http://e621.net/post/show/291797/-3-alpha_channel-ambiguous_gender-bell-cat-collar-

creme_colored_fur ?

Akkira said:
http://e621.net/post/show/291797/-3-alpha_channel-ambiguous_gender-bell-cat-collar-

creme_colored_fur ?

Would work.

furballs_dc said:
Would work.

3fast5me

I'd call it tan fur, honestly.

The hexadecimal color code #ffdfac is a light shade of brown

Mario583 said:
The hexadecimal color code #ffdfac is a light shade of brown

So, tan?

I wasn't even aware that you can use "tan" on fur, I thought it's just applicable to human skin.

Sure can, it's a color, not just an elevated amount of melanin.

A similar coloring that is fur/hair specific is "fawn", we could use that instead, though that's generally a bit darker than "tan".

Might as well just start using the hex code if we need to be this specific...

Looks like a strawberry blonde to me.

beige

MaShCr said:
Might as well just start using the hex code if we need to be this specific...

What would you say then?
White? Brown?

MaShCr said:
Might as well just start using the hex code if we need to be this specific...

Wasn't there discussion a little while ago about color tags and possible condensing of them into basic color groups?

Digital_Kindness said:
Wasn't there discussion a little while ago about color tags and possible condensing of them into basic color groups?

Yea, you're thinking of forum #56286. Give me a little bit, I'm putting together a new topic with suggestions toward standardizing the system.

Or just call it beige.

BudFisk said:
Or just call it beige.

That's the issue though; what you call beige, he calls creme, and they call tan. Without standards, the tagging system is chaos.

Maybe we call all shade of brown just brown?

Stick to only ROYGBV, black, white, grey, brown, maybe pink too.
Then you just pick whichever is closest?

MaShCr said:
That's the issue though; what you call beige, he calls creme, and they call tan. Without standards, the tagging system is chaos.

"Cream" and "Tan" is more of a variation of beige, but do whatever you want.

Hammie said:
Maybe we call all shade of brown just brown?

Stick to only ROYGBV, black, white, grey, brown, maybe pink too.
Then you just pick whichever is closest?

Good ol' Roy G. Biv.

BudFisk said:
"Cream" and "Tan" is more of a variation of beige, but do whatever you want.

Tan and beige are both variations of brown; cream is actually a variation of yellow.

Digital_Kindness said:
Good ol' Roy G. Biv.

...

No! ROYGBV, fuck indigo, it's just dark blue.

Hammie said:
No! ROYGBV, fuck indigo, it's just dark blue.

You colorist.

Digital_Kindness said:

Tan and beige are both variations of brown; cream is actually a variation of yellow.

Okei. Just Wikid the heck out of it, and cream is listed under both yellow and beige, so where is you god now? Just kidding. I just think of "Cream" more as an objective and "Beige" as an adjective.

BudFisk said:
Okei. Just Wikid the heck out of it, and cream is listed under both yellow and beige, so where is you god now? Just kidding. I just think of "Cream" more as an objective and "Beige" as an adjective.

lol, I mean object, not objective.

I'm partial to tertiary RGB colors for tagging hues since we're a digital image site, but I think more people are familiar with secondary RYB colors, however inaccurate they may be. Can I get a quick vote if people had to choose between the two? (Ignore the pink/brown/nonhue issue for now.)

Secondary

Yeah, the old school rainbow colors are best imo.
They're more likely to be what people search for.

Tertiary. The hyphenated colors would be a bit of a pain to tag.

Oh, and cyan. Cyan is a good color.

Ah, clarification.
My vote is for secondary without the awful hyphenated colors.
There would be infinite arguments about red-orange vs. orange, and blue-violet vs. violet.
Oh, and purple not violet.
Violets are flowers, purple's a color.

Tertiary. We're all about accuracy when tagging an image, so why shouldn't we extend that accuracy to the colors we tag?

I said secondary, because they where easier to write, not the colors.

