Dark mode is not as good for your eyes as you believe(wired.com)
wired.com
Dark mode is not as good for your eyes as you believe
https://www.wired.com/story/dark-mode-chrome-android-ios-science/
78 comments
I developed eye floaters in one of my eyes and that made Light Mode almost unbearable to use. Some people might not like Dark Mode, but it's also an accessibility feature that helps not only people with certain common eye conditions, but others like migraine sufferers.
This, exactly this. Bright white pages are physically painful to me.
Exercize is too. But it's worth it for the fewer health issues.
Perhaps a light mode is like exercize for the eyes?
And it gets better with a more balanced light around the room as well (since sitting in a darkened room will obviously make a light screen painful).
Perhaps a light mode is like exercize for the eyes?
And it gets better with a more balanced light around the room as well (since sitting in a darkened room will obviously make a light screen painful).
Screen brightness is adjustable, and there are utilities for both windows and macs to adjust most external screens from your task bar.
It shouldn't be brighter than a piece of paper in the same location.
It shouldn't be brighter than a piece of paper in the same location.
oh thanks wasn't aware I could adjust my screen brightness
I say this with no ill intent, but if a simple white screen is "physically painful", it's clear that the screen brightness hasn't been changed. It may even still be in the store demo mode, which is going to be even worse.
Surely this isn't a highly subjective topic that is going to result in people hugely advocating for one or the other purely based on their own anecdotes. Right?
Putting the sarcasm aside, my personal experience with dark mode is that I do find it more pleasant in general to work with. However, in a lot of cases it does make reading text more difficult which mostly seems to come down to the wrong contrast ratios being used between the text and background.
Which brings me on a bit of a tangent, I feel like the web in general has gotten less readable. But this is more to do with font choices, line length and a whole host of other things independent of the dark/light mode.
Putting the sarcasm aside, my personal experience with dark mode is that I do find it more pleasant in general to work with. However, in a lot of cases it does make reading text more difficult which mostly seems to come down to the wrong contrast ratios being used between the text and background.
Which brings me on a bit of a tangent, I feel like the web in general has gotten less readable. But this is more to do with font choices, line length and a whole host of other things independent of the dark/light mode.
>I feel like the web in general has gotten less readable. But this is more to do with font choices, line length and a whole host of other things independent of the dark/light mode.
A few years ago I unticked the setting in Firefox that said "Allow websites to choose their own fonts instead of the ones above" and never looked back.
It's absolutely fantastic how every site now has the same font of my own choosing, it's so legible and clear. Very occasionally a site breaks because it uses icon fonts or they've made their design absolutely pixel perfect, but that's a trade-off I can deal with.
A few years ago I unticked the setting in Firefox that said "Allow websites to choose their own fonts instead of the ones above" and never looked back.
It's absolutely fantastic how every site now has the same font of my own choosing, it's so legible and clear. Very occasionally a site breaks because it uses icon fonts or they've made their design absolutely pixel perfect, but that's a trade-off I can deal with.
>Surely this isn't a highly subjective topic that is going to result in people hugely advocating for one or the other purely based on their own anecdotes. Right?
No, it's not. Eye physiology is not a la cart.
Individual preference and placebo effects can be, sure. But whether it's good or bad for your eyes is not subjective. Big Mac combos are "subjective" too when it comes to taste, but not subjective when they are compared to a healthy balanced meal.
No, it's not. Eye physiology is not a la cart.
Individual preference and placebo effects can be, sure. But whether it's good or bad for your eyes is not subjective. Big Mac combos are "subjective" too when it comes to taste, but not subjective when they are compared to a healthy balanced meal.
It kind of is though. I generally prefer dark mode but when there's enough ambient light, I can deal with light mode just fine.
When I'm in a darker environment, light mode (even at very low brightness) is too bright, to the point where sometimes I can't even look at the screen.
A screen that I can't look at is, by definition, less readable than one that I can.
When I'm in a darker environment, light mode (even at very low brightness) is too bright, to the point where sometimes I can't even look at the screen.
A screen that I can't look at is, by definition, less readable than one that I can.
Context is important. For a lot of people, it is a subjective topic where they are more likely to comment based on personal experience ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Dark mode is good in the sense that I love it.
Using light mode apps, especially in the evening, is like a laser into my eyes, subjectively.
Using light mode apps, especially in the evening, is like a laser into my eyes, subjectively.
Turn the monitor brightness down.
I have it set to 5/100 and there's no problem using light mode all day and night.
I have it set to 5/100 and there's no problem using light mode all day and night.
I do design work, in addition to building stuff. I need to see colors "as-is" (to the degree that's ever a thing) fairly often. 5/100 brightness wouldn't be great, and even syntax-highlighting gets murky at low brightness, I'm guessing?
Is there anything visible at that point. There always seems to be someone advocating impractical solutions simply because they believe these solutions work for them personally.
