Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Making pitch and track color less dominant #2363

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 15, 2016

Conversation

kocio-pl
Copy link
Collaborator

@kocio-pl kocio-pl commented Sep 22, 2016

Resolves #1190.

The color definition is not absolute for now to make it easier to test modifications. When it'll be ready to merge, I will remove the "[WIP]" (work in progress) from the title.

After some testing I feel this color (lighten 8%, desaturate 5%) is the best on typical backgrounds:

z14 - it's still visible on the sport center and on the ground, but less than a forest, and small spots on residential area are not a problem now:

Before
jdk619dg
After
4ylsau2h

z15 - pitches are less intense than a special building and secondary roads, now they are more or less like a regular buildings, which is good:

Before
vouzm97o
After
9 xab68c

z16 - when school areas are bigger, it's the same as with sport centres, and we have a special case, pitch on the residential area, which also looks OK on this zoom level:

Before
f9vbphts
After
zypwbbvq

z17 - another typical background, pitch on a grass, you can also see that it's still much different than cemetery green:

Before
wpbsfxf
After
_vw2ny6z

@kocio-pl kocio-pl changed the title Making pitch and track color less dominant [WIP] Making pitch and track color less dominant Sep 25, 2016
@kocio-pl kocio-pl self-assigned this Nov 15, 2016
@kocio-pl
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I'm going to merge it if in a few days if no one will oppose.

@imagico
Copy link
Collaborator

imagico commented Nov 15, 2016

This does not seem to be codified here i think but it is generally not common to merge your own changes (4-eyes principle).

I am staying out of this matter due to #2270.

The current color by the way was selected in #2071 after #1190.

@kocio-pl
Copy link
Collaborator Author

This does not seem to be codified here i think but it is generally not common to merge your own changes (4-eyes principle).

This happens sometimes (like in #2409), but I definitely won't push anything when there are any objections.

I am staying out of this matter due to #2270.

I consider it to be rather objection than just lack of interest, so now I don't plan any action here.

@pnorman
Copy link
Collaborator

pnorman commented Nov 15, 2016

I'm going to merge it if in a few days if no one will oppose.

No, you shouldn't merge this without review from someone else

@imagico
Copy link
Collaborator

imagico commented Nov 15, 2016

I consider it to be rather objection than just lack of interest

Neither is the case - i am just not able to form a qualified opinion here. I would not change the color this way but i would also not have changed the playground color the way it was changed or the dog_park color. So i can't really say if i consider this change in isolation as good or bad.

So i am fine if this change finds general approval - but i would appreciate it of course if - in line with #2270 - someone can explain the guiding principles behind these color choices then.

@matthijsmelissen
Copy link
Collaborator

matthijsmelissen commented Nov 15, 2016

This does not seem to be codified here i think but it is generally not common to merge your own changes (4-eyes principle).

I commented on that in #2436 (comment), but my message likely crossed your message (and @kocio-pl's comment). Of course, everything is open for discussion, but let's keep discussing the principles separate from discussing this PR.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants