color codes for silver vs metal ?

[Steffen]

There always has been confusion about which color codes need to be used
for silver(ish) things or metal in our library.

I would like to sum up my state of knowledge and would like to discuss this here,
so the usage of color codes can be tidied up in our library.

Causing this post is the ongoing discussion at
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cg...144485.dat
(, there had been some before already at other parts)

This is my (personal) state of knowledge,
I may be wrong in one or the other point of course.
When replying, please just don't assume that I or you are "just right",
because the library sometimes has inconsistencies.

color 179:
means "printed silver".
that is a color being used in patterns that get printed onto parts

color 383:
from the beginning was a "special color", used for physical metal parts
which appear "silverish" or "chromish" :-) ,
thus, do not use this for copper or other metal things

color 494:
another very special color.
it has been introduced for "electric studs",
which show up in historic LEGO instructions as studs with a yellow portion.
some tools for this reason used to render or code this color as yellow,
but nowadays most render it similar to 383, which frequently leads to confusion.
IMHO, this color code should ONLY be used for electric studs, and not used
too liberately, because it carries not only the semantics "made of silverish/chrome metal",
but also "shall show up in instructions as yellow" and
"is somewhat related to electric studs"

color 80:
I didn't know much about this color for long time and have never used it.
But I think it is for silver plastic parts like this
http://media.peeron.com/pics/inv/custpic...848722.jpg


BrickLink has a very good, visual color comparison table
http://www.bricklink.com/catalogColors.a...itemType=P
, but sadly without LDRAW color codes.

IMHO, we definetely need such a table with visual part examples for our LDRAW library.

We also might or might not have to introduce new colors in ldconfig.ldr, or phase out some confusing ones
(and map them to others for downwards compatibility).

[Michael Heidemann]

Currently the following official files uses these colors:
This should help to find the correct usage for the color values.

color 179 (Flat_Silver)
part files: 3069bp07, 3069bp15, 3069bp25, 3069bp51, 3069bp53, 973p8g,
color 383 (Chrome_Silver)
lots of files, too much to list here.
color 494 (Electric Contact)
two part files (2895.dat and 2986c01.dat)
color 80 (Metallic_Silver)
seven part files (example: 973p6x.dat)

cu
mikeheide

[Steffen]

thank you very much for the analysis, Mike!

I would like to add this info:

color 494:
occurs also in p\studel.dat - this is what color 494 at its time had been added for:
a "symbolic" color, intended to make electric studs show yellow contacts in instructions.

usage in file 2895 seems to be an error to me, I would have used color 383.

usage in 2986c01.dat may have been done because the underside contacts are intended to be used
together with electric studs. Here are instructions I found by checking the instructions of sets on peeron which contain
that part:

http://www.peeron.com/scans/6483-1/23/ - underside cannot be seen, no contribution to our discussion

http://www.peeron.com/scans/8082-1/7 - underside visible, appears yellow in instructions

http://www.peeron.com/scans/8480-1/139 - underside seems to be not shown in yellow

http://www.peeron.com/scans/6979-1/16 - electric studs clearly shown in yellow, but underside of motor not shown

http://www.peeron.com/scans/6484-1/11 - electric studs shown in yellow, underside of motor not shown

[Michael Heidemann]

It just came to my mind that exactly that has been the reason for many new colors - to be interchangable with bricklink. If I remember right that has been the reason that the new ldconfig.ldr has been release some month ago.
So it should be possible to match bricklink to LDraw.

[Steffen]

at http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cg...144485.dat , Magnus wrote:

There is no doubt that this must be the right color here.
I have put together this picture, which shows good examples
of the different silver colors.



This picture has been confirmed by both
Scott Wardlow, manager of ldconfig.ldr and
Philippe Hurbain, creator of visualldconfig.mpd.

LDraw Pearl Colors
Should be used for parts made in a "metal-looking", sometimes "softer", plastic.
LDraw Metallic Colors
Should be used for painted/printed parts.

I apologize if I have contributed to this confusion.

[Steffen]

(I am copying and pasting the discussion from
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cg...144485.dat
, as that discussion will get lost once the file is released):

Magnus, Scott, Philo,

thank you very much for compiling that information!
The overview image is very instructive!

I fear that the semantics of these colors must have changed
in the past 8 years. I somehow must have missed that semantics change:
I remember that 383, 494 and "rubber black" in the early days
of LDRAW were the only "special" colors, and in those days,
usage was not the way as on your overview image here now.

However, the suggested colors purpose makes perfect sense.
It has several benefits:
(a) it gives 494 a "real" role, different from the special one
I described above
(b) it makes a difference between real metal parts and
silver colored plastic ones.

So I am 99% convinced that your table reflects the optimal solution
for using these colors, and we should use that.

