|
 |
| | | Author: | tec  | | Posted: | May 22, 2021 15:20 | | Subject: | Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 234 times | | Topic: | Catalog | | Status: | Open | |
|
| Hi
Is there a way (or setting) to collapse all Tan pics to the same shade? So that
all listings are simple, uniform.
or, show all in the the most common shade? (which is... the last?!?)
or, exclude just that strange shadowy Tan?
Oh well, just in case, if there's a fix also for Dark Tan... I'd love
to use it
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | chetzler | | Posted: | May 22, 2021 16:33 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, tec writes:
| | Hi
Is there a way (or setting) to collapse all Tan pics to the same shade? So that
all listings are simple, uniform.
or, show all in the the most common shade? (which is... the last?!?)
or, exclude just that strange shadowy Tan?
Oh well, just in case, if there's a fix also for Dark Tan... I'd love
to use it
|
Unlikely. This has been mentioned several times over the past couple of years
with more colors than just the tans. It causes problems for sellers when packing.
It is clearly not a high priority for BL. 🙁
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | randyf | | Posted: | May 22, 2021 17:58 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, chetzler writes:
| | In Catalog, tec writes:
| | Hi
Is there a way (or setting) to collapse all Tan pics to the same shade? So that
all listings are simple, uniform.
or, show all in the the most common shade? (which is... the last?!?)
or, exclude just that strange shadowy Tan?
Oh well, just in case, if there's a fix also for Dark Tan... I'd love
to use it
|
Unlikely. This has been mentioned several times over the past couple of years
with more colors than just the tans. It causes problems for sellers when packing.
It is clearly not a high priority for BL. 🙁
|
To clarify, it is clearly not a high priority for the *users* of BL.
Images are submitted by individuals. Some of those individuals (myself especially
included) spend a considerable amount of time to adjust the colors of the images
to make things better. Other individuals submitting images do not care.
I don't think people complaining about this issue actually know how hard
it is to standardize the tens upon tens upon tens of thousands of part images
one by one. It is a monumental task.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | May 22, 2021 18:24 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 51 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | […]
To clarify, it is clearly not a high priority for the *users* of BL.
Images are submitted by individuals. Some of those individuals (myself especially
included) spend a considerable amount of time to adjust the colors of the images
to make things better. Other individuals submitting images do not care.
|
And some just don’t have the skills or means to do much about it.
| | I don't think people complaining about this issue actually know how hard
it is to standardize the tens upon tens upon tens of thousands of part images
one by one. It is a monumental task.
|
Oh, come on, surely you just need to say “Computer, standardize all the pictures!”
and it will give you a lollipop.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | chetzler | | Posted: | May 22, 2021 19:42 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, chetzler writes:
| | In Catalog, tec writes:
| | Hi
Is there a way (or setting) to collapse all Tan pics to the same shade? So that
all listings are simple, uniform.
or, show all in the the most common shade? (which is... the last?!?)
or, exclude just that strange shadowy Tan?
Oh well, just in case, if there's a fix also for Dark Tan... I'd love
to use it
|
Unlikely. This has been mentioned several times over the past couple of years
with more colors than just the tans. It causes problems for sellers when packing.
It is clearly not a high priority for BL. 🙁
|
To clarify, it is clearly not a high priority for the *users* of BL.
Images are submitted by individuals. Some of those individuals (myself especially
included) spend a considerable amount of time to adjust the colors of the images
to make things better. Other individuals submitting images do not care.
I don't think people complaining about this issue actually know how hard
it is to standardize the tens upon tens upon tens of thousands of part images
one by one. It is a monumental task.
|
This is a relatively recent problem. There was a time when there photographs
rather than renders. The renders are problematic.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Admin_Russell | | Posted: | May 22, 2021 19:52 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 97 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
|
BrickLink
ID CardAdmin_Russell
|
Location:  USA, California |
| Member Since |
Contact |
Type |
Status |
| May 9, 2017 |
 |
Admin |
|
|
| BrickLink Administrator |
|
| In Catalog, chetzler writes:
| | In Catalog, randyf writes:
| | In Catalog, chetzler writes:
| | In Catalog, tec writes:
| | Hi
Is there a way (or setting) to collapse all Tan pics to the same shade? So that
all listings are simple, uniform.
or, show all in the the most common shade? (which is... the last?!?)
or, exclude just that strange shadowy Tan?