My monitor's absolute lowest brightness is ideal for me in diffuse daylight (normal working conditions) and tolerable (still not too bright) in the evening. It is annoying that they don't go even lower, but it works for me. My phone's brightness slider goes all the way down to a comfortable level for night, at the very lowest setting.
Depends on your specific display. Mine is at brightness 16 at home, and 0 or 2 at work.
Of course, everything is visible. Perfectly visible, not as some sort of compromise.
Of course, everything is visible. Perfectly visible, not as some sort of compromise.
The point is you want your screen to annoy you so you don’t use it in that time.
The point is I'm gonna use my devices at night so I'd like them not to attack me when I do so.
We have invented light bulb at the beginning of 20th century. You will definitely find its descendant in your room. Try to use it.
I don't want my room to be bright, I want my devices to be at a comfortable brightness level for my dimly lit room! :)
> Dark mode is good in the sense that I love it.
I love it so much that I've been using it since my Atari 600 XL and Commodore 64 days.
At times it's been complicated: I remember the early IntelliJ IDEs had no dark-mode but you could configure one yourself (and it was lots of work). Or Windows: the rare time when I worked on Windows I couldn't get a dark mode to work but I remember I could "dim" the laser white background into a light grey and Word would show a slightly grey background.
Linux / Emacs: zero issue configuring these with dark modes of course.
As an anecdote at 51 y/o I need, at long last, to go see an ophthalmologist to measure my now failing eyes.
But spending most of my life from 11 y/o to 51 y/o in front of computer screen, I'd say all these decades without glasses was a good run.
I love it so much that I've been using it since my Atari 600 XL and Commodore 64 days.
At times it's been complicated: I remember the early IntelliJ IDEs had no dark-mode but you could configure one yourself (and it was lots of work). Or Windows: the rare time when I worked on Windows I couldn't get a dark mode to work but I remember I could "dim" the laser white background into a light grey and Word would show a slightly grey background.
Linux / Emacs: zero issue configuring these with dark modes of course.
As an anecdote at 51 y/o I need, at long last, to go see an ophthalmologist to measure my now failing eyes.
But spending most of my life from 11 y/o to 51 y/o in front of computer screen, I'd say all these decades without glasses was a good run.
Yeah I'm not using dark mode for any "health" reasons in the first place. It's to avoid pain.
[deleted]
The point though is that while one might "love it" and dark mode might feel like "laser into the eyes" to them, it can also mean reduced eyesight and increased vision problems mid/long term - not "subjectively", but objectively.
To make an analogy, excercize also feels like an exhausting experience for many people, and they "love" and prefer lounging on a couch, but long term they'd live more and be healthier if they did it more of the former and less of the latter.
To make an analogy, excercize also feels like an exhausting experience for many people, and they "love" and prefer lounging on a couch, but long term they'd live more and be healthier if they did it more of the former and less of the latter.
> it can also mean reduced eyesight and increased vision problems mid/long term
[Citation needed]
The article mentions several studies, including short-term discomfort from digital eye strain associated with excessive screen use (regardless of color theme) and improved reading accuracy with light themes, but I don't see anything associating dark themes with long-term vision issues.
[Citation needed]
The article mentions several studies, including short-term discomfort from digital eye strain associated with excessive screen use (regardless of color theme) and improved reading accuracy with light themes, but I don't see anything associating dark themes with long-term vision issues.
Then switch on the lights in your room? Why doing complex retheming and suffering pain if you don't when you can just flip the switch?
Ah yes, let me turn on the lights when my roommate is already sleeping just to be able to use light mode.
Or you could just use a table lamp, or any other background lighting. Instead of that you will be complaining about pain in your eyes, band aiding it with dark mode and go blind before 40 years old.
Using dark mode makes you blind? That’s a new one.
No, looking into only source of light during night makes your eye to strain which can make you blind.
Dark mode has basically become unusable for me as I've aged and my vision has gotten worse due to uncorrectable/partially correctable astigmatism. Black text on white-ish backgrounds is far more readable, whereas white text on black background makes each character act like its own little point light and cause all kinds of eye strain
I have the same problem but its not actually the text that matters but the bright background will constrict your pupils, reducing the amount of lens they use, which reduces the distortion. If I'm in a bright room the mode doesn't matter, but if I'm in a dark room I have to blast the background to constrict those pupils to get a clear image.
Dark mode, light mode ... Just switch on the light in the room and stop looking into light source while sitting in the dark. That's why your eyes hurt, when your irises need to constantly expand and contract. Dark mode is reducing amount of light coming through but does not solve the root cause of no background light.
That’s a great way to annoy someone else that may already be sleeping in the room.
We have also invented table lamps which you can put behind the monitor and achieve same result without switching lights in whole room.
