New England Patriots White jersey/grey pants

[guest23]

The RGB code for Red is 255/0/0

The RGB code for Yellow is 255/255/0

The RGB code for Orange is 255/128/0 (255/127.5/0)

Halfway between Red and Orange is Vermilion

The RGB code for Vermilion is 255/64/0 (255/63.75/0)

Scarlet is halfway between Red and Vermilion (by definition, scarlet is one-quarter of the way between Red and Orange)

Therefore, the RGB code for Scarlet, by definition, is 255/32/0 (255/31.875/0)

So, as stated before, "Scarlet" is not a random term applied to a color estimation that's somewhere near Red, but rather an EXACT color that has a specific code, which could easily be applied to all color-matching systems, including Pantone's system (as evidenced by your example of the red Pantone that included the RGB code for that color.

What are you sourcing for these EXACT values?

[VikWings]

Didn't the FSU shade of garnet change with the re-design? It looks more maroon/burgundy with the current jerseys where the previous ones looked more red-ish.

[TruColor]

The RGB code for Red is 255/0/0

The RGB code for Yellow is 255/255/0

The RGB code for Orange is 255/128/0 (255/127.5/0)

Halfway between Red and Orange is Vermilion

The RGB code for Vermilion is 255/64/0 (255/63.75/0)

Scarlet is halfway between Red and Vermilion (by definition, scarlet is one-quarter of the way between Red and Orange)

Therefore, the RGB code for Scarlet, by definition, is 255/32/0 (255/31.875/0)

So, as stated before, "Scarlet" is not a random term applied to a color estimation that's somewhere near Red, but rather an EXACT color that has a specific code, which could easily be applied to all color-matching systems, including Pantone's system (as evidenced by your example of the red Pantone that included the RGB code for that color.

This is so wrong, I don't even know where to begin.

[TruColor]

Didn't the FSU shade of garnet change with the re-design? It looks more maroon/burgundy with the current jerseys where the previous ones looked more red-ish.

...which is also Washington Redskins Burgundy.

I'm sure WavePunter will now argue that this is all wrong.

[WavePunter]

The RGB code for Red is 255/0/0

The RGB code for Yellow is 255/255/0

The RGB code for Orange is 255/128/0 (255/127.5/0)

Halfway between Red and Orange is Vermilion

The RGB code for Vermilion is 255/64/0 (255/63.75/0)

Scarlet is halfway between Red and Vermilion (by definition, scarlet is one-quarter of the way between Red and Orange)

Therefore, the RGB code for Scarlet, by definition, is 255/32/0 (255/31.875/0)

So, as stated before, "Scarlet" is not a random term applied to a color estimation that's somewhere near Red, but rather an EXACT color that has a specific code, which could easily be applied to all color-matching systems, including Pantone's system (as evidenced by your example of the red Pantone that included the RGB code for that color.

What are you sourcing for these EXACT values?

For Red, I'm sourcing the RGB code itself, given that the R stands for "Red". With red's value maxed at 255 and no other colors present, the RGB code for Red is 255/0/0.

If you max Red and Green in the RGB code, you get

Yellow, so the RGB code for Yellow is 255/255/0.

For the truest Orange, I went with the exact midpoint between Red and Yellow, and ended up with 255/127.5/0

And so on, dividing the "Green" value in half each time to get the most precise color for Vermilion and then Scarlet.

If anything here is incorrect, please enlighten me. I used nothing more than a precise verbal definition of Scarlet, sound logic, and basic math skills to formulate these values. I understand certain color names are nothing more than generalizations, but I chose the name "Scarlet" for a reason. It's verbal definition gives it a specific location on the color wheel, which is easy to calculate given RGB's numerical nature. I used math to place Scarlet 1/8 of the way between Red and Yellow (which is 1/4 of the way between Red and Orange), thus giving me an exact color with an exact value.

Once again, I'm very open to learning why my logic and reasoning is wrong, because obviously I'm quite interested in the topic.

[WavePunter]

Didn't the FSU shade of garnet change with the re-design? It looks more maroon/burgundy with the current jerseys where the previous ones looked more red-ish.

...which is also Washington Redskins Burgundy.

I'm sure WavePunter will now argue that this is all wrong.

Not at all. Neither Garnet nor Burgundy give any specifics in their definitions. Both just generally describe the colors as dark shades of red, etc. Also, I haven't stated that anyone or anything is "wrong". I just voiced my opinion that schools shouldn't arbitrarily pic a random shade of a color just because it's "close enough" to their official color. If your official color is scarlet, you should select a pantone for your school that represents scarlet, not one that looks more crimson or burgundy or orange. The school I work at is Scarlet and Grey and our pantone red is not quite scarlet, which bugs me.

