Timeline for Why is bright pink background a bad UX/UI?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:32 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://ux.stackexchange.com/ with https://ux.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Jun 2, 2016 at 4:43 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackUX/status/738229590351454213 | ||
| May 31, 2016 at 9:17 | answer | added | nigel222 | timeline score: 0 | |
| May 27, 2016 at 12:36 | comment | added | Joe | I guess part of this comes down to the target demographic/intended culture? | |
| May 26, 2016 at 14:06 | comment | added | DA01 | Agreeing to disagree is exactly my point...it's a matter of pure opinion that bright pink 'hurts' :) | |
| May 26, 2016 at 0:24 | comment | added | DA01 | @Maurycy the second half is about contrast--not any particular colors. It's an important distinction. Contrast is always an issue...be the colors bright or desaturated. | |
| May 26, 2016 at 0:16 | comment | added | Maurycy | @DA01 Even though first half of DasBeasto's answer is indeed missing scientific references, the second part points out a pretty objective (assuming W3S's competency) issue with using bright colors as the background. So there are clearly aspects to this questions that can be objectively answered. Maybe I'm just personally attached to this question but I think there is something good in there. Perhaps "What UX problems bright, saturated website backgrounds have?" would be a better fit? This avoids the subjective and not universally defined "good/bad" classification. | |
| May 25, 2016 at 21:19 | comment | added | DA01 | Also, keep in mind that this is a UX site. Though there is overlap, you're going to get different types of answers here than if you ask over on, say, GraphicDesign.se. | |
| May 25, 2016 at 21:18 | comment | added | DA01 | @Maurycy that's the thing, it can't be answered objectively--at least not as a broad statement. While DasBeasto believes they are bad, that's just one opinion (though certainly a valid one) and isn't necessarily based on any particular validated research or science. Without context, it's really hard to make any sort of general statement like 'color X is good/bad for implementation Y'. | |
| May 25, 2016 at 20:56 | comment | added | Maurycy | @DA01 The question is not based on an interpretation of the other question but on the statements made by, what I presume, are designers, so I disagree on that part. But I guess the question is too specific to be useful. I was actually thinking about changing it to "Are bright colors a bad choice for a background?" which I believe is useful and can be answered objectively (it pretty much already is) but I don't like altering the question that dramatically after so much time. | |
| May 25, 2016 at 17:28 | comment | added | DA01 | I voted to close and really should have left a comment. Apologies. One issue is that the question is based on an incorrect interpretation of the original question being asked. The original question was asking about contrast...not a particular color. But beyond that, it's really opinion based and--even if there are objective arguments to be made--what particular color is good/bad is entirely dependent on the very particular context the color is being used in. "Is color X bad?" is simply too broad/subjective of a question to have a concrete answer. | |
| May 25, 2016 at 14:59 | comment | added | macetw | Bright pink background was the default UI for the SGI/Irix operating system. :) Oh, it was one of a kind. | |
| May 25, 2016 at 13:58 | comment | added | Yakk | Well, you do run the risk of "magic pink" transparency. And transparency in UX is so passé. ;) | |
| May 25, 2016 at 8:51 | vote | accept | Maurycy | ||
| May 24, 2016 at 22:49 | comment | added | Superbest | I was one of the people who made that comment. My reason was partly that it led to your problem, partly that contrast with white input fields was poor, and partly that I found it dazzling and tiring to look at. In general, I think backgrounds should be subdued colors, so as to not distract form foreground elements. Perhaps it is possible to make bright pink background work, but your question was not an example of this. | |
| May 24, 2016 at 15:14 | comment | added | coteyr | You have to understand that sometimes people call UI "good or bad" based on trends. UI can not be good or bad without context. A red back ground is totally fine. Red on red is a bad thing. Same as some others. | |
| May 24, 2016 at 15:05 | review | Close votes | |||
| May 25, 2016 at 9:55 | |||||
| May 24, 2016 at 15:01 | comment | added | Darrel Hoffman | Personally (and I'm sure I'm not the alone in this), I associate pure magenta (#FF00FF) with "something is wrong", but that's only from the standpoint of a developer. Many graphics engines will use that color as a default color for when data is missing, e.g. a 3D model with a missing texture file. Sure, you could just render it in black or something, but then it wouldn't be as blatantly obvious that there was a missing/broken asset, so magenta is used to stand out better, because it's bright, and less likely to be used legitimately by the artists. | |
| May 24, 2016 at 14:48 | answer | added | DA01 | timeline score: 40 | |
| May 24, 2016 at 13:48 | answer | added | DasBeasto | timeline score: 83 | |
| May 24, 2016 at 13:31 | history | asked | Maurycy | CC BY-SA 3.0 |