Oh well, just in case, if there's a fix also for Dark Tan... I'd love
to use it
|
Unlikely. This has been mentioned several times over the past couple of years
with more colors than just the tans. It causes problems for sellers when packing.
It is clearly not a high priority for BL. 🙁
|
To clarify, it is clearly not a high priority for the *users* of BL.
Images are submitted by individuals. Some of those individuals (myself especially
included) spend a considerable amount of time to adjust the colors of the images
to make things better. Other individuals submitting images do not care.
I don't think people complaining about this issue actually know how hard
it is to standardize the tens upon tens upon tens of thousands of part images
one by one. It is a monumental task.
|
This is a relatively recent problem. There was a time when there photographs
rather than renders. The renders are problematic.
|
There were never photographs of most parts. There were old renders and there
were new renders. Many new renders were added to replace the old renders, even
though the color was not perfect. This was done because the new renders were
larger and didn't have the black lines which some people thought made the
site look dark and old.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | jennnifer | | Posted: | May 22, 2021 21:10 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, chetzler writes:
| |
This is a relatively recent problem. There was a time when there photographs
rather than renders. The renders are problematic.
|
No, we went from 2D line-drawn renders to a mixture of LEGO and BrickLink's
3D renders.
LEGO's are better than BL's but their colors are still bad. The old renders
were awesome for color accuracy but apparently off-putting to people who thought
them old-fashioned.
Photos would be great, but to really work, they would all need to be consistent
and continuously updated. No magic button that I know of to make this problem
go away!
Jen
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Brickitty | | Posted: | May 22, 2021 21:42 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, chetzler writes:
| | It causes problems for sellers when packing.
|
In my opinion, if you're depending on a tiny picture rather than a clear
description to identify the part you're packing, you're already a poor
seller. Maybe that explains why so many parts I order arrive in a slightly different
color. I had a horrible seller send me a cheap Red piece instead of a rare and
valuable Dark Red piece back in February, and then insist he had packed the correct
one and that I was lying despite sending him pictures and having the part sitting
right in front of me.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | Grego | | Posted: | May 22, 2021 22:07 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Brickitty writes:
| | In Catalog, chetzler writes:
| | It causes problems for sellers when packing.
|
In my opinion, if you're depending on a tiny picture rather than a clear
description to identify the part you're packing, you're already a poor
seller. Maybe that explains why so many parts I order arrive in a slightly different
color. I had a horrible seller send me a cheap Red piece instead of a rare and
valuable Dark Red piece back in February, and then insist he had packed the correct
one and that I was lying despite sending him pictures and having the part sitting
right in front of me.
|
Every seller has a system that works for them. Calling a seller poor because
they use the picture as well as the description is harsh.
Picture or not, mistakes in colour happen ...once sent a bunch of expensive Dark
Blue instead of the cheaper Blue parts ....when informed by the buyer, i didn't
ask for pictures, or return of parts ...I just apologized and sent what they
ordered.
And I certainly don't call buyers who order the wrong part, poor buyers.
Sometimes knowing your buyer helps ...when they order a bunch of LBG parts and
one odd lot in LG when the part is also available in my store in LBG
Or the buyer who I *knew* wanted a particular variant of a part and he ordered
the other.
A little communication that slows down the transaction but ends up in a successful
and faster overall transaction (no need to resend parts ...discuss why the parts
received were what they ordered etc)
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | chetzler | | Posted: | May 22, 2021 22:41 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Brickitty writes:
| | In Catalog, chetzler writes:
| | It causes problems for sellers when packing.
|
In my opinion, if you're depending on a tiny picture rather than a clear
description to identify the part you're packing, you're already a poor
seller. Maybe that explains why so many parts I order arrive in a slightly different
color. I had a horrible seller send me a cheap Red piece instead of a rare and
valuable Dark Red piece back in February, and then insist he had packed the correct
one and that I was lying despite sending him pictures and having the part sitting
right in front of me.
|
And who are you? Seriously? Why should I heed your ill-formed opinion? Go
ahead and expound on what credentials you possess that give you standing to critique
my methods. You come in here with a single anecdote about how a seller wronged
you and apparently you seem to want to take it out on me? That's a lot of
nerve, my friend.
Yes, I must be a very poor seller indeed. Look at my terrible record. Why don't
you get back to me after you've packed a couple thousand orders, many with
lot counts numbering in the hundreds. No serious seller has the time to read
a description for every part, especially since, historically, images were more
than sufficient. I never had color mistakes until the new renders surfaced.