Alright, I think we can find a compromise between accuracy and familiarity if we combine the secondaries from RGB (RYGCBM) with the secondaries from RYB (ROYGBV) to give us Red, Orange, Yellow, Green, Cyan, Blue, Violet, and Magenta (because honestly not many people are going to be searching for stuff like Spring Green, Red-Orange, or Azure).

The next issue has to do with lightness vs darkness.

We could either:

• specify them next to each hue (Red, Light_Red, Dark_Red, Orange, Light_Orange, Dark_Orange, ...)
• or give them their own tags (Light_Color and Dark_Color)

One of the benefits of the first is that we could do things like alias Dark_Orange to Brown or Light_Magenta to Pink; while one of the benefits of the second is not having 24 different color tags.

Discuss please.

Can't we just call magenta pink and forget about all the light/dark nonsense?

MaShCr said:
Alright, I think we can find a compromise between accuracy and familiarity if we combine the secondaries from RGB (RYGCBM) with the secondaries from RYB (ROYGBV) to give us Red, Orange, Yellow, Green, Cyan, Blue, Violet, and Magenta (because honestly not many people are going to be searching for stuff like Spring Green, Red-Orange, or Azure).

The next issue has to do with lightness vs darkness.

We could either:

• specify them next to each hue (Red, Light_Red, Dark_Red, Orange, Light_Orange, Dark_Orange, ...)
• or give them their own tags (Light_Color and Dark_Color)

One of the benefits of the first is that we could do things like alias Dark_Orange to Brown or Light_Magenta to Pink; while one of the benefits of the second is not having 24 different color tags.

Discuss please.

Change "Magenta" to "Pink" and add brown.

DrHorse said:
Can't we just call magenta pink and forget about all the light/dark nonsense?

I agree with this. Getting into what's light/dark or not is going to cause problems, especially since what appears light may be dark and vice-versa depending on the quality and settings of someone's monitor.

Digital_Kindness said:
I agree with this. Getting into what's light/dark or not is going to cause problems, especially since what appears light may be dark and vice-versa depending on the quality and settings of someone's monitor.

Good point. So what do we define brown as? Desaturated orange? If so, OP's image would qualify.

cyan is just light blue

When I have time I'll bother making a chart that defines every single RGB value as a regular colour instead of all the shit like magenta, cyan and azure.

Hammie said:
cyan is just light blue

Add as much white to blue as you want; you'll never get cyan.

720p said:
When I have time I'll bother making a chart that defines every single RGB value as a regular colour instead of all the shit like magenta, cyan and azure.

The point is to separate the gamut into a manageable number of well-known, minimally-disputable categories instead of having 256^3 color tags.

Hammie said:
cyan is just light blue

No it's not. It's a blue-green hue. Don't you guys start talking bout getting rid of cyan. We need cyan.

MaShCr said:
The point is to separate the gamut into a manageable number of well-known, minimally-disputable categories instead of having 256^3 color tags.

This is what I mean, if there's ever an argument over "this is brown" or "this is orange" they can just check the RGB value against the chart.

Turquoise is a better color name for blue-green than cyan.

720p said:
This is what I mean, if there's ever an argument over "this is brown" or "this is orange" they can just check the RGB value against the chart.

Ah, a graphical representation showing the categories' boundries then. You might want to use a hue/saturation pie, as full RGB would require 3D cube volumes.

Hammie said:
Turquoise is a better color name for blue-green than cyan.

What do you have against calling cyan what it is?

DrHorse said:
No it's not. It's a blue-green hue. Don't you guys start talking bout getting rid of cyan. We need cyan.

http://youtu.be/4WLe0dIP-A4?t=15s

MaShCr said:
Ah, a graphical representation showing the categories' boundries then. You might want to use a hue/saturation pie, as full RGB would require 3D cube volumes.

What do you have against calling cyan what it is?

cyan can mean a number of different things

Hammie said:
cyan can mean a number of different things

Exactly. These tags are meant to make up a set of mutually exclusive color ranges that cover every specific color a tagger could encounter.

Toward that end, we probably shouldn't forget the hueless colors Black, White, and Gray.

MaShCr said:
...
Toward that end, we probably shouldn't forget the hueless colors Black, White, and Gray.

Shades, not colors.