Blue is supposedly bad for two reasons:
* chromatic aberration: white light entering into a prism or other lens refracts, i. e., bends. The amount of refraction depends on wavelength. Short wavelength light, which usually is perceived as blue, bends more than other wavelengths. (You can see this by noting that the spectrum created by a prism has red on the top and blue/violet on the bottom.) As a result, no lens can sharply image all wavelengths at the same distance. The eye’s lens tends to focus long and middle wavelengths, leaving short wavelength a bit blurred. In theory, it should be more difficult to see fine detail in blue.
* foveal tritanopia: the fovea has the highest resolution for perceiving fine detail. There are no short wave cones in the very center, the area of maximum resolution, so presumably it is impossible to see blue when an image falls there.
nsaspook wrote: »
In theory, it should be more difficult to see fine detail in blue.
vtmaps wrote: »
In theory, theory and practice are the same, in practice they are not. Nsaspook's observations might well be correct because of chromatic aberration in the eye's optics (different colors light are refracted differently) and for many other reasons.