And by the way, when I made those mistakes, I did right by my customers and
shipped the correct parts like a not-poor seller does.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Brickitty | | Posted: | May 23, 2021 02:56 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, chetzler writes:
| | And who are you? Seriously? Why should I heed your ill-formed opinion? Go
ahead and expound on what credentials you possess that give you standing to critique
my methods. You come in here with a single anecdote about how a seller wronged
you and apparently you seem to want to take it out on me? That's a lot of
nerve, my friend.
Yes, I must be a very poor seller indeed. Look at my terrible record. Why don't
you get back to me after you've packed a couple thousand orders, many with
lot counts numbering in the hundreds. No serious seller has the time to read
a description for every part, especially since, historically, images were more
than sufficient. I never had color mistakes until the new renders surfaced.
|
I apologize. Your original message didn't state that you only look at a picture
and don't read the description, and nothing I said was intended to be pointed
at you. I thought I was sympathizing with you. But I was distracted when I was
replying to the post, and I misjudged your comment and the situation in general.
The only point I was trying to make was that I strongly believe in double-checking
orders before sending them out, and relying solely on a picture leaves more room
for error. I do actually have a lot more experience in this area than my BL feedback
shows, in the hundreds of thousands of parts both as a buyer and a seller, with
a near-perfect track record as a seller because I double- or triple-check
everything. I like to emphasize how important I think that is. But right then
I was speaking from recent frustration as a buyer, and I didn't think of
how my words would come across. My phrasing was -- well, poor -- and
I didn't mean to insult you or anyone else.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | chetzler | | Posted: | May 23, 2021 10:30 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Brickitty writes:
| | In Catalog, chetzler writes:
| | And who are you? Seriously? Why should I heed your ill-formed opinion? Go
ahead and expound on what credentials you possess that give you standing to critique
my methods. You come in here with a single anecdote about how a seller wronged
you and apparently you seem to want to take it out on me? That's a lot of
nerve, my friend.
Yes, I must be a very poor seller indeed. Look at my terrible record. Why don't
you get back to me after you've packed a couple thousand orders, many with
lot counts numbering in the hundreds. No serious seller has the time to read
a description for every part, especially since, historically, images were more
than sufficient. I never had color mistakes until the new renders surfaced.
|
I apologize. Your original message didn't state that you only look at a picture
and don't read the description, and nothing I said was intended to be pointed
at you. I thought I was sympathizing with you. But I was distracted when I was
replying to the post, and I misjudged your comment and the situation in general.
The only point I was trying to make was that I strongly believe in double-checking
orders before sending them out, and relying solely on a picture leaves more room
for error. I do actually have a lot more experience in this area than my BL feedback
shows, in the hundreds of thousands of parts both as a buyer and a seller, with
a near-perfect track record as a seller because I double- or triple-check
everything. I like to emphasize how important I think that is. But right then
I was speaking from recent frustration as a buyer, and I didn't think of
how my words would come across. My phrasing was -- well, poor -- and
I didn't mean to insult you or anyone else.
|
Apology acknowledged and accepted, thank you. I reacted strongly because I do
take great pride in the way I run my business and I do double-check orders before
shipping (which catches a fair number of errors), and yet mistakes can still
happen due to fatigue and I own those errors when they do happen. The frustration
is that packing orders got a little harder for no other reason (according to
Russell's post here) than that "some people" thought perfectly useful images
looked outdated. So once again we were asked to accept something that looks
sleek and new despite the fact that it is less functional.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | popsicle | | Posted: | May 23, 2021 11:51 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 64 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, chetzler writes:
| | In Catalog, Brickitty writes:
| | In Catalog, chetzler writes:
| | And who are you? Seriously? Why should I heed your ill-formed opinion? Go
ahead and expound on what credentials you possess that give you standing to critique
my methods. You come in here with a single anecdote about how a seller wronged
you and apparently you seem to want to take it out on me? That's a lot of
nerve, my friend.
Yes, I must be a very poor seller indeed. Look at my terrible record. Why don't
you get back to me after you've packed a couple thousand orders, many with
lot counts numbering in the hundreds. No serious seller has the time to read
a description for every part, especially since, historically, images were more
than sufficient. I never had color mistakes until the new renders surfaced.
|
I apologize. Your original message didn't state that you only look at a picture
and don't read the description, and nothing I said was intended to be pointed
at you. I thought I was sympathizing with you. But I was distracted when I was
replying to the post, and I misjudged your comment and the situation in general.
