![[challenge entry]](/images/board_posticon_c.gif "Challenge Entry: Conjoined Celebs"){kind=small}
Bullfrog
From the Conjoined Celebs challenge. See all 1174 entries (closed)
(, Wed 1 Oct 2003, 7:18, archived)
ba-dumtish
TJ: can anyone identify this eyechart's font for me? Pretty please?
www.nap.edu/html/visual_impairments/ch2_f1.html
(,
Wed 1 Oct 2003, 7:21,
archived)
TJ: can anyone identify this eyechart's font for me? Pretty please?
www.nap.edu/html/visual_impairments/ch2_f1.html
that is the most useful thingi've seen in ages
it's wizardry, I tell thee
(,
Wed 1 Oct 2003, 7:25,
archived)
it's wizardry, I tell thee
Ican't read it clearly.
budum dum tish
(budum dum tish
DrPoppers Touched by his noodly appendage,
Wed 1 Oct 2003, 7:23,
archived)
"Farao Black"was the closest, (though the R is wrong). Tried to charge me $36 for it, so I nicked the letters I needed from the preview. Haha, nobs.
I've got a sneaking suspicion it's just a really bold Courier..
(,
Wed 1 Oct 2003, 7:58,
archived)
I've got a sneaking suspicion it's just a really bold Courier..
Courier New doesold-skool Courier is more square
One on the left is New
edit: here's the original chart one:
(,
Wed 1 Oct 2003, 8:12,
archived)
One on the left is New
edit: here's the original chart one:
thatapproach to diagnosing blindness and visual impairment in children hasn't been used for a few years, for good reason.
edit: this is good though "With charts of the recommended and more modern design, the literal application of the SSA criterion is that the standard is met when no letters at all can be read at the 20/160 level or smaller. However, the common practice has been and remains testing acuity with charts that have no intermediate sizes between 20/100 and 20/200. As it has been most commonly applied, this means that the SSA standard is met when no letters at all can be read at the 20/100 size or smaller. We are not recommending a change from the criterion for Impairment of Central Visual Acuity. We do, however, recommend standardization of chart design, which would raise policy issues for SSA. "
edit edit: a lot of that is valid, but a lot is about 10 years behind or so. Not wrong, there is just newer research. And I'm going to shut up now, because I'm the biggest nerd on the planet.
(edit: this is good though "With charts of the recommended and more modern design, the literal application of the SSA criterion is that the standard is met when no letters at all can be read at the 20/160 level or smaller. However, the common practice has been and remains testing acuity with charts that have no intermediate sizes between 20/100 and 20/200. As it has been most commonly applied, this means that the SSA standard is met when no letters at all can be read at the 20/100 size or smaller. We are not recommending a change from the criterion for Impairment of Central Visual Acuity. We do, however, recommend standardization of chart design, which would raise policy issues for SSA. "
edit edit: a lot of that is valid, but a lot is about 10 years behind or so. Not wrong, there is just newer research. And I'm going to shut up now, because I'm the biggest nerd on the planet.
gracielou,
Wed 1 Oct 2003, 8:19,
archived)