Vision simulator

Vision specimen
deuteranopia · 100%

#EF4444

seen as #837442

Collides

#F97316

seen as #B99417

Collides

#EAB308

seen as #EEBA0D

Collides

#22C55E

seen as #A19363

Collides

#14B8A6

seen as #8089A9

Collides

#3B82F6

seen as #4D74F3

#8B5CF6

seen as #4A70F1

#EC4899

seen as #727A95

Collides
Collision checkΔE < 15 after simulation

#14B8A6#EC4899

ΔE 595.9

#EF4444#22C55E

ΔE 7611.4

#F97316#EAB308

ΔE 2512.3

#F97316#22C55E

ΔE 6012.4

ModelDeutan
Strength100%
Swatches8
Collisions4

Color Blindness Simulator

See a palette or an image the way a colour-blind reader does — protan, deutan, tritan, and full achromatopsia, with severity as a slider rather than an on/off switch. Pairs that started clearly distinct and end up indistinguishable are flagged, so you get a list of collisions instead of a picture to squint at.

Deficiency types
4
Of men have one
~8%
Severity, not a switch
0-1
Bytes uploaded
0

Step by step

How to use it

  1. 01Bring in the colours

    A set of swatches from your palette, or an image — a chart, a screenshot, a map. Everything is transformed on your machine.

  2. 02Pick the deficiency

    Deutan is the most common and the right default. Protan darkens reds noticeably; tritan collapses blue and green; achromatopsia removes hue entirely and is the strictest test of whether your design works on lightness alone.

  3. 03Move severity off the extremes

    Most colour-blind people have anomalous trichromacy — a reduced response rather than a missing cone. Checking at partial severity is closer to the common experience than checking only at 1.0.

  4. 04Read the flagged collisions

    Pairs that were clearly different before the transform and are nearly identical after it are listed explicitly. That list is the actionable output — the picture is just the evidence.

Worked example

The pair that always collides

Red and green status indicators are the canonical failure, and they fail in the most common deficiency there is. The distances below are why.

Given

Success
a mid green
Error
a mid red
Simulating
deuteranopia

Distinct before, indistinguishable after

before   red and green sit far apart in hue
         and at similar lightness
         a sighted reader separates them instantly

after    both transform toward the same
         yellow-brown, and their lightness
         was already close
         -> the pair is flagged as a collision

fix      change lightness, or add a shape:
         a tick and a cross survive every mode
Distinct before
yes
Distinct after
no
Cheapest fix
a second cue

Red and green are chosen for status because they are opposites in hue — which is exactly the axis that red-green deficiency removes. The pair also tends to sit at similar lightness, so once hue is gone there is nothing left to tell them apart. Any fix that only changes the hues is treating the symptom; separating them in lightness, or adding an icon, fixes the cause.

Before you rely on colour

What to know about colour vision deficiency

Never let colour be the only signal

This is the whole of the guidance and it is easy to satisfy: a shape, an icon, a label, a pattern, or a position alongside the colour. A chart with direct labels and a status list with a tick and a cross work for everyone, including people looking at a bad projector in a bright room.

Red-green is the common case by a wide margin

Deutan and protan together account for the overwhelming majority — roughly 8% of men and 0.5% of women of northern European descent. Tritan is rare and achromatopsia rarer still, but both are useful as stress tests: a design that survives them survives everything.

Most people are not dichromats

Full absence of a cone type is the minority case; far more people have a shifted or weakened response, which the severity slider models. Checking only at full severity can make a design look catastrophic when the lived experience is subtler — and can also let a marginal design pass at zero.

Lightness survives every deficiency

Achromatopsia removes hue entirely and lightness still carries. That makes it the most useful single check you can run: if your interface still works in that mode, it works in all the others. It is also why separating status colours in lightness is more robust than separating them in hue.

Simulation approximates, it does not reproduce

These are matrix transforms of a well-studied model, not a window into someone's perception. They are excellent for catching collisions and no substitute for testing with colour-blind users when the stakes are high — a medical chart, a safety indicator, a financial dashboard.

Everything runs locally

Both the swatch transform and the image transform run in your browser, so an unreleased design or an internal dashboard screenshot never leaves the machine.

The judgement call

How do you fix a collision?

Once a pair is flagged, these are the repairs in rough order of robustness.

  • Status indicators, success and error

    Add a shape

    A tick and a cross survive every deficiency and every bad screen. The most robust fix there is.

  • Two lines on a chart

    Separate lightness

    Lightness is the one channel that survives all four modes. Dashes and markers help further.

  • Categorical series, many colours

    Label directly

    Beyond about five categories no palette is reliably distinguishable. Put the name next to the line.

  • A required-field or validation colour

    Add text

    A red border alone tells a colour-blind user nothing. The message is what carries the meaning.

  • A heat map or a sequential scale

    Use a single-hue ramp

    Vary lightness along one hue rather than crossing red to green, and the ordering stays readable in every mode.

  • A decorative colour with no meaning

    No action

    If nothing is communicated by the colour alone, a collision does not cost the reader anything.

Reference

What each mode models

Deuteranopia
Green cones absentThe most common form. Reds and greens converge toward a shared yellow-brown.
Protanopia
Red cones absentSimilar confusions to deutan, with reds noticeably darkened as well as shifted.
Tritanopia
Blue cones absentRare. Blues and greens converge, and yellows can read as pink.
Achromatopsia
No hue at allRarest, and the strictest test: whatever survives here is carried entirely by lightness.
Severity
0 to 1Models anomalous trichromacy — a weakened cone response — which is far more common than complete absence.
Collision flag
Distinct before, close afterOnly pairs that started clearly apart are flagged, so the list is the design regression rather than a list of similar colours.

FAQ

Questions, answered plainly

How do I check my design for colour blindness?

Load your palette or a screenshot and switch between the four modes, starting with deutan as the most common. Read the flagged collisions rather than judging by eye: those are the pairs that a sighted viewer separates easily and a colour-blind viewer cannot.

How common is colour blindness?

Roughly 8% of men and 0.5% of women of northern European descent have some form, and red-green deficiency accounts for the overwhelming majority. In practical terms, any interface with more than a handful of users has some.

Why do red and green status colours fail?

Red and green are opposites in hue, and hue is exactly the axis red-green deficiency removes. They also tend to sit at similar lightness, so once the hue difference is gone there is nothing left. Separating them in lightness helps; adding a tick and a cross fixes it outright.

What is the single most useful check?

Achromatopsia. It removes hue entirely, so anything still readable is being carried by lightness or by a non-colour cue. A design that survives that mode survives all the others, which makes it the fastest way to find out whether colour is doing work it should not be doing alone.

Is severity worth adjusting?

Yes. Complete absence of a cone type is the minority case — most colour-blind people have a reduced or shifted response, which is what the slider models. Checking only at full severity overstates the problem, and checking only at zero misses it.

Is this accurate enough to rely on?

The simulation is a matrix transform of a well-established model: reliable for finding collisions, and not a window into anyone's actual perception. For safety-critical or medical interfaces, use it to catch the obvious problems and then test with colour-blind users.

Both the swatch and image transforms run in your browser. Nothing is uploaded, which matters for unreleased designs and internal dashboards.