The only point I was trying to make was that I strongly believe in double-checking
orders before sending them out, and relying solely on a picture leaves more room
for error. I do actually have a lot more experience in this area than my BL feedback
shows, in the hundreds of thousands of parts both as a buyer and a seller, with
a near-perfect track record as a seller because I double- or triple-check
everything. I like to emphasize how important I think that is. But right then
I was speaking from recent frustration as a buyer, and I didn't think of
how my words would come across. My phrasing was -- well, poor -- and
I didn't mean to insult you or anyone else.
|
Apology acknowledged and accepted, thank you.
|
Magnanimous of you. And your apology is forthcoming too, I assume?
| | I reacted strongly because I do take great pride in the way I run my business
|
The "great pride" taken in anyone's business methods, does not give
licence to "react strongly" as you charitably phrase your diatribe 
Man up, Chris... You blew your top and overreacted, understandable. Follow the
other member's example and take ownership of your actions with an apology
of your own. Or continue to do as you do.
| | and I do double-check orders before shipping (which catches a fair number of errors), and yet mistakes can still
happen due to fatigue and I own those errors when they do happen. The frustration
is that packing orders got a little harder for no other reason (according to
Russell's post here) than that "some people" thought perfectly useful images
looked outdated. So once again we were asked to accept something that looks
sleek and new despite the fact that it is less functional.
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | chetzler | | Posted: | May 23, 2021 12:48 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 53 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, popsicle writes:
| | In Catalog, chetzler writes:
| | In Catalog, Brickitty writes:
| | In Catalog, chetzler writes:
| | And who are you? Seriously? Why should I heed your ill-formed opinion? Go
ahead and expound on what credentials you possess that give you standing to critique
my methods. You come in here with a single anecdote about how a seller wronged
you and apparently you seem to want to take it out on me? That's a lot of
nerve, my friend.
Yes, I must be a very poor seller indeed. Look at my terrible record. Why don't
you get back to me after you've packed a couple thousand orders, many with
lot counts numbering in the hundreds. No serious seller has the time to read
a description for every part, especially since, historically, images were more
than sufficient. I never had color mistakes until the new renders surfaced.
|
I apologize. Your original message didn't state that you only look at a picture
and don't read the description, and nothing I said was intended to be pointed
at you. I thought I was sympathizing with you. But I was distracted when I was
replying to the post, and I misjudged your comment and the situation in general.
The only point I was trying to make was that I strongly believe in double-checking
orders before sending them out, and relying solely on a picture leaves more room
for error. I do actually have a lot more experience in this area than my BL feedback
shows, in the hundreds of thousands of parts both as a buyer and a seller, with
a near-perfect track record as a seller because I double- or triple-check
everything. I like to emphasize how important I think that is. But right then
I was speaking from recent frustration as a buyer, and I didn't think of
how my words would come across. My phrasing was -- well, poor -- and
I didn't mean to insult you or anyone else.
|
Apology acknowledged and accepted, thank you.
|
Magnanimous of you. And your apology is forthcoming too, I assume?
| | I reacted strongly because I do take great pride in the way I run my business
|
The "great pride" taken in anyone's business methods, does not give
licence to "react strongly" as you charitably phrase your diatribe
Man up, Chris... You blew your top and overreacted, understandable. Follow the
other member's example and take ownership of your actions with an apology
of your own. Or continue to do as you do.
| | and I do double-check orders before shipping (which catches a fair number of errors), and yet mistakes can still
happen due to fatigue and I own those errors when they do happen. The frustration
is that packing orders got a little harder for no other reason (according to
Russell's post here) than that "some people" thought perfectly useful images
looked outdated. So once again we were asked to accept something that looks
sleek and new despite the fact that it is less functional.
|
|
Dear, dear, Cory,
I know you really like me and all, but I thought it was clear by now that I'm
just not that into you and yet you keep trying to engage with me. I'm actually
getting a little concerned for you--your behavior seems a little obsessive.
I guess it's my own fault that I keep responding to your prattle. I'm
sorry, Cory. I'm sorry that I've apparently been leading you on all
this time. Please, please forgive me and if you can at all help it, please don't
interact with me anymore, it's not healthy. You need to move on.
