And I don’t think I am missing the point. Studies have shown we reed white text on black slower … I wonder why?

Text on a screen using Dark colors is words different than light colors in a book in low light.

The fact is that your monitor is illuminated, and dark colors aren’t like a lack of light in the room.

And yes, he would make the font size bigger, but you can do that too.
Hold Ctrl and press + (or rather, hold Ctrl and press equals (=) ).

If he really was doing it purely for not causing eye strain, he would make the font size bigger!

I have to prefix this by saying;
I use a computer daily, I’m in the same boat as many of the other readers, and I attempt to practice what I preach through tolerable means.

I can’t believe so many people stare into a light source and then are surprised when their eyes hurt. I try to run my computer at 0 brightness, and about 50% contrast. (YMMV with regard to different models of screens).

There is a definite problem when it comes to color, much of it is washed out and you lose some detail. It’s a small problem, and I think the point I’m at is a good blend of acceptable color tone, but not blinding bright.

I cry whenever I see a monitor at damn near 100%/100% settings. It’s sticking out like the local sun for the room/office/whatever.

Just as the author of this post said, you don’t stare at a light bulb, you don’t stare at the sun, so don’t stare at a computer screen which is turned all the way up. The only time your face should be white washed is if there are no lights on (not to mention, you probably shouldn’t use the computer too much with the lights off, that’s even worse…).

However, for the original reader, if they are using firefox, they can just click “View” > “Page Style” > “No style”

Job done, black on white.

Our eyes have little problem focusing on most printed material, which is characterized by dense black characters with well-defined edges. Healthy eyes can easily maintain focus on the printed page. Characters on a computer screen, however, don’t have this contrast or well-defined edges. These characters (pixels) are brightest at the center and diminish in intensity toward their edges. This makes it very difficult for our eyes to maintain focus and remain fixed onto these images. Instead our eyes drift out to a point called the “resting point of accommodation” or RPA.

Our eyes involuntarily move to the RPA, and then strain to regain focus on the screen. This continuous flexing of the eyes’ focusing muscles creates fatigue and the burning, tired-eyes feeling that is so common after long hours at the computer.

*However,* all of this does not mean that looking at a monitor is, in any way, like looking at the sun. Looking at the sun will burn your retina, which no corrective lenses can fix. Eye strain and the ability to focus is a different thing entirely.

In the last couple of years I was diagnosed with myasthenia gravis, a neuro-muscular disease. MG invariably affects muscles in the eyes. I am pretty sensitive to light at times and very much prefer light on dark.

Beryl with Super-n to switch to a negative of a page is huge help.

I would like to know how paper ended up white, I have always assumed it was just a matter of what was easier to create dark inks to mark light paper. I would be surprised if it was done for ergonomic regions.

However, judging by the comments some people have a strong preference for dark on light.

So lets have more of the beryl magic.

The reason was based solely on my health, and the health of you.

i took it somewhat personally.

frankly, you are wrong, and AnonymousCoward is right: black on white is better for reading than white on black. he/she even attached some very good urls.

and

and I don’t think I need to cite sources,

yes, you don’t have to publish your sources but it’s a good habit to do so in order to transparently show where your ideas are comming from to receive an insightful critique - we all are searching for *a* truth, right?

ps: and the reason why books are printed black on white and not the other way around is because it’s cheaper.

pps: that example with photographs is just ridiculous - you read/recognize slower because it is more difficult to.

no offense, though.

best regards,

another anonymous covard

http://www.pthree.org/comments/feed/