On very odd colours and their names...

[pyro-manic]

... which means that the profile artist got it wrong, not the paint standards.

Yes. More than one, in fact. But when you see a colour named as "light grey", wouldn't you expect it to be a shade of grey, that wasn't particularly dark?

[Hobbes]

Naturally. But when using a profile for inspiration, it would be nice if the colours named were somewhere close-ish to what the profile looks like. Rather than entirely different, ie GREEN instead of grey.

... which means that the profile artist got it wrong, not the paint standards.

When you add profiles to the mix, you open up another can of worms: color representation on a computer.
There are a couple of issues:
1. computers use the RGB model to represent colors. This model can't represent certain colors accurately, and it's fundamentally different to the CMYK color model used by paint. Conversion introduces inaccuracies as well.
2. computer monitors (and printers) must be calibrated to allow colors to be shown accurately. This is done routinely in the prepress industry, not so much by hobbyists.

[kitnut617]

When you add profiles to the mix, you open up another can of worms: color representation on a computer.
There are a couple of issues:
1. computers use the RGB model to represent colors. This model can't represent certain colors accurately, and it's fundamentally different to the CMYK color model used by paint. Conversion introduces inaccuracies as well.
2. computer monitors (and printers) must be calibrated to allow colors to be shown accurately. This is done routinely in the prepress industry, not so much by hobbyists.

I have to agree with you there, a lot of people will swear blind that they've got the colours on the model exactly like the photo they have of the real thing, completely ignoring the fact they got the photo off the net and did a print out of it.  I've always said if you haven't taken the photo yourself, and understood what your camera is doing, you can't really go by photos as representing the real article.

But also I can see what Harro is saying right now, I've got two computers side by side (one's for business and the other for personal) with two different monitors, I've just brought up the same photo on both of them and what can be seen is completely different.

[IanH]

When you add profiles to the mix, you open up another can of worms: color representation on a computer.
There are a couple of issues:
1. computers use the RGB model to represent colors. This model can't represent certain colors accurately, and it's fundamentally different to the CMYK color model used by paint. Conversion introduces inaccuracies as well.
2. computer monitors (and printers) must be calibrated to allow colors to be shown accurately. This is done routinely in the prepress industry, not so much by hobbyists.

I have to agree with you there, a lot of people will swear blind that they've got the colours on the model exactly like the photo they have of the real thing, completely ignoring the fact they got the photo off the net and did a print out of it.  I've always said if you haven't taken the photo yourself, and understood what your camera is doing, you can't really go by photos as representing the real article.

But also I can see what Harro is saying right now, I've got two computers side by side (one's for business and the other for personal) with two different monitors, I've just brought up the same photo on both of them and what can be seen is completely different.

Don't forget the lighting conditions too - grey's tendency to change...

[Rheged]

I have to agree with you there, a lot of people will swear blind that they've got the colours on the model exactly like the photo they have of the real thing, completely ignoring the fact they got the photo off the net and did a print out of it.  I've always said if you haven't taken the photo yourself, and understood what your camera is doing, you can't really go by photos as representing the real article.

I had a similar problem years ago with the railway "MIDLAND RED"  colour. I'd been given a faded photo of Midland 1000 to work with.   I ended up taking the model to the NRM in York and holding it up to the original loco................and even  then the JMNs (rivet counters) told me that I'd got it wrong.      I repeat; it's either heavily weathered or a field modification if anyone grumbles!!

[Mossie]

Colour is a minefield.  The Eyeball, Human, Mk.1 is very good at distinguishing colour difference.  My first job was in a pints lab nearly twenty years ago.  One thing I came to learn is that your eye could determine more shades than the Colour Computers, although they were much better than us at putting values to things.  Things might have improved since then, but I'm willing to bet there's still a discrpency.

Once you start adding other devices into the equation, cameras, printers, display screens etc.  they all interperet colour differently & the end result can differ widely.  Add lighting conditions & weathering you're never going to get the same result.  Batch variation of paints & inks will also give you noticeable differences.

We would test paints against a standard & place them side by side on identical films, identical thickness in set lighting conditions to determine variation.  The two ends of the spec alone would be very noticeble, even the differences between the minimums the computer could measure would be obvious.  I see on the net people comparing paints side by side, my advice is hold them well apart in the same light, because you will be able to detect something simple like batch variation & assume the two colours are different.

[Alvis 3.14159]

I completely mistrust my ability to be accurate with colours, since I discovered there is a colour temperature difference between my right and left eyes. My right eye sees things bluer than the left...or does the left see things warmer? No freaking idea, and the optomotrists poo-pooed it...but i know that a sheet of white paper looks different when viewed one eye at a time.

So I'm going to start posting all my stuff in greyscale!

Alvis Pi

[PR19_Kit]

2. computer monitors (and printers) must be calibrated to allow colors to be shown accurately. This is done routinely in the prepress industry, not so much by hobbyists.

Probably true, but how do mere mortals do that?

I once had an HP printer that came with a 'test card' and a handy software utility that enabled me to co-ordinate colours on my laptop and printer, but it worked under Win98 and won't even look at Win7. There doesn't seem to be an equivalent around these days.

[Hobbes]

You can often set a 'color profile' which should get you reasonably close (on the Mac anyway, this used to be much harder in Windows, dunno if it's improved recently). To get an exact match, you need a calibration device (basically a camera) that you can place on the monitor. This will measure the color output for a given input, the result is a color profile for that monitor.

[rallymodeller]

You can often set a 'color profile' which should get you reasonably close (on the Mac anyway, this used to be much harder in Windows, dunno if it's improved recently). To get an exact match, you need a calibration device (basically a camera) that you can place on the monitor. This will measure the color output for a given input, the result is a color profile for that monitor.

Or you can do a gamma correction (at least on CRTs) if you have Adobe products installed.

On a related note, I just spent the last hour or so rebuilding my Canadian military colour swatch palette. Our colour standards (1-GP-12c) were really not that standard. Example: there are at least four different variations of 503-301 Green including one mixed my a Dutch automotive paint manufacturer for our European-based CF-104s. It's slightly ridiculous. We have since gone to FS colours but some of the old style remains (like on the Aurora).

[jcf]

... which means that the profile artist got it wrong, not the paint standards.

Yes. More than one, in fact. But when you see a colour named as "light grey", wouldn't you expect it to be a shade of grey, that wasn't particularly dark?

No, as 'grey' isn't a colour, it's a tone. 

[Nigel Bunker]

Talking of paint names, I remember in the early 80s when a well known paint manufacturer introduced it's "new range of colours for the new year". A friend of mine's wife got a temporary job working for the said firm. Her job? Visiting hardware shops and replacing the labels on the tins of paint - Nut Brown became Cinnamon Brown, new label, same contents - you get the idea. I've been very wary of paint names ever since.

[rickshaw]

2. computer monitors (and printers) must be calibrated to allow colors to be shown accurately. This is done routinely in the prepress industry, not so much by hobbyists.

Probably true, but how do mere mortals do that?

I once had an HP printer that came with a 'test card' and a handy software utility that enabled me to co-ordinate colours on my laptop and printer, but it worked under Win98 and won't even look at Win7. There doesn't seem to be an equivalent around these days.

Basically you need to buy extra pieces of kit, Kit, for your PC.  There are pantone and other systems around which include a sensor which detects what is being displayed on the VDU and then adjusts it to the correct value for the colour being displayed.  Here, is a good explanation of what is involved.

[PR19_Kit]

Basically you need to buy extra pieces of kit, Kit, for your PC.  There are pantone and other systems around which include a sensor which detects what is being displayed on the VDU and then adjusts it to the correct value for the colour being displayed.  Here, is a good explanation of what is involved.

Thanks rickshaw, just what I needed to know.

It'll be very handy for my decal-making, as I tend to make test strips of each colour I use now, and then adjust the RGB outputs till it prints correctly. That's not only time consuming but it can be MIND-blowingly frustrating at times!