Sincerely,
-Chris
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | popsicle | | Posted: | May 23, 2021 13:52 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 74 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, chetzler writes:
| | In Catalog, popsicle writes:
| | In Catalog, chetzler writes:
| | In Catalog, Brickitty writes:
| | In Catalog, chetzler writes:
| | And who are you? Seriously? Why should I heed your ill-formed opinion? Go
ahead and expound on what credentials you possess that give you standing to critique
my methods. You come in here with a single anecdote about how a seller wronged
you and apparently you seem to want to take it out on me? That's a lot of
nerve, my friend.
Yes, I must be a very poor seller indeed. Look at my terrible record. Why don't
you get back to me after you've packed a couple thousand orders, many with
lot counts numbering in the hundreds. No serious seller has the time to read
a description for every part, especially since, historically, images were more
than sufficient. I never had color mistakes until the new renders surfaced.
|
I apologize. Your original message didn't state that you only look at a picture
and don't read the description, and nothing I said was intended to be pointed
at you. I thought I was sympathizing with you. But I was distracted when I was
replying to the post, and I misjudged your comment and the situation in general.
The only point I was trying to make was that I strongly believe in double-checking
orders before sending them out, and relying solely on a picture leaves more room
for error. I do actually have a lot more experience in this area than my BL feedback
shows, in the hundreds of thousands of parts both as a buyer and a seller, with
a near-perfect track record as a seller because I double- or triple-check
everything. I like to emphasize how important I think that is. But right then
I was speaking from recent frustration as a buyer, and I didn't think of
how my words would come across. My phrasing was -- well, poor -- and
I didn't mean to insult you or anyone else.
|
Apology acknowledged and accepted, thank you.
|
Magnanimous of you. And your apology is forthcoming too, I assume?
| | I reacted strongly because I do take great pride in the way I run my business
|
The "great pride" taken in anyone's business methods, does not give
licence to "react strongly" as you charitably phrase your diatribe
Man up, Chris... You blew your top and overreacted, understandable. Follow the
other member's example and take ownership of your actions with an apology
of your own. Or continue to do as you do.
| | and I do double-check orders before shipping (which catches a fair number of errors), and yet mistakes can still
happen due to fatigue and I own those errors when they do happen. The frustration
is that packing orders got a little harder for no other reason (according to
Russell's post here) than that "some people" thought perfectly useful images
looked outdated. So once again we were asked to accept something that looks
sleek and new despite the fact that it is less functional.
|
|
Dear, dear, Cory,
I know you really like me and all, but I thought it was clear by now that I'm
just not that into you and yet you keep trying to engage with me. I'm actually
getting a little concerned for you--your behavior seems a little obsessive.
I guess it's my own fault that I keep responding to your prattle. I'm
sorry, Cory. I'm sorry that I've apparently been leading you on all
this time. Please, please forgive me and if you can at all help it, please don't
interact with me anymore, it's not healthy. You need to move on.
Sincerely,
-Chris
|
I guess it's "continue to do as you do" then?
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | May 22, 2021 20:05 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, tec writes:
| | Hi
Is there a way (or setting) to collapse all Tan pics to the same shade? So that
all listings are simple, uniform.
or, show all in the the most common shade? (which is... the last?!?)
or, exclude just that strange shadowy Tan?
Oh well, just in case, if there's a fix also for Dark Tan... I'd love
to use it
|
Much of this would be achievable if we focused on using Legos official images
wherever possible expecially when it comes to generic bricks but it would take
a lot of time to expect community volunteers to go through and update them all.
Personally I think this needs to be done by an allocated Lego employee that also
deals with the images on their own site
If it was done this way all the parts in your examples would look correct and
as below for both Tan and Dark Tan respectively:-
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | jennnifer | | Posted: | May 22, 2021 21:05 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 47 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | In Catalog, tec writes:
| | Hi
Is there a way (or setting) to collapse all Tan pics to the same shade? So that
all listings are simple, uniform.
or, show all in the the most common shade? (which is... the last?!?)
or, exclude just that strange shadowy Tan?
Oh well, just in case, if there's a fix also for Dark Tan... I'd love
to use it
|
Much of this would be achievable if we focused on using Legos official images
wherever possible expecially when it comes to generic bricks but it would take
a lot of time to expect community volunteers to go through and update them all.
Personally I think this needs to be done by an allocated Lego employee that also
deals with the images on their own site
If it was done this way all the parts in your examples would look correct and
as below for both Tan and Dark Tan respectively:-
|
The LEGO renders ARE the problem. They are so badly lit that some colors are
very poorly represented. Members like randyf took it upon themselves to adjust
each file manually to make the images actually resemble our colors. This is totally
worth it in my opinion. I can also adjust renders but I am not as good as he
is at it. If anyone ever wants an existing render to be improved, just drop me
a message and I will try and fix it.
