In a world where digital content is increasingly consumed on mobile phones and the prevalence of vision issues is on the rise, the need for accessibility, clarity, and legibility of digital images has never been more urgent.
Rhino offers visual accessibility testing via automated visual accessibility tests, including Cambridge Visual Clarity & APCA WCAG 3 Contrast to help organisations ensure their Hero Images and PDP gallery images are glance-readable on mobile.
Experts predict that by 2050, half of the global population could be myopic. As the world becomes more digital, ensuring content is clear, readable, and accessible is no longer optional—it’s essential. Poor contrast isn’t just a design flaw; it’s a barrier to access. The best way to grow your brand’s penetration is by improving your reach with mobile-ready, accessible content readable on screens and legible to older shoppers.
The implications for digital content are clear: as eyesight deteriorates across generations, ensuring that images and text are accessible to all users is not just a regulatory requirement; it is an imperative for how brands get seen properly in a screen-first world.
Rhino leverages the Advanced Perceptual Contrast Algorithm (APCA), which has been proposed as a better approach for measuring contrast in the upcoming WCAG 3.0 guidelines, to deliver perceptually accurate, context-aware contrast assessments explicitly designed for screens and modern digital experiences.
Rhino processes thousands of images rapidly, making it feasible for global brands to ensure all assets meet accessibility standards.
Using APCA, Rhino moves us beyond the limitations of the old WCAG 2x contrast ratio, providing more accurate results for both light and dark modes and reducing false positives and negatives.
Rhino uses the algorithm belonging to Cambridge University related to text legibility on screens and evaluates instantly whether the text size and stroke weight is sufficient.
APCA is based on how humans actually perceive contrast, rather than relying on a simple mathematical ratio as in WCAG 2. This means APCA more accurately predicts readability and legibility for real users.
WCAG 2’s ratio can produce false positives and false negatives because it does not align with human perception.
APCA considers text size, font weight, and context (such as background/foreground assignment), while WCAG 2 only distinguishes between “normal” and “large” text with fixed thresholds.
This allows APCA to set higher contrast requirements for small or thin text, and more flexibility for large or bold text, reflecting actual readability needs.
APCA’s contrast values are perceptually uniform; the same value means the same perceived contrast. WCAG 2’s ratio overstates contrast for dark colours and understates it for light ones, leading to inconsistent results.
APCA is more reliable for modern design needs, such as dark mode interfaces, where WCAG 2 can be off by 200–250%.
Independent tests show that 47% of colour pairs that pass WCAG 2 should actually fail accessibility, and 23% that fail WCAG 2 should actually pass. APCA corrects these errors, leading to more accessible and readable digital content.
APCA penalises problematic combinations more appropriately, improving legibility for users with colour vision deficiencies.
APCA provides designers with a broader, more usable palette of accessible colours, especially for non-body text elements like buttons or large headings, without sacrificing accessibility.
The algorithm is easier to apply in real-world scenarios, as it reflects the actual conditions users experience, including device screens and ambient lighting.
APCA is grounded in peer-reviewed research on visual acuity and contrast perception, making it a more scientifically robust standard than the WCAG 2 ratio.
APCA is a superior colour contrast test because it models human perception, adapts to context, and provides consistent results, leading to genuinely accessible experiences.