I then took it a step further and suggested that pantone officially names common school colors, so there can be more accuracy between schools (for example, Kansas and Nebraska using the same color pantone when their "official" colors are different. I'm definitely blaming the schools/teams for the inaccuracies, but I was just adding my opinion that it would be nice for pantone to standardize common colors for differentiation and accuracy among the athletic world

[IceCap]

The problem is that "Scarlet" is just a name. Just like "Wolf Grey." The Atlanta Thrashers, if I remember correctly, once called their shade of copper "Capital of the South Copper" or something silly like that.

Teams just assign whatever names they want to their colours. If a red team wants to make it seem like they're different from other red teams they might say "our main colour is 'Scarlet'" and call it a day.

[oldschoolvikings]

I think what you're being asked is, what makes you think that scarlet is specifically one/quarter the way to orange, or what ever you were saying?

[chakfu]

I agree that precise mathematical definitions for descriptive color names would be nice, but what authority is there? Crayola?

I'm not joking, that kind of organization would be very pleasing and I understand where wavepunter is coming from. Perhaps pantone and other companies or societies could actually establish a consensus nomenclature.

[WavePunter]

I understand where you're coming from, and I agree. For randomly named colors that fit the team's image, it's just a name, I understand that. Miami has had several shades of Aqua and Coral, but they always call them Aqua and Coral. My point is that "scarlet" is not just another word that describes some general shade of red. "Scarlet" has an exact definition that states "Scarlet is a bright red with a slightly orange tinge. In the spectrum of visible light, and on the traditional color wheel, it is one-fourth of the way between red and orange, slightly less orange than vermilion.

Given this definition, it's VERY easy to pinpoint exact values such as "one-fourth" and if you know the value of red and orange, it's a pretty simple process to get an exact and accurate answer.

[oldschoolvikings]

I understand where you're coming from, and I agree. For randomly named colors that fit the team's image, it's just a name, I understand that. Miami has had several shades of Aqua and Coral, but they always call them Aqua and Coral. My point is that "scarlet" is not just another word that describes some general shade of red. "Scarlet" has an exact definition that states "Scarlet is a bright red with a slightly orange tinge. In the spectrum of visible light, and on the traditional color wheel, it is one-fourth of the way between red and orange, slightly less orange than vermilion.

Given this definition, it's VERY easy to pinpoint exact values such as "one-fourth" and if you know the value of red and orange, it's a pretty simple process to get an exact and accurate answer.

But where did THAT come from? Seriously, I teach color and design at an art college... I've never heard anything that specific applied to a color before. And I've been forced to read multiple friggin textbooks on the subject.

[infrared41]

I kinda would prefer to see this at the Super Bowl:

I'd prefer the Seahawks look below, but either match up is preferable to what we're going to get.

[WavePunter]

As you guys know, I'm an equipment manager and wrestling coach at my alma mater, Newberry College. Our colors are "Scarlet and Grey", and we completely rebrand when we switched from the Indians to the Wolves, and I was on the branding committee. In an attempt to refine our color-usage, I decided to find out exactly what Scarlet looked like to get a good starting point. I started by simply googling "Scarlet" and the same definition popped up in a few different places, and other definitions generally confirmed or supported the original definition, so I assumed it was true. For the past several years, I've basically just operated under that assumption, since none of my subsequent findings have given me reason to question the validity of that definition.

[TruColor]

Here are some of the colors that collegiate programs use to represent Scarlet:

...more:

[TruColor]

...and a couple more:

The lesson here should also be that RGB values do not define a color solely...Pantone provides them as a visual match to the printed version of the color.

[guest23]

...and a couple more:

The lesson here should also be that RGB values do not define a color solely...Pantone provides them as a visual match to the printed version of the color.

Well put. There may be a general consensus out there as to what a color should look like but there is no agreed upon international standard. Maybe ISO (iso.org) would be willing to take on such an endeavor but in all reality people and businesses using different names for the same colors seems to be rather inconsequential in the grand scheme of things.

Last point this is why businesses refer to specifications, processes, items etc. in terms of numbers and not names. With a quantitative naming convention like a pantone value "485 C" there's no ambiguity as to what that color is. Good luck doing the same with thousands of names like "scarlet".

[WavePunter]

...and a couple more:

The lesson here should also be that RGB values do not define a color solely...Pantone provides them as a visual match to the printed version of the color.

Well put. There may be a general consensus out there as to what a color should look like but there is no agreed upon international standard. Maybe ISO (iso.org) would be willing to take on such an endeavor but in all reality people and businesses using different names for the same colors seems to be rather inconsequential in the grand scheme of things.