This is a problem that can be fixed with a bit of effort and skill. I have not
seen a perfect set of renders out there for us to use, so this is what we have.
Trying to make the best of it!
Jen
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | May 22, 2021 22:27 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, jennnifer writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | In Catalog, tec writes:
| | Hi
Is there a way (or setting) to collapse all Tan pics to the same shade? So that
all listings are simple, uniform.
or, show all in the the most common shade? (which is... the last?!?)
or, exclude just that strange shadowy Tan?
Oh well, just in case, if there's a fix also for Dark Tan... I'd love
to use it
|
Much of this would be achievable if we focused on using Legos official images
wherever possible expecially when it comes to generic bricks but it would take
a lot of time to expect community volunteers to go through and update them all.
Personally I think this needs to be done by an allocated Lego employee that also
deals with the images on their own site
If it was done this way all the parts in your examples would look correct and
as below for both Tan and Dark Tan respectively:-
|
The LEGO renders ARE the problem. They are so badly lit that some colors are
very poorly represented.
|
Okay but whats worse.... A poorly represented colour which is uniform in shading
accross the site or a colour which can be represented in just about any shade
you can think of?
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | WoutR | | Posted: | May 24, 2021 04:48 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | In Catalog, jennnifer writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | In Catalog, tec writes:
| | Hi
Is there a way (or setting) to collapse all Tan pics to the same shade? So that
all listings are simple, uniform.
or, show all in the the most common shade? (which is... the last?!?)
or, exclude just that strange shadowy Tan?
Oh well, just in case, if there's a fix also for Dark Tan... I'd love
to use it
|
Much of this would be achievable if we focused on using Legos official images
wherever possible expecially when it comes to generic bricks but it would take
a lot of time to expect community volunteers to go through and update them all.
Personally I think this needs to be done by an allocated Lego employee that also
deals with the images on their own site
If it was done this way all the parts in your examples would look correct and
as below for both Tan and Dark Tan respectively:-
|
The LEGO renders ARE the problem. They are so badly lit that some colors are
very poorly represented.
|
Okay but whats worse.... A poorly represented colour which is uniform in shading
accross the site or a colour which can be represented in just about any shade
you can think of?
|
We will always have this problem. It cannot be solved, unless
1) one person has all the parts and a (semi-)profeccional photo studio where
he/she can process all the photos in a uniform manner; or
2) all historic parts are modelled in 3D with enough accuracy, we choose one
of the RGB values used to represent the color (even LEGO does not always use
the same one), we choose a standard software option to generate and edit the
images according to a pre-determined protocol. To ensure a uniform look, it is
probably best if only one or a few people do this...
It's simply more complicated than most people realise and not feasible.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | May 24, 2021 05:19 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, WoutR writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | In Catalog, jennnifer writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | In Catalog, tec writes:
| | Hi
Is there a way (or setting) to collapse all Tan pics to the same shade? So that
all listings are simple, uniform.
or, show all in the the most common shade? (which is... the last?!?)
or, exclude just that strange shadowy Tan?
Oh well, just in case, if there's a fix also for Dark Tan... I'd love
to use it
|
Much of this would be achievable if we focused on using Legos official images
wherever possible expecially when it comes to generic bricks but it would take
a lot of time to expect community volunteers to go through and update them all.
Personally I think this needs to be done by an allocated Lego employee that also
deals with the images on their own site
If it was done this way all the parts in your examples would look correct and
as below for both Tan and Dark Tan respectively:-
|
The LEGO renders ARE the problem. They are so badly lit that some colors are
very poorly represented.
|
Okay but whats worse.... A poorly represented colour which is uniform in shading
accross the site or a colour which can be represented in just about any shade
you can think of?
|
We will always have this problem. It cannot be solved, unless
1) one person has all the parts and a (semi-)profeccional photo studio where
he/she can process all the photos in a uniform manner; or
2) all historic parts are modelled in 3D with enough accuracy, we choose one
of the RGB values used to represent the color (even LEGO does not always use
the same one), we choose a standard software option to generate and edit the
images according to a pre-determined protocol. To ensure a uniform look, it is
probably best if only one or a few people do this...
