Jump to content

Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Sign in to follow this  
RPTA

If you could introduce a new line color...

Recommended Posts

... what letter/number and color would it be?

 

I personally would make a pink (X) line. How about everyone here?

Edited by RPTA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

  • Pink
  • Black
  • White
  • Sea Green

 

They contrast enough with the existing colors that they could be used for new trunk/major lines. Black might be questionable though since it would appear that the (S) alternates between black, dark gray, and gray depending on where you see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, pink would be the next logical color, since SAS will be light blue, and we already have light and dark green. Light versions of other colors aren't really different enough (like having a ligher orange or yellow; though a deep pure yellow gold would be good, and I've been suggesting that be used for Bway for a long time).

Lavender would perhaps be the only other thing different enough from pink, purple and blue to be used.

Sea Green would still be too close to the (G)'s lime green.

White is too hard to see on the background. They only use it for totally shot down Fastrack lines. I guess they could use outline, like they do on the yellow Bway line.

 

However, those shades of colors would probably be used anyway if there were ever that many new trunk lines built. The DOT express bus map used a lot of similar shades for all the different companies, though similar shades would be separated by borough.

 

But then there will probably probably never be any totally new trunk line built after the SAS, so it's all moot anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sea Green would still be too close to the (G)'s lime green.

It's pretty distinct I think—much more so than lavender. Azure blue and lime green have many colors in between, one of which is teal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still, on different signs and maps, the exact colors vary, so overall, the G color is a light green (as opposed to Lex, which is a darker green), so it would still look like it was associated with the Crosstown line.

Again, if you had a bunch of different colors, like the old DOT map, then yes, but a color like that would be way down on the list. We already have two greens, and pink (or I should as a flesh color, which pink would probably come out as in "The Map" gamut) is what is not really represented (the closest is the (7)'s purple).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the G color is a light green (as opposed to Lex, which is a darker green), so it would still look like it was associated with the Crosstown line.

Sea green is actually a different hue whereas pink or lavender are different lightness variations of the same color used for the (7). That means "sea green" really isn't a "green." English just doesn't have a native word to describe the color and needs a two-term word. Pink, on the other hand is the same hue as purple (or damn close to it) and under less ideal lighting conditions, would not be distinguishable from purple. Brown and orange already have that problem in some contexts because they are the same hue.

 

There's an excellent article (http://www.starchamber.com/colors/colors-and-language.html) on how people perceive colors based on their upbringing (cultural and linguistic stuff). Chinese people tend to lump orange with red, for example, and many would even say sea green is actually blue. Where people draw the hue/saturation/luminosity thresholds for certain colors may be different, but the end result is all the same—the eye sees what the eye sees and differentiating colors by hue lets it survive many more varying lighting/printing conditions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lavender is light purple, pink is light magenta to light red, and flesh is also light red. They're still different enough from each other, while sea-green and lime are both still "light green". We already have one light green, so that color is not really needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lavender is light purple, pink is light magenta to light red, and flesh is also light red. They're still different enough from each other, while sea-green and lime are both still "light green". We already have one light green, so that color is not really needed.

 

Here's a chart of colors divided up mathematically:

6eji35.png

I've divided the chart into 15 different hue columns and one monochrome column. The rows from the top increase in saturation to the 5th row and then decrease in luminosity to the last row. The monochrome column simply decreases in luminosity from the top to the bottom. Outlined in solid black are the colors currently used by the MTA for trunk lines. Outlined in dotted black are the colors I think are distinctive enough to be added for future expansions.

 

You can see that "green" actually covers 4 columns in this chart and so does "blue." There's definitely room for additional colors without any confusion.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In one of my fantasy maps, I have a dark, gold-ish color for one of my lines, and another line has a darker variation of the 2nd Avenue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice chart.

 

I still say sea green is overall too close to the other greens to be the next new color. When a lot of the other colors are used up, yes (like the RR maps, or the express bus map).

I've never seen Lexington green up there in the Lum. 100 range. Even that 104 hue in that range looks more suited for the (G). It looks like a variation of the 80 hue at the same luminosity. That's why they don't look that different from the (G). It's the luminosity moreso than the hue.

 

Really, hues 296 and 320 are different enough to denote different lines, but the (7) coloring hasn't been consistent, so that line still ends up covering those three hues.

 

The next line after SAS would probably be more in the 244 range, particularly Sat: 40, as 296 in the 60 and lower saturation is too close to the (7), and if the map had faint lines for part time (kike let's say they decided to do the express where it's a separate line in the faded color), those colors would be used for that.

320 might be used, and would be a variation of 244. It could also simply be hue 8, in the 40 sat. though again, that would fit a part time version of the 7th Ave. service.

 

Now, for hue 56 (Bway), I've been saying they should use Lum. 60 or 80 (and then, the current 100 would be for part time services on the Weekender map).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pink and White would probably be best. In the (unlikely) scenario that the MTA gets the money to build more than 3 new trunk lines, I would hope they would at least make sure similar colors didn't cross over or interline for any significant distance.

 

  • Pink
  • Black
  • White
  • Sea Green

 

They contrast enough with the existing colors that they could be used for new trunk/major lines. Black might be questionable though since it would appear that the (S) alternates between black, dark gray, and gray depending on where you see it.

 

 

Don't they already use black to denote shuttle bus connections during weekend work? That could get confusing.

In any case the IRT routes are red and green, so any consideration for the plight of the color blind died a long time ago. T.T

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's for subway letters that are not used. Besides white is hard to see and distinguish.

 

 

White on black is actually quite good to distinguish. Just like white on blue. Reason why various transit companies around the world (like Amtrak, Dutch Railways, etc.) use white on blue for station signs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In response to the OP's thread starter, since it seems all the eye friendly colors the MTA mappers already exhausted. I do like teal as a color also light green (figure (T) and (G)- those are my favorite colors). Maybe pink? They used it before for the (MJ) before that line was demolished. But it may look too similar to the color used for the (7) if they don't catch the right hue of pink People may confuse those two colors.

 

That's all I can think off as a new line color for a new line if the MTA ever has a need for it.

 

White on black is actually quite good to distinguish. Just like white on blue. Reason why various transit companies around the world (like Amtrak, Dutch Railways, etc.) use white on blue for station signs.

 

 

Pics please. I want to see how the Dutch Railway does it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not try white

It's used on Fastrack maps to show the line out of service.

As Roadcruiser says, it's hard to distinguish on the light background.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I say light purple or pink. I can see that some ppl may not like pink but it could work.....

 

 

It was barely well-received in Chicago, but 6 years later (and with our new Color LED's they look good) it makes sense to try Pink.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.