Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by crackalamoo 648 days ago
I disagree overall. I find it much less painful on the eyes to read in dark mode at night, even if there's no evidence for health benefits.

I agree that dark mode as an additional UI shouldn't be an afterthought, and should be tested fully just like the main UI. Poorly-designed dark mode can be difficult to use because of things like bad contrast.
2 comments
cosmotic 648 days ago
I think the point is that, after everything is said and done, there's no evidence that supports dark mode. Personal anecdote goes both ways.

Dark mode usually has lower contrast ratio (gray-on-gray text instead of black-on-white), and that's definitely proven to be harder to read.

The beyond-frustrating thing for me is that Windows 3.1 supported dark mode via system color palettes along with any other color customization anyone wanted to make to their entire system in a single place. Now every single application is custom-drawn and custom-themed, so these sorts of customizations are impossible.

This all worked better literally 30 years ago.

link
crackalamoo 647 days ago
In my mind, it's not about medical evidence for dark mode: I just prefer the experience as a user.

Also even light mode is often gray on gray, with backgrounds like #eee and text like #112 for example. The contrast is probably lower on average for dark mode, but it can still be designed well.

link
tvshtr 647 days ago
gray-on-gray? of course that's shitty. There's white on black tho, which I use in all apps that have it (most do). Most commonly called AMOLED black.
link
CrendKing 648 days ago
> I find it much less painful on the eyes to read in dark mode at night

I don't understand this. Do people not use lamp or light source in their house? Are people living like cavemen? Otherwise, how is it that much difference between day and night+lamp?

If it is sleep time, there is already blue light filter most OS supports nowadays. No need to ask each app to support a separate color scheme.

link
Sipu 648 days ago
Easy, a proper screen puts out north of 500-600 nits also on phones. Also people's eyes have variable sensitivity to light, nothing weird about that.

Besides, you don't stare straight at your lamps. You do stare straight at your screen. The "night mode" just kills all color on your devices. It's a lot worse option than dark mode.

link
CrendKing 648 days ago
Last time I calibrated my monitor for sRGB, the first step DisplayCAL ask me to do is to aim for 120 nits brightness. Sure a screen is capable of outputting 500 nits, doesn't mean you have to use its full capacity. Unless you guys are writing code or reading book under HDR mode all the time?
link
krackers 648 days ago
Fyi that 120 nits recommendation is probably because most color grading assumes you work in a dark-ish room. It's probably not a good value for office work.
link
Sipu 647 days ago
Proper gaming screens like Samsung Odyssey Neo G9 has a base brightness of ~600 nits and peak brightness of 2000. Iphone 14 pro's can also get pretty bright (1000-2000 nits). Also these gaming screens perform best in HDR mode even in regular desktop use as the dynamic 2048 zone backlight works properly there. The more dynamic range your screen has, the better everything looks. Your calibrated 120 nits is _very_ dark, and likely the overall dynamic range of your screen isn't very high either and the maximum brightness is 350-400 nits at most and contrast is absolute rubbish.
link
themadturk 648 days ago
One of my sons has migraines with accompanying light sensitivity. Yes, some days he lives in the dark, with dark mode screens turned way down.
link