.204; median: #DDDDDD or 221.221.221, lightest: #EEEEEE or 238.238.238; we avoided making the lightest color white, that is, #FFFFFF or 255.255.255.

        Even with all this awareness, caution, and effort, we still get a few complaints (perhaps two complaints per year, if that). Surely we've fielded no more than seven or eight color and background complaints since we got tired of hearing people complain that black on white is boring (which was a comparatively common complaint).

           

        Darker Red Text:   #660000;   102.000.000

        Tip: To read text on a particularly bad background, try using Select All.
        Having been aware of this field since childhood, I've always tried to make sure that anything I do is readable in spite of having a background. Thus the backgrounds we use are either hand-picked or hand-crafted or both (a background we grabbed from somewhere but was unacceptable so we fixed it to our standards).

        For this example, we created a background graphic that has many things going against it. First, it is very busy. A good background will have a subtle variation and image elements that are larger than the largest characters to be used in the text -- or it will be so fine (such as a speckled pattern) that the images will be smaller than the characters (for example, one of the image elements might easily fit inside the bowl of a lowercase "o"). This pattern was deliberately created so that the image elements are approximately the same size as the letters themselves. Secondly, the pattern contains horizontal lines. Now, one every six to twelve lines of text, if it's subtle enough, might be okay (we have a few "tile" tiles [yup!] which were created with great skill). This pattern might underline the text were it a pixel taller on our system (but probably not on yours). Thirdly, industry standard aims to make the variations in luminance no more than 25 percent, and to try to make that at one end of the spectrum or the other (dark, with light text or light, with dark text). Our standard is much stricter. We go by the 1 to 240 scale of luminance, and 25 percent would be a range of 60. We shoot for a luminance 240 range of 30 or less with an absolute max of 48 or less (one increment in WebSafe, such as #CCFFCC to #FFCCFF). In addition, we try to place the 30 range at or near 15 to 75 or 165 to 225. At times, we see images that go substantially outside of these parameters and still provide a relaxed, high contrast environment for reading. These three patterns have a range of 32, just over our max. (These image have a total luminance of 192 to 224; the gray scale values are, darkest: #CCCCCC or 204.204.204; median: #DDDDDD or 221.221.221, lightest: #EEEEEE or 238.238.238; we avoided making the lightest color white, that is, #FFFFFF or 255.255.255.

        Even with all this awareness, caution, and effort, we still get a few complaints (perhaps two complaints per year, if that). Surely we've fielded no more than seven or eight color and background complaints since we got tired of hearing people complain that black on white is boring (which was a comparatively common complaint).