A Wild Font/Colour Combo Appeared!

You can tell I'm not used to trying to make things pretty...

OK.

Before we start, a call to action!

If you're interested in seeing the stuff that's going up on the new channel, please go subscribe here . I can't get a custom channel name until I hit 100 subscribers, so it'd be a big help!

ANYWAY.

LAST TIME on Jill Makes A New Channel (and actually tries to think things through before launching it rather than just winging it like she did previously) I had been sent a cute little lightbulb design by Josh (my tame artist).

The interim result: a colour combo (green, white, yellow accent), a font (note that it's pretty decorative, and so I won't use it for large blocks of text), and a little tweak to make it unique (lightbulb dots on the 'i's!)

BUT! 

Solomon (hi Solomon!) helpfully pointed out in my last post that considering the contrast levels for people with vision impairment might be a good idea! So I looked up this handy tool: 

https://snook.ca/technical/colour_contrast/colour.html#fg=33FF33,bg=333333 

Now obviously, a logo doesn't need to comply with any visibility guidelines, because hey, logo, but it seems sensible to see if the colours I want to use can be tweaked sufficiently to make them at least partially compliant.

The big one seems to be contrast ratio, which is supposed to be 3:1 or greater for larger fonts.

Contrast Ratio

So the colour I used in the previous post was 04b79b (the left hand square). How's that look with bright white?

Brightness Difference: (>= 125)  128.713 (fine)
Colour Difference: (>= 500) 423 (eh)
Are colours compliant? Sort of... (OK...)
Contrast Ratio 2.54 (too low)
WCAG 2 AA Compliant NO
WCAG 2 AA Compliant (18pt+) NO
WCAG 2 AAA Compliant NO
WCAG 2 AAA Compliant (18pt+) NO

So brightness difference is OK, but the colour difference isn't as high as it could be, and the contrast ratio is not high enough for my liking.

I tried a similar colour (04b1a2) which was better, (second from the left) but still not 3:1.

OK, what would it take to be TOTALLY SUPER AMAZINGLY WCAG AAA Compliant for 18pt+? 

Third square.

Mmm...no?

Too dark for my taste. Doesn't really go with the 'bright' theme. Or as my husband put it: SCIENCE IS THE ONLY LIGHT IN THE DARRRRRKNESSSSSS. I like the colour on its own but...mmm...for now...

A COMPROMISE!

I draw your attention to the right hand square.

Brightness Difference: (>= 125) 141.353 (yay!)
Colour Difference: (>= 500) 461 (eh, almost)
Are colours compliant? sort of...
Contrast Ratio 3.05 (score!)
WCAG 2 AA Compliant NO (but it doesn't need to be)
WCAG 2 AA Compliant (18pt+) YES (this is what we wanted!)
WCAG 2 AAA Compliant NO (see above)
WCAG 2 AAA Compliant (18pt+) NO (ditto)

And this is where we're up to so far.  I fiddled around with the yellow until I found one I liked, and we're good.

Hooray!

Now we need some channel art, a photo, and maybe also a logo to use as a channel watermark. (Not the initials of the channel, because...ahem, this is not BS.)

I think I need to do something with it, as right now on the channel banner it looks kinda...boring, like I made it in MS Paint. But as a placeholder it's all good.

Next instalment might not be for a couple of days, as I must get on with the things you actually Patronise me for, but this series will continue (if you're interested) as I get everything else in order!

(And man, is there a lot of stuff to think about if you actually plan it rather than winging it. Last time I just did it piecemeal so the work was all spread out, so I didn't notice how much I had to do. This way is more organised though!)