There is just one remaining thing to talk about,
which also explains my confusion about this issue:

(i) we just released new parts with the recent update 2011-01,
which do not adhere to that spec, e.g.
4707c01.dat, ..., 4707c03.dat

(ii) many of my parts are now sitting for 8 years now on the PT, e.g.
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cg...s/3240.dat
, and they got CERT votes despite they use the colors not that way :-|

(iii) all the electric plugs
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptreviewsum...ctricplugs
currently do not use that scheme

So I am 99% convinced that your scheme is a good solution.
Should we decide to apply it, then we should do the following:
- add its information to the LDRAW color chart http://www.ldraw.org/Article93.html
, where it is currently missing
- extend ldconfig.ldr by more comments, e.g. listing some part numbers as examples to avoid confusion
- update the whole library to adhere to that scheme.

[Steffen]

as it is very difficult to use the various colors properly,
I think that we need a better color chart for the LDRAW colors, featuring some photos
of real parts, taken in a standard lighting environment, like marakoeschtra has done it with the minifigs,

see http://forums.ldraw.org/showthread.php?t...305#pid305

[Orion Pobursky]

I agree and I'll add that to the list of things to work on for the new site. In the mean time you are always welcome to create a version that you like on the wiki

[Steffen]

(deleted - I had replied to the wrong msg - will repost)

[Steffen]

yes, thank you.

My suggestion is to ask marakoeschtra if he would like to donate his minifig photos to us.
They have the advantage that 1 standard reference color is in each image (the minifig head) for comparison.
And I very much like to have minifigs as "protagonists" in the comparison chart :-))

For each color, we should also supply some example images of real world parts, to be more instructive

Does anyone know how to contact marakoeschtra ?
When googling, I only find that already some other people had that problem :S

[Steffen]

maybe here is a way to reach him: http://www.youtube.com/user/marakoeschtra

(just BTW: his creations are so incredibly awesome, just look here:

Farm: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=275447

Garbage Truck: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=211616

)

[Steffen]

Scott, could you please help us here in this issue?

Some last word from your side and from the other color experts might be helpful here.

Whatever is decided, the decision will affect some official and unofficial parts to be corrected.

But we need better systematics here. Currently, our library contains an inconsistent usage of these colors.

[Scott Wardlaw]

Where's the opposing argument? I have already backed the color chart that Philo put together.

I think the path forward is pretty simple...If the part in question is listed on Bricklink, then Bricklink will tell you which color(s) can be used. This matching is possible now that our color names match their color names. Since Bricklink's business is of buying and selling real parts, they tend to get these things right almost 100% of the time.

[Steffen]

there is no opposing argument.

after I saw the comparison sheet above, my original suggestion was proven wrong,
and I changed my mind.

I just was asking for a last confirmation,
because the decision requires changing a bunch of currently official files,
as well as unofficial ones currently on the PT.

May I ask for some documentation at
http://www.ldraw.org/library/tracker/ref/
about the colors in general, and especially the metal variants?

[Steffen]

Scott, Chris, maybe LSC,

I would like to get a final "go" from your side for this color change.

It will mean that we have to touch/correct a bunch of both official and unofficial files.

Steffen

[Scott Wardlaw]

Steffen, you should go forward using your best judgment in each situation that requires a change to a file.

Scott

[Steffen]

that's what I anyway do: never apply a rule just because it's a rule.

However, what I've been asking here is not exactly that,
but instead if we should apply the above table.

For this I need a definitive "yes" or "no" from preferredly both you and Chris
before I'd like to proceed.

The decision will affect e.g. the 12V train parts here:
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptreviewsum...intrack12v

and the battery boxes here:
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptreviewsum...tteryboxes

, and maybe some more files currently using color 383 or 494.

[Chris Dee]

I've now found the time to look at this and I agree with the suggestion. Attached is a list (as of 2011-12-07) of official and unofficial files that use colour codes 80, 135, 179, 383 and 494.

[Steffen]

Thank you very much, I'll now proceed applying that table.

[Magnus Forsberg]

Quote from http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cg...243c02.dat

Philo said:
"Now I'm lost! why use 494 for this part which is not an electrical contact? Why not 383???
...or do we consider that 494 goes on all metallic part (even if they are chromed) and 383 is used only for chromed ABS?"


I don't want to "throw more gravel in the machine", but I too wonder
if there are more then one "shade" of metal.

After looking at this picture I must agree with Philo.
http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/ping05...0-3-20.jpg
The shaft should use 494, but the spring 383?

Perhaps we could accept that colour 383 sometimes is used on very shiny/reflective metalparts.
It is, after all, only our way of creating a visual impression of something silvery.
And chromium plating is used on both plastic and metal.

[Steffen]

(continuing the quoting for completeness)

======================================================================
At Thu Dec 15 00:40:03 2011, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: novote
Comments:
I took from the mentioned thread that 383 only should be used
for lacquered plastic, whereas 494 would be "silverish" metal,
like the electric portions, but also metal axles.

ldconfig.ldr already provides different metal variations
(copper-like, chrome-like, gold-like, etc.pp.).