It's simply more complicated than most people realise and not feasible.
|
Yet Lego themselves have already done the hard work....
The OP gave 4 random contrasting examples for both Tan and Dark Tan part images
taken from Bricklink and when I searched up the official images for those very
same parts they were all perfectly uniform and so even if there are some differences
here and there with the official images that certainly does'nt appear to
be the case for the most part?
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | peregrinator | | Posted: | May 22, 2021 21:27 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | If it was done this way all the parts in your examples would look correct and
as below for both Tan and Dark Tan respectively:-
|
Honestly I think these renders are not good - the shading is so heavy that tan,
for example, looks much darker than it ought
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | May 22, 2021 21:57 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, peregrinator writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | If it was done this way all the parts in your examples would look correct and
as below for both Tan and Dark Tan respectively:-
|
Honestly I think these renders are not good - the shading is so heavy that tan,
for example, looks much darker than it ought
|
But a lot of this comes down to simple display settings for instance on my PC
LCD they currently look perfect whereas on my Laptop they look a little too dark
but something easily adjustable for those that are bothered by it. Either way
at least all those example Lego images are uniform in colour/shading and that's
the important thing as the OP's examples show tan in different colours altogether?
besides if they're good enough for Legos official site I don't see any
reason why they shouldn't be good enough to use on Bricklink?
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | jennnifer | | Posted: | May 22, 2021 22:44 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | In Catalog, peregrinator writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | If it was done this way all the parts in your examples would look correct and
as below for both Tan and Dark Tan respectively:-
|
Honestly I think these renders are not good - the shading is so heavy that tan,
for example, looks much darker than it ought
|
But a lot of this comes down to simple display settings for instance on my PC
LCD they currently look perfect whereas on my Laptop they look a little too dark
but something easily adjustable for those that are bothered by it. Either way
at least all those example Lego images are uniform in colour/shading and that's
the important thing as the OP's examples show tan in different colours altogether?
besides if they're good enough for Legos official site I don't see any
reason why they shouldn't be good enough to use on Bricklink?
|
Here is where we agree to disagree.  I don't how LEGO using them makes
them good enough for our uses. They are not pulling parts using their images.
The accuracy means nothing to them. They use different images in their instructions
booklets and on printed material.
I think their renders are only clear if you have another render to compare them
to. At a glance, the White look LBG, the LBG look DBG, and the DBG look Black.
The Trans images are all terrible. The Yellow all look... well not Yellow.
Would you really go pull a White part from just seeing this render? randyf's
images are WAY closer to the truth.
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | May 23, 2021 06:55 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, jennnifer writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | In Catalog, peregrinator writes:
| | In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| | If it was done this way all the parts in your examples would look correct and
as below for both Tan and Dark Tan respectively:-
|
Honestly I think these renders are not good - the shading is so heavy that tan,
for example, looks much darker than it ought
|
But a lot of this comes down to simple display settings for instance on my PC
LCD they currently look perfect whereas on my Laptop they look a little too dark
but something easily adjustable for those that are bothered by it. Either way
at least all those example Lego images are uniform in colour/shading and that's
the important thing as the OP's examples show tan in different colours altogether?
besides if they're good enough for Legos official site I don't see any
reason why they shouldn't be good enough to use on Bricklink?
|
Here is where we agree to disagree. I don't how LEGO using them makes
them good enough for our uses. They are not pulling parts using their images.
The accuracy means nothing to them. They use different images in their instructions
booklets and on printed material.
I think their renders are only clear if you have another render to compare them
to. At a glance, the White look LBG, the LBG look DBG, and the DBG look Black.
The Trans images are all terrible. The Yellow all look... well not Yellow.
Would you really go pull a White part from just seeing this render? randyf's
images are WAY closer to the truth.
|
To be honest if I was picking parts by image alone I would have far more success
picking this as white if I knew there was continuity across the site and that
all other white parts (or at least most) looked just the same as your example.
I honestly believe you would also soon become accustomed to the fact that white
looks this way and LBG is much darker with DBG much darker still. The thing is
when we have lots of different people rendering the shading differently we only
create a bigger issue especially when Legos colour palette range is ever increasing
therefore I would almost say it’s imperative that a colour render used is the
same for all parts where possible.
I don’t knock Randy’s work and if Randy was handling all the colour renders for
the site or insisting that all contributions use the same software and are
editing to the same settings that he himself uses then it wouldn’t be such a
problem but that’s not gonna happen and so whether you like the official Lego
image renders in my example of not at least they are consistent compared to the
mish-mash of colour variations shown in the ops examples?
