Web Safe Colors

[dtm32236]

Do you guys use web-safe colors for HTML?

I figure that with today's monitors and high color quality settings, almost any color will look the same on all machines.

I thought I'd get opinions on this.

[dragonfly7358]

No

For my sites I assume people have more than 256 colors. Monitors, let alone OS and browsers, have slight differences on how they display colors.

[SyCo]

I haven't used web safe colours since 2000. Look at all those web 2.0 gradients!

[tracknut]

Do you guys use web-safe colors for HTML?

I figure that with today's monitors and high color quality settings, almost any color will look the same on all machines.

Yes, but if you're a photographer or otherwise very concerned about color rendition on your customer's monitor, "...look the same on all machines" can get to be quite the nightmare. Virtually nobody's monitor is regularly calibrated, and while you should calibrate your own, you are likely to get into discussions with your customers about your "dark photos" or "light photos" etc.

Dave

[matt.ritter]

Yes, but if you're a photographer or otherwise very concerned about color rendition on your customer's monitor, "...look the same on all machines" can get to be quite the nightmare. Virtually nobody's monitor is regularly calibrated, and while you should calibrate your own, you are likely to get into discussions with your customers about your "dark photos" or "light photos" etc.
Dave

While it is very important to remember that all monitors will look very different.. using web-safe colors will have no impact on that. And actually could make things worse.

[dtm32236]

Thanks guys.

Look at all those web 2.0 gradients!

huh? what does that mean?

[SyCo]

web 2.0 - the tag name for the new wave in web-design. Often there's a colour gradient, usually from light to dark. In doing so it uses lots and lots of non websafe colours.

From the often mocked 'Simple Way to Redesign for Web 2.0'
2 column CSS layout
image reflections
whitespace
Color gradients
and the obligatory Beta Badge

[dragonfly7358]

Gotta love the

obligatory Beta Badge

Personally if it is beta you don't need to launch it. Guess its cool not to finish what you start.

[dtm32236]

web 2.0 - the tag name for the new wave in web-design. Often there's a colour gradient, usually from light to dark. In doing so it uses lots and lots of non websafe colours.

From the often mocked 'Simple Way to Redesign for Web 2.0'
2 column CSS layout
image reflections
whitespace
Color gradients
and the obligatory Beta Badge

no no no.... "web 2.0" has nothing to do with design or layout.

web 2.0 is about accessibility and functionality of websites and applications used on the web. Web 2.0 is all about "rich user experience" and the possibilities of new services on the web.

nothing at all to do with design. that's a common misconception.

who cares about 2 column layouts or image reflections, color gradients or whitespace. this has nothing to do with anything.

Tim O'Reilly is the person that coined the term "web 2.0". Here you can read what 2.0 really is:
http://oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html

[dragonfly7358]

no no no.... "web 2.0" has nothing to do with design or layout.

Nope, it depends on context.

From a programming context, web 2.0 is all about the application.
From a design point, web 2.0 is as described by SyCo

Coining a "Term" does not mean you name how and what it can refer to. If that was the case it would be a word.

[SyCo]

Tim O'Reilly is the person that coined the term "web 2.0".

web 5.0 - where children print out pages of text, bind them into a tactile readable format and sit with their parents trying to understand them.

sweet, I have a term.

[dtm32236]

Point taken - but who said "hmmm... 'web design of the future' should be a 2 column layout with image reflections and a bunch of gradients"?

That's that stupidest thing I've heard. I hope to god that all new websites don't look like that. As a matter of fact, I'm sick of the reflected logos already. They're all over the place. And who says that that's what a 'nice' site should look like? That's absurd.

Anyway, Web 2.0 as a design standard was initially a misconception of the term "Web 2.0" - referring to usability.

[SyCo]

Point taken - but who said "hmmm... 'web design of the future' should be a 2 column layout with image reflections and a bunch of gradients"?

no-one, that was kind of my point, the wave of 2.0 design (not functionality) is so forumulaic. I think it looks nice but these designs of today will most likelt represent a clerly defined period in web design. The next big thing is right around the corner.:)

[dtm32236]

no-one, that was kind of my point, the wave of 2.0 design (not functionality) is so forumulaic. I think it looks nice but these designs of today will most likelt represent a clerly defined period in web design. The next big thing is right around the corner.:)

I can agree with that.

[TJ111]

I think the next big thing is elaborate graphics and very 'hand-made' looking layouts. For an example, a beautiful site is http://webdesignerwall.com , and it looks and functions perfectly with javascript disabled. I can see more and more sites moving to things like that in an effort to stand out and look modern (similar to how sites now all try to look "web 2.0").

But technically speaking web 2.0 refers to dynamic content, Ie ajax based pages, where users are presented with interactive pages instead of static html pages. I'm not going to argue about it, because I agree people design sites to look "web 2.0", but that doesn't technically make it a "web 2.0" site.

[dtm32236]

wow - that's a crazy (and very well made) site.

[dtm32236]

wow - that's a great, and very impressive site...

EDIT: sorry - didn't mean to post twice