Colors of print on Classic letter and digit 3005's

[Tore Eriksson]

I believe lightblue has become a lot brighter after LDConfig.ldr was introduced. To the better, I think. Much more like the IRL color. The problem is, the bold "lightblue" patterns on the serires 3005pv*.dat are now much darker IRL than the LDrawn versions.

Also, the"blue" print on the older series are darker IRL and have a slight touch of purple (I think).

A third issue is that many of these files were made as a compromise between portraital accuracy and readability in smaller scales in original LDraw.

A forth issue is that these letters and digits have been made with several different fonts. I have no idea how many...

About the color issue, I'm about to complete the 3005pv*.dat series now. Should I continue coding it lightblue or should I pick a better color? If sp, which one?

[Philippe Hurbain]

About the color issue, I'm about to complete the 3005pv*.dat series now. Should I continue coding it lightblue or should I pick a better color? If sp, which one?

Question is - is it supposed to be really light blue, or is it a misprint that makes underneath white of brick that makes regular blue color lighter? See huge color variation between bricks at the bottom of this page: http://www.bricklink.com/v2/search.page?q=3005*#T=P&P=4 ? Peeron and Bricklink list everything as "blue"...

[Tore Eriksson]

About the color issue, I'm about to complete the 3005pv*.dat series now. Should I continue coding it lightblue or should I pick a better color? If so, which one?

Question is - is it supposed to be really light blue, or is it a misprint that makes underneath white of brick that makes regular blue color lighter? See huge color variation between bricks at the bottom of this page: http://www.bricklink.com/v2/search.page?q=3005*#T=P&P=4 ? Peeron and Bricklink list everything as "blue"...

Good question! No, the bold (newer I'm quite sure) chars are not by far light blue as defined by LDConfig. In fact, they are much closer to blue than the myriad of variants occuring among to older ones. All the older have a touch of violet which the bold ones lack. I think we should make all bold, currently light blue letters and digits plain blue, without a doubt.

The the next question is, do we have to change the currently blue ones? I don't have an opinion there. Lke you said, BL and Peeron regard them as blue. I can live with both a change there and with no change.

(The pics on BL are likely made with different cameras and in different lighting. Thus the differences can be both bigger and smaller than in real life.)

[Tore Eriksson]

From left to right:
1. I think color 110 violet is quite a better presentation of the old ink. But is it worth the trouble to change them all again?
2. Color 1 is without a doubt better for the bold ones.
3. Color 89 is interesting, but no, I don't think so.
4. Color 9 light blue is just terrible!

[Philippe Hurbain]

As you say 110 is great for thin letters but imho not worth the trouble. As for bold ones, plain blue...