Sometimes I don’t understand why we should feel the need to go to such lengths
to edit Legos official renders or even Legos official colour names as in doing
so we just seem to create further problems for ourselves?
If these official Lego renders were used as White, LBG, DBG and Black I would
soon become accustomed enough to be able to tell the difference regardless of
whether I’m able to see them side by side or not...
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | jennnifer | | Posted: | May 23, 2021 11:02 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, infinibrix writes:
| |
Sometimes I don’t understand why we should feel the need to go to such lengths
to edit Legos official renders or even Legos official colour names as in doing
so we just seem to create further problems for ourselves?
|
Honestly, we are going to these lengths because we think we are actually solving
a problem. Most of our renders are now fairly good, some of them are still bad.
| | If these official Lego renders were used as White, LBG, DBG and Black I would
soon become accustomed enough to be able to tell the difference regardless of
whether I’m able to see them side by side or not...
|
And then we have new sellers getting them all mixed up while they are 'becoming
accustomed'? And new buyers ordering the wrong thing?
**The best solution is to have the most renders possible with the best color
accuracy.**
Anyone can contribute and fix the remaining problems with this issue. I should
mention that fixing some of the colors like Tan and Dark Tan are a bit more challenging
to get right than others. Most of the bad examples in the OP were actually some
of my early attempts that need to get brought up to randyf's standard.
I will set aside some time today to contribute some better versions.
Take care,
Jen
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | infinibrix | | Posted: | May 23, 2021 16:16 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, jennnifer writes:
| | And then we have new sellers getting them all mixed up while they are 'becoming
accustomed'? And new buyers ordering the wrong thing?
|
But it goes without saying that any new buyer or seller with any sense is almost
certainly going to go by descriptions before relying on the colour of an image
alone. Once accustomed to how a colour looks on BL they can be more confident
about relying on the look of an image alone to determine colour however that
process will always be much harder if that same shade of colour is rendered differently
for differnt parts? besides its well known in the e-commerce world that the colour
and shading you see on screen may look different in hand especially with people
using different monitor settings and so trying to set the perfect shade for everyone
is somewhat futile concept anyway?
| | Anyone can contribute and fix the remaining problems with this issue. I should
mention that fixing some of the colors like Tan and Dark Tan are a bit more challenging
to get right than others. Most of the bad examples in the OP were actually some
of my early attempts that need to get brought up to randyf's standard.
I will set aside some time today to contribute some better versions.
Take care,
Jen
|
Firstly I did'nt look to see who the contributor was for the ops examples
so my comments ar'nt targetted at you or any other contributor for that
matter and likewise I don't expect you to fix anything in fact I'd recommend
saving yourself the trouble by just using the official Tan/Dark Tan images I've
posted above as that would be how I have and continue to upload them?
They all look like good enough represntations of Tan and Dark Tan to me in fact
I just looked up some basic 1x1 plates on the lego site to display a vast range
of colours and even though the colour names are not displayed until you click
onto the image I could see exactly which colour was which?
In the end whether we edit the original renders or not people will still get
a few parts mixed up from time to time given they contain light shadowing where
people will see a shade of colour differently but in my view by keeping the renders
consistantly the same you reduce that risk as it gives people the ability to
visually memorize a colour render on the site but if that colour render is always
changing/slightly different it only makes people more reliant on needing to read
the colour description rather than less reliant?
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | calebfishn | | Posted: | May 23, 2021 17:27 | | Subject: | Re: Tan in the catalog | | Viewed: | 32 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, tec writes:
| | Hi
Is there a way (or setting) to collapse all Tan pics to the same shade? So that
all listings are simple, uniform.
or, show all in the the most common shade? (which is... the last?!?)
or, exclude just that strange shadowy Tan?
Oh well, just in case, if there's a fix also for Dark Tan... I'd love
to use it
|
This is a fascinating discussion, but I can't really get into it.
Yes, the colors may be wonky, but at least it gives the name of the color right
there in the description. This is very important for people like me who:
1. Can only print order sheets in black and white.
2. Are colour blind. I wouldn't be able to tell dark tan from nougat, from
green, from coral no matter how good the photographs were.
|
|
|
|
|
Italy, Marche
)
)
France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
Canada, British Columbia
United Kingdom, England
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Netherlands, Zuid-Holland
)
)
)
)