Imagine you're watching a black-and-white movie on an old TV, and it looks kind of washed out. You fiddle with the contrast, and suddenly the movie looks much crisper and with better contrast. You're not actually seeing more colors -- its just grayscale -- but you can optimize it to give you more depth of perception.
That's what EnChroma does. It doesn't actually make you see red, but it heightens the contrast to make it stand out more.
So, does it just look like different green? Like still green, but you can tell it apart from "true" green? Like wearing them could you pass a colorblind test even though you still can't see red?
i can see reds and greens, but very similar shades next to each other, i can't tell. i also can't see either color very well when it's a really small sample size (for example, the green under my power switch on my wireless mouse to show that it's on).
the way i think about it is that people who aren't colorblind have a maximum green value that is much higher than mine. the enchroma glasses, which i've tried, effectively make greens more green. i feel like it makes things inaccurately colored, but exaggerates colors enough to be able to better differentiate. i still can't see past my "maximum green" value though, which is why those marketing videos of people crying are total bullshit. it just looks like a very saturated instagram filter. it doesn't make me see colors i haven't seen before.
i didn't try a color blindness test with them but i should have. the best memory i have of using it is that it was fall time and the leaves on a bush in my yard were turning red, but i had no idea until i put the glasses on, and i could distinctly tell which leaves were turning and which weren't.
i liked them and wanted to keep them, but i couldnt justify the $220 price or whatever it was, so i returned them. i want to get another pair some day
Colorblind person here. This debunking video is piling on more BS, like oh, colorblind people learned to be amazing at detecting slight color changes! No, we are not. We learned what names are attached to what color, but we see them differently, much poorer (save for blues). Enchroma apparently helps with separation, as parent comment suggests. That being said, the fake dramatic videos are definitely shameful scam, agreed.
What boggles my mind a bit is that true colorblindness glasses don't seem that difficult to me. Standard red-blue 3d glasses almost do it, it's just you need red-green differentiating glasses. I don't think this would Open the World of Color!, but it would with a bit of practice probably allow you to at least perceive a difference.
But the glasses need to be visibly-differently (to a non-color-blind person) tinted. If they look the same, they're not going to work. Just like a "blue-reducing" pair of glasses needs to look visibly yellow, or it clearly (in all senses of the term) isn't doing anything.
A truly optimal pair would take some sciencing but bashing something prototype-quality with something like https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0928YT83C would be a matter of holding up the cyan-ist of the films up to one eye and the magenta-ist of the films to the other, and looking at some red and green things, concentrating on which eye the object is bright in.
If one removes red while the other removes green, then if something looks dark through the lens that blocks green, and looks bright in the one that doesn't block green (but blocks red), then one could tell that it is green. (and visa versa for something red)
Not that this would give the same subjective experience of a person w/o colorblindness seeing red vs seeing green, but I wouldn't be surprised if it allows one to pass r/g colorblindness tests fairly well?
It wouldn't. It would subtract, but differently for each eye. Differential subtraction between two eyes is not addition, but it has certain characteristics in common with it.
I've tried them, they kind of make reds pop a little more.
But imagine this. You put on a pair of pink tinted glasses to fix your vision. Ok great, but everything is tinted now. I don't find it pleasing at all. My normal is my normal, putting tinted glasses on me doesn't make things look better, it looks wrong.
EDIT: I mean it'd probably be OK if I were just shooting a video--I can fumble through it connecting unreliably, or just do another take if it unexpectedly disconnects. But I'm doing multiple video calls a day, and the webcam built-in to my monitor "just works" every time. It's tough to justify the additional complexity for something that isn't working reliably.
That's why I started leaning toward "Clean HDMI". With that method, as long as the HDMI capture device works, everything should "just work" on the Mac side, and as long as the camera can output clean HDMI, it should also "just work." I'm not dealing with a poorly-supported software webcam utility, special USB signaling, or annoying inactivity timeouts.
But it looks like I'll need a different camera, and it won't be cheap, but at least it's an option.
I am not a chemist, but the following comment from a retr0bright video[1] claims that retr0bright works not by reversing the process, but by speeding it up.
Interestingly, The idea that the yellowing is from the Brominated Flame Retardants in the plastic is actually itself a myth. It's a sort of believable just-so story because people look up bromine, see it is brown, and go "ah, makes sense". The interaction doesn't actually involve the brominated Fame Retardants, and is a breakdown of the butadiene chain of the plastic polymer which is effectively an oxidization which is catalyzed by energy (whether light (UV being the most energetic), or Heat). This happens with All ABS plastics, including those that don't have any Tetrobromobisphenol-A. This is why UV Stabilisers and absorbers tend to be a common inclusion in the formula of ABS plastic. (And why when they are forgotten/omitted you see things like car recalls due to seatbelt fasteners degrading). The yellowing is effectively the molecular debris from that breakdown, which gives a colour to the plastic. Hydrogen Peroxide is a strong oxidizer- it works in retrobrite not by reversing the process, but actually speeding it up. It reverses the colour change because while it significantly speeds up the butadiene being broken down, it also breaks down the molecular debris that results from it, to smaller, colorless compounds. It will also interact with other compounds in the plastic- for example, those that might have been added for the factory colouring.The result is that the colour of the original plastic returns- possibly without any factory set colouring compounds as well. Another downside is that because the butadiene chain is still compromised, retrobrite can never restore the structure of the plastic, so it will remain brittle. I've seen suggestions that an acid might be able to chemically recompose the butadiene polymer. I was able to successfully test a paste of Oxalic Acid, without any sunlight exposure for example- though it took a week and the colour change was very small.
This might explain why direct sunlight can brighten plastic instead of yellowing it even more.
Technically, BS Zelda no Densetsu [1] is a re-release with updated graphics, but I see your point. I believe Zelda 1 & 2 gameplay do not translate well to modern audiences, so it's easier to just re-release them in their original form instead of merely updating textures or going for an all-new remake. Link's Awakening was a much fitter candidate for the latter.
By the way, the Oracle games were originally intended to be a remake of Zelda 1 [2].
reply