Am I the only one that uses light mode at day and dark mode at night? I see this topic light vs dark so often and wonder why nobody mentions that approach..
I have a shortcut in my vim which just toggles my light/dark themes and I use it regularly.
I have a shortcut in my vim which just toggles my light/dark themes and I use it regularly.
I thought that’s what everyone did! Apple OSs have a setting to do this at sunset/sunrise or at certain times. I have mine go dark at 10pm and light at 10am.
Same here, I cannot stand looking at dark mode UI in a well lit space. There's not enough contrast. When I work after dark, I'll swap over of course.
„which swaps the standard white background for black“
I tried, but I just can’t believe anything written after that statement. The default was white (or green or orange) on black.
All these white backgrounds are fairly new - probably there are more years with white than black backgrounds, but that’s not how my old brain think of time.
I tried, but I just can’t believe anything written after that statement. The default was white (or green or orange) on black.
All these white backgrounds are fairly new - probably there are more years with white than black backgrounds, but that’s not how my old brain think of time.
You talk about terminals? They talk about websites (or real text made for reading) where their statement is true.
> I tried, but I just can’t believe anything written after that statement. The default was white (or green or orange) on black.
The vast majority of the world's population have rarely or never used a monochrome computer screen. Even when they were common, the bulk of what people read, _even people who used such monitors_, was black on white - it was paper.
The vast majority of the world's population have rarely or never used a monochrome computer screen. Even when they were common, the bulk of what people read, _even people who used such monitors_, was black on white - it was paper.
Paper doesn’t emit light, which makes the white background very different in nature.
Black text on a white background has been the most common on new computers since around the mid-80s.
In the Unix world it became common with the introduction of the X Window System.
In the personal computer world it also became common with the launch of Microsoft Windows 1.0 and Apple Macintosh.
In the Unix world it became common with the introduction of the X Window System.
In the personal computer world it also became common with the launch of Microsoft Windows 1.0 and Apple Macintosh.
Well this just isn’t true. You can’t take the release dates of those OSes and claim everyone had fancy GUIs starting then.
Mac was always a tiny fraction of the market. No one used Windows 1.0. High end UNIX workstations were extremely rare.
What was common was DOS, the other home micros, and dumb terminals. All black background.
Mac was always a tiny fraction of the market. No one used Windows 1.0. High end UNIX workstations were extremely rare.
What was common was DOS, the other home micros, and dumb terminals. All black background.
Screens that put out light, I can't handle light mode. On OLED at least, dark mode means the only light entering my eyes is what I'm trying to see. I read a lot. Heaven help you if your "dark mode" is gray background, chaotic evil. I don't really mind any mode on LCD displays, I just generally dislike LCD displays.
You know what I would love, a high refresh rate, high resolution color e-ink or similar. You couldn't sit in the dark to use it, but it would probably be ideal for everything except watching video.
You know what I would love, a high refresh rate, high resolution color e-ink or similar. You couldn't sit in the dark to use it, but it would probably be ideal for everything except watching video.
Dark modes aren't made equal. Some have proper contrast and are generally easier to look at than light modes even in proper background lighting (especially when the light version overuses various shades of gray), some are rather painful to use - and I'm not even speaking about aesthetics.
There are apps and websites where dark mode is a massive win, but when coding with colored syntax, you won't beat light background both on- and off-screen (doesn't mean I don't sometimes end up coding in a dark room using a dark terminal anyway :P)
There are apps and websites where dark mode is a massive win, but when coding with colored syntax, you won't beat light background both on- and off-screen (doesn't mean I don't sometimes end up coding in a dark room using a dark terminal anyway :P)
I certainly agree about dark modes being different. I've used vim with black background and white text (and bright colors in the syntax highlighting) for many years now, but whenever I try dark mode in other editors they are mostly shades of grey and completely unreadable. Do people really use dark grey background with a less dark font?
Personally I suffer eye strain without dark mode, but dark does not means black, I tend to use dark grey colors without too much contrast.
The only app I use in dark mode is Visual Studio Code. I've tried using dark mode across all apps, but I never got used to it.
I use Mixed Mode: white on black for terminals and code editors, black on white for everything else. What I notice is that white backgrounds start to be a problem when ambient light is low, towards evening. I compensate by dimming the screen. Another thing that I notice is that small text is more difficult to read on black backgrounds.
My understanding on this is that you need to combine dark mode with something that cuts blue light to reduce eye strain.
I've been experimenting with "red mode" for reading at night, I.e. filtering all colors except red and black. Works really well especially with an OLED screen.
I've been experimenting with "red mode" for reading at night, I.e. filtering all colors except red and black. Works really well especially with an OLED screen.
I don't understand how something that is pleasing to the eye can be bad for it. Dark mode seems to give me less eyestrain. Websites have so much white space that white mode makes my eyes fatigued faster. Just bright LED light.
