is your blue my blue ?

Kinda wondering if you'd get different results for using a different display (especially of different technology)

This what I got from two consecutive tests anyways (weird that the percentage is different)

Your boundary is at hue 168, greener than 81% of the population. For you, turquoise is blue.

Your boundary is at hue 168, greener than 85% of the population. For you, turquoise is blue.

Your boundary is at hue 175, bluer than 65% of the population. For you, turquoise is green.

Actually hard, because I use to distinguish Cyan from Green and Blue, so categorizing it to either blue or green was a bit difficult

Test is flawed. Does not allow for demilitarized zone between blue and green!

This leads to blueward expansion by green and a preemptive war by blue!

Turquoise is green!

Your boundary is at hue 192, bluer than 98% of the population. For you, turquoise is green.

You all need to get your eyes checked

30 years on the internet, never seen so many people being wrong.

Did I win?

Hue 174 a true neutral was my description

182 for me. Apparently I am picky about my blues

Doesn't the intensity of blue fade over the life of most OLED displays? Couldn't that skew the results?

J'ai fait le test et je trouverais intéressant de le refaire en changeant la luminosité/clareté des tons. Pour les tons clairs, dans le doute je choisi bleu, mais c'est possible que je fasse pas pareil pour les tons foncés.

Guess my eyes are a Lil off

"Your boundary is at hue 185, bluer than 97% of the population. For you, turquoise is green."

So I found that I pretty reliably get 185ish if I don’t think about it and just click. Now what happens is the test gives you a blue blue or green green, then throws you color just a bit over the line opposite of your first then throws you colors the opposite but closer to that line back and forth about every time. Seems like my picks tend to be A, B, A, B, A, B pretty consistently, which lead to the same outcomes. Not intentional choices for me, but it feels like the shock of seeing a color variance compared to the last color makes it feel like it’s “more green” or “more blue” than the previous. I feel like they should have a sort of pallet (unintentional pun) cleanser in between each color to give a true test.

True neutral

Although the colors change every time so the result is different every time too

Much like Eiffel 65, I appear to be blue...

our boundary is at hue 176, bluer than 75% of the population. For you, turquoise is green.
Je distingue ce que j'appelle en français, le bleu turquoïse et le vert turquoïse. Dans mon langage, c'est là que ce trouve la frontière entre les bleus et les verts.

Does this exist for other colors? Would be interested to see the entire spectrum done like this.

hooray for the middle of the bell curve

Just shows that green / blue is too binary. Learn more colours

lol

Both my runs were higher than the average, but the second run fell about where I would probably put the line if I manually did it (182). I think it depends on the samples you get (along with your device of course). Now, let's do one where we divide things into blue, blue-green, and green. I would think the lines would be a lot similar for most people, but who knows.

Mine is at 185. I have red/green colorblindness. Wonder if that pushes me more to the blue side?

TIL I am bluer than 83% of the population.

167 here. I think the phrasing means I see a whole lotta blue

I did it twice and got 164 and 165, greener than 95%. Idk man, shit just looks blue to me.

I got exactly 172 as well.

I wonder where they get their population distribution info

This is great! I’ve always felt my color recognition is different from my wife’s so now we can compare.

I get different results with each eye 🤔

I've got 174. As I remember correctly categorizing colors in your mind depends on your native language (or just language used), and some may even categorize the hues on this gradient to more basic colors in their language (like in Russian: зелёный [zʲɪˈlʲɵnɨj], голубой [ɡəɫʊˈboj] and синий [ˈsʲinʲɪj]).

I think the boundary between the basic color equivalents for green, and blue (zielony /ʑɛˈlɔ.nɨ/ and niebieski /ɲɛˈbjɛs.ki/) in Polish are more moved more to the right, and that's why I got 174. But I wonder if I have repeated that test in my native Polish if the results would differ (so they are even more to the right).

Edit: I have manually changed strings on the website from English to Polish, making my mind to "think in Polish". The result is 179 so I think that theory checks out.

I'm red green colorblind but ended up at 177, which is fairly close to the (as I see at least) middle while line dividing green and blue.

Which is surprising because I bought blue chopsticks in Japan, and my mother say they are mainly green, much to my frustration.

182 for me. Interesting, I have a little bit of synesthesia. When I see turquoise, a very specific taste comes in my mouth.

I got 187? I have been playing I love hue a lot tho which may be skewing my perception

these questions are really hard to answer

The most interesting thing is my wife is 172, and I am 173. So I guess our blues are the same

I got exactly the population median (174 iirc?)

i feel like this needs like 5x as many data points before giving a result, also at some point to me the only correct answer would be "neither" because the middle point is just Cyan to me, which isn't blue and definitely isn't green, just like how orange isn't yellow but definitely isn't red.

I got exactly the same result

This is silly, instantly it's not blue or green

I got 161 then 169 for my blue boundary. looking at the chart, I definitely agree more with the latter

Took it twice and got nearly opposite results. Split the difference?

172 itou, mais on dit bleu turquoise, donc il y a sans doute un côté culturel fort dans la délimitation

198 on my pixel 6 pro. I was honestly 50-50 on several. I do have some portions of three types of color deficiency, though none too severe.

Wife was 172 on same device.