To me, it would be canonical to just add the different variations
in shinyness there. However, I already had trouble asking for
a magnet material there (see LDRAW forums). So I think that
asking for shinyness variations will again trigger a long discussion
which could take us again over 1 year. I really want to avoid that.
The current discussion status quo at the mentioned thread as
reached a consensus after long time, and there are many parts here
sitting on the PT waiting to just get outta here. I suggest
that we stick to the current compromise and let the parts go
at least for a first iteration from the PT. They can at any point
of time return, should the new discussion lead to a new compromise.
Just some thoughts to share.

[Steffen]

(continuing the quoting for completeness)

======================================================================
At Thu Dec 15 00:40:03 2011, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: certify
Comments:
whoups, didn't mean to downgrade

[Steffen]

(continuing the quoting for completeness)

======================================================================
At Thu Dec 15 10:50:07 2011, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Philo
Certification: certify
Comments:
OK, let's go!

[Nils Schmidt]

I solved all metallic silver issues for the patterns of 973 (Minifig Torso). Additionally I closed some gaps and BFCed a few patterns. Chris will probably submit my work results in the week after next.

[Chris Dee]

Should patterns be using 80 (as in the files you sent) or 179?

Chris

[Philippe Hurbain]

According to this: color 179 is for molded parts with aluminium powder additive, where as color 80 is for surface painted parts.

[Chris Dee]

Thanks for the clarification - it's not the first time I have found this thread difficult to decipher.

[Joshua Delahunty]

According to this: color 179 is for molded parts with aluminium powder additive, where as color 80 is for surface painted parts.

FWIW, if a part is "Pearl Light Grey" on Peeron, it's usually a 131 part (not 179), and -- indeed -- the real photo of the part for 135 in that chart is of a 131 part.

Missing from the above chart:
296 Cool Silver
301 Metalized Silver
304 Cool Silver, Diffuse (I mention this for completeness, one could argue it doesn't apply)
315 Silver Metallic

None of those are chrome silver or electric-contact silver, BTW.

-- joshua

[Joshua Delahunty]

at http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cg...144485.dat , Magnus wrote:

There is no doubt that this must be the right color here.
I have put together this picture, which shows good examples
of the different silver colors.



This picture has been confirmed by both
Scott Wardlow, manager of ldconfig.ldr and
Philippe Hurbain, creator of visualldconfig.mpd.

LDraw Pearl Colors
Should be used for parts made in a "metal-looking", sometimes "softer", plastic.
LDraw Metallic Colors
Should be used for painted/printed parts.

I apologize if I have contributed to this confusion.

OK, I have more time this time to comment on this...

The first part in this chart (listed with LDRAW color 80) is
59898 Drum lacquered tournament helmet
It has only ever come in color 298 Cool Silver, Drum Lacq
That was a very good example element.

The second element (by LDRAW color 135) is
57575 Mask 2 2007
It has come in colors 26 Black and 131 Silver
It's not a good example of color 179 Flip/Flop Silver (Silver Flip/Flop) [depending on the chart, the name TLG uses is slightly different]. TLG color 179 is rare, it's only been used on a very small number of parts: 6 early Bionicle masks

The third element (by LDRAW color 179) is
93594 Rim no. 2 ø11, 176x6.2
and it comes in color 315 (see below)

Now we get to the TLG colors not in this list:

296 Cool Silver can be thought of as an earlier 131 Silver. Parts were often released in both, but 296 had much shorter runs (so I think 131 supplanted it). One good example of a part that came in both 296 and 131 is 46453 Rectangular air inlet.
http://www.peeron.com/inv/parts/46453

301 Metalized Silver
Only two parts came in this color, and they aren't actual LEGO elements (they are clickets jewelry parts)

304 Cool Silver, Diffuse
This is one of the colors with a "splattered" silver over a base (black, I believe). Not really useable in LDRAW apps yet.

315 Silver Metallic
The newest silver. Lots of elements ome in this color now, from 2009 onwards. Castle accessories in abundance. In addition to the image in the chart, another good example of this part is
62691 Mini figure arm w/cored knob
from the minifigures series (and, earlier, the Agents sets).
http://www.bricklink.com/catalogItem.asp?P=62691
315 Silver metallic is the more common arm in that entry. The "Space Villian" figure has the same arm in Titanium Metallic, he's the only one so far with that color.

-- joshua

EDIT: added parenthetical guess about the "unknown" part being TLG color 131
EDIT: added information about the third image in the chart

[Daniel Goerner]

I found something odd.



If a metallic color is subparted and it's the ONLY color in this subpart color 16 in the subpart it looks really glossy as intended (green arrows). But if they're subparted together with other colors with some other color defined via color 16 they look flat (red arrows). Is that a bug in LDView or something else?

That happens if I view the part directly. If I put it in a model and view it all metallic colors look flat.

[Travis Cobbs]

I think this is a bug in LDView.

I will investigate.

[Daniel Goerner]

Hmmm, the error occured when I had just the code without header in any file. After putting headers to all parts and subparts the metal looks flat no matter if it's defined via color 16 or not. Weird.

[Travis Cobbs]

Did you perhaps disable specular highlight before your second test?

Metallic colors in LDView are only visible in the specular highlight.