I always had problems with dark mode and daylight. Also the dark mode is often not very good designed. Lack of contrast is often the case. Apple does a very good Job but others not (i.e. dark design in vs code or win 11)
I always thought dark mode was good in dark surroundings and light mode was good in light surroundings.
If light mode feels blinding in light surroundings, turn your brightness down. Your screen has this setting.
If light mode feels blinding in light surroundings, turn your brightness down. Your screen has this setting.
(2019)
[deleted]
has there been claims that dark mode are easier on your eyes in any context? I always assumed it to be the case only for low environmental light situations: watching entertainment or coding.
other than this benefit, I use dark mode to save on battery in OLED displays
other than this benefit, I use dark mode to save on battery in OLED displays
> The iPhone X was the first Apple phone to launch with an OLED screen.
Funny they almost write this like Apple was pioneering this. The iPhone X was released 8 years after the Samsung Galaxy S, which was the first OLED smartphone.
Funny they almost write this like Apple was pioneering this. The iPhone X was released 8 years after the Samsung Galaxy S, which was the first OLED smartphone.
Explicitly specifying “Apple” is almost like not specifying “Apple”? Did you “almost” fail to mention Samsung?
In the context of the article, the sentence preceding the one quoted above is "Until recently, most phones were made with LCD screens", which I imagine is why it stuck out.
I'm sure there will be disagreement about whether that's sufficient grounds to find it amusing, but at least personally it feels like "recently" is ambiguous enough to be impossible for people to disagree on how accurate it is. Personally, the fact that eight years is around half the time that smart phones have even existed that while saying "most phones didn't have it until recently" might be correct, it certainly feels like it's missing some important context.
I'm sure there will be disagreement about whether that's sufficient grounds to find it amusing, but at least personally it feels like "recently" is ambiguous enough to be impossible for people to disagree on how accurate it is. Personally, the fact that eight years is around half the time that smart phones have even existed that while saying "most phones didn't have it until recently" might be correct, it certainly feels like it's missing some important context.
You didn't include the sentence where they call out Samsung explicitly:
> Until recently, most phones were made with LCD screens. The iPhone X was the first Apple phone to launch with an OLED screen. Other phones with OLED displays include the Samsung Galaxy S10 and the Huawei Mate P30. For these phones, dark mode can offer healthy battery saving capabilities.
I don't read that as acting like Apple pioneered anything, but I do read it as assuming that most consumers choose Apple and therefore the moment that Apple included OLED LCDs were no longer "most phones".
Which, while frustrating to someone like me who is tired of Android always being treated as an off-brand afterthought, is reflective of reality in the US.
> Until recently, most phones were made with LCD screens. The iPhone X was the first Apple phone to launch with an OLED screen. Other phones with OLED displays include the Samsung Galaxy S10 and the Huawei Mate P30. For these phones, dark mode can offer healthy battery saving capabilities.
I don't read that as acting like Apple pioneered anything, but I do read it as assuming that most consumers choose Apple and therefore the moment that Apple included OLED LCDs were no longer "most phones".
Which, while frustrating to someone like me who is tired of Android always being treated as an off-brand afterthought, is reflective of reality in the US.
Why are they talking about the S10... the S5 had an amoled screen.
According to Wikipedia, the S4, S III, S II, and some S models also had AMOLED screens.
Sure, but the choice of then mentioning the Galaxy S10 (2019) next to the iPhone X (2017) seems like a weird choice, when the Galaxy GT-I7500 (2009) as well as Galaxy S1 (2010) already had AMOLED 9-10 years before that.
I had an HTC Desire with AMOLED before the release of Galaxy S. Not saying that was the first one either.
I mixed it up. It wasn't the Galaxy S1, but the Galaxy GT-I7500:
> First released 29 June 2009; 15 years ago
> Display 320 x 480 px, 3.2 in, AMOLED, Touchscreen
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Galaxy_(original)
About one year before HTC Desire.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTC_Desire
> First released 29 June 2009; 15 years ago
> Display 320 x 480 px, 3.2 in, AMOLED, Touchscreen
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Galaxy_(original)
About one year before HTC Desire.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTC_Desire
[deleted]
>>> first Apple phone to launch
Becomes "first ... phone to launch". People don't instantly recognize brand names as adjectives. Part of our brains drops them as we read. An options for a writer aiming for clarity would be "Apple's first phone to launch with an OLED", but that doesn't place "Apple" beside "first". Leveraging subtext and association makes for better marketing.
Becomes "first ... phone to launch". People don't instantly recognize brand names as adjectives. Part of our brains drops them as we read. An options for a writer aiming for clarity would be "Apple's first phone to launch with an OLED", but that doesn't place "Apple" beside "first". Leveraging subtext and association makes for better marketing.
They would almost be writing it like that, if they were making statements without qualification.
But luckily they were not.
But luckily they were not.