Sadly web browsers don’t draw half pixels, so there’s not much I can do here without using a different method of drawing the dots.
At least your dark theme can distinguish the different dots, mine can’t:
On the other hand, the challenge becomes a lot easier with dark theme:, 0, 1, 0, -1, 0, 0 
Lol, casual
However, that might make for a good baseline, placebo measurement for each person to account for screen, browser, device differences
I wonder how it changes if the stones are lined up next to each other in straight rows, like they would be on a board. I think that might it easier.
Interesting experiment!
1, 1, 2, 1, 0 (on my mobile screen)
I’m still for keeping digital stones the same size though, making them line up perfectly is more important than making perceived area the same.
The Android app Gridmaster slightly squishes the grid to fill up more of the screen. Depending on whether you have more space vertically or horizontally, the board may look like one of these extremes, or something in between:
I don’t think about it on bigger boards, but on small boards I often fiddle with it (by adjusting the height of the bottom panel, leaving more/less space for the board) until it is approximately square, because the small gaps annoy me 
Also worth noting that most “flat” themes use a black border around the white stones. This is obviously needed on a white background (i. e. in a book), but also on a wood background it helps with the contrast.
This gives us another parameter to adjust: we can change the size of the white circles and the white stones independently, by changing the thickness of the border. For my counting game, I used a thicker border for a more “playful” look.
For the problem videos I’ve done, I’ve instead used a flat theme without any borders at all:
At least when the stones are as big as here, I don’t think the contrast is an issue.
I don’t really have a strong preference between these options, I think they can all look good under the right circumstances. Which options do you like for flat white stones? (assume the black stones are always solid black)
0 voters
Also, do you prefer small gaps (like in the OGS screenshot above) or no gaps (like in the video)?
0 voters
I like the no border version of flat white stones so much it was my first post on the forum and still my most popular contribution 
I still always use this theme to play on OGS
Related to the question of different sizes, I also experimented with an 8 bit style copying from Hayauchi Super Igo and never was quite satisfied with the result. That game has slightly different shapes for black and white along with different shadows, although to my eyes the result is still white stones look larger
I can’t tell the difference of the “thick” border as compared to the “thin” one.
I think some border is necessary.
I realized it’d be much better if I referred to a general concept, instead of specific definition, just to spark ideas rather than invite challenges. The original point was to change perspectives and let foreground be background (some kind of duality - in general English) like this.
You already have a smart solution by just changing the background picture. Let me extend it and combine the Escher’s idea. Let the lines be wider and wider across the board, the stones will still be on lines (and intersections). But visually they will appear in squares. It’s still the same board, same game, and same rules.
It looks really cool 
I see Maharani made an L19 thread at the same time: Visualize go this way, make it 30 times easier to count • Life In 19x19
That one didn’t get as much interest.
1,0,2,2,1 → ave=1.2
Where is that from? OGS or another server with some visual mods or is it genuinely hosted like that somewhere
I think the reason that the diameter of a go stone is slightly larger than the smaller of the two line distances is to make them hold together a bit. But wouldn’t making a depression centered at each intersection be a more effective way to keep the stones in place? But I have never seen a go board with depressions at the intersections. I wonder why no one has tried this. With slightly smaller diameter stones, it should work very well.
I think that 9p players (and maybe 9d as well) keep a mental count of territories, at least through the end game if not throughout. That way they always know if they are ahead or not and can adjust tactics and maybe even strategy appropriately. Just my speculation,
I think that practice is also common for players (much) weaker than 9p/9d. Even strong kyu players (like 3k EGF or stronger) may do this in serious tournament games with longer time settings.
The main reason of the difference of diameter is to have them look the same size.
Some goban with small holes or cavities were already produced for blind players.
Since you are replying to me, I clarify: I was not talking at all about the difference in diameter between white and black stones, nor was I referring to the advantage of holes or cavities for blind and visually impaired players.
My answer was informative at least for others who read your post.
It was not informative for me. I am serious about my suggestion to try out a depression at each intersection. While it certainly would not work the same way a magnetic board does, I think it would provide a new level of comfort for all of us who love real boards and stones: much less fiddling with the positions of stones so as to see their relationships more clearly.
To clarify: I am not opposed to assistive technologies for blind and visually impaired people; indeed, I have done a bit of work and am educated in that area.
But my interest in go is here focused on a specific serious proposal. Does anyone agree that playing Go would be easier and more fun with a board that works the way I described?