Last point this is why businesses refer to specifications, processes, items etc. in terms of numbers and not names. With a quantitative naming convention like a pantone value "485 C" there's no ambiguity as to what that color is. Good luck doing the same with thousands of names like "scarlet".

I think "thousands" is a bit of an overexaggeration based on my suggestion. I simply implied that it would be nice if the more common colors were established, i.e. red, blue, kelly, navy, scarlet, forest, hunter, orange, burgundy, crimson, cardinal, garnet, maroon, powder blue, athletic gold, etc. It was just a thought, and this thread has gone a very long way off course from my intentions. I was simply expressing my desire for these "official colors" to actually mean something. As someone else pointed out before I joined the discussion, fans are often overly proud of their specific color (name), to the point of correcting others for saying the wrong color name. My main point was to truly back up the meaning behind the fans' love for the colors and the institutions devotion to them by simply taking some of them and unifying them so that there is some real value and credence behind the names. Fans don't know their favorite team's color by "pantone 185 C", they know it by name. I'm well aware of the pantone system and how it works, and that they use numbers/letters instead of word names. And again, as I've said numerous times, the onus is on the institutions, not Pantone, although it would be nice to have some unified system to reference. That's all I was trying to say until I was told how wrong I am and how vague names are vs number codes, etc. Everything that has been said to me, I already knew. A couple guys seemed to get the basic message I was trying to convey, and I appreciate that, but I certainly didn't intend on creating such a hotly debated near-argument. It just bothers me when two "scarlet" teams don't wear the same shade of red, then a "crimson" team and a "scarlet" team DO wear the same exact shade. For a group who points out inconsistencies in the Jets' greens, and is aware of the Eagles "midnight green" jersey color-matching issues, I really thought a lot more of you would be on the same page. But again, I never intended to cause an argument or upset anyone.

[WavePunter]

...and a couple more:

The lesson here should also be that RGB values do not define a color solely...Pantone provides them as a visual match to the printed version of the color.

Well put. There may be a general consensus out there as to what a color should look like but there is no agreed upon international standard. Maybe ISO (iso.org) would be willing to take on such an endeavor but in all reality people and businesses using different names for the same colors seems to be rather inconsequential in the grand scheme of things.

Last point this is why businesses refer to specifications, processes, items etc. in terms of numbers and not names. With a quantitative naming convention like a pantone value "485 C" there's no ambiguity as to what that color is. Good luck doing the same with thousands of names like "scarlet".

I think "thousands" is a bit of an overexaggeration based on my suggestion. I simply implied that it would be nice if the more common colors were established, i.e. red, blue, kelly, navy, scarlet, forest, hunter, orange, burgundy, crimson, cardinal, garnet, maroon, powder blue, athletic gold, etc. It was just a thought, and this thread has gone a very long way off course from my intentions. I was simply expressing my desire for these "official colors" to actually mean something. As someone else pointed out before I joined the discussion, fans are often overly proud of their specific color (name), to the point of correcting others for saying the wrong color name. My main point was to truly back up the meaning behind the fans' love for the colors and the institutions devotion to them by simply taking some of them and unifying them so that there is some real value and credence behind the names. Fans don't know their favorite team's color by "pantone 185 C", they know it by name. I'm well aware of the pantone system and how it works, and that they use numbers/letters instead of word names. And again, as I've said numerous times, the onus is on the institutions, not Pantone, although it would be nice to have some unified system to reference. That's all I was trying to say until I was told how wrong I am and how vague names are vs number codes, etc. Everything that has been said to me, I already knew. A couple guys seemed to get the basic message I was trying to convey, and I appreciate that, but I certainly didn't intend on creating such a hotly debated near-argument. It just bothers me when two "scarlet" teams don't wear the same shade of red, then a "crimson" team and a "scarlet" team DO wear the same exact shade. For a group who points out inconsistencies in the Jets' greens, and is aware of the Eagles "midnight green" jersey color-matching issues, I really thought a lot more of you would be on the same page. But again, I never intended to cause an argument or upset anyone.

[TruColor]

I think "thousands" is a bit of an overexaggeration based on my suggestion. I simply implied that it would be nice if the more common colors were established, i.e. red, blue, kelly, navy, scarlet, forest, hunter, orange, burgundy, crimson, cardinal, garnet, maroon, powder blue, athletic gold, etc. It was just a thought, and this thread has gone a very long way off course from my intentions. I was simply expressing my desire for these "official colors" to actually mean something. As someone else pointed out before I joined the discussion, fans are often overly proud of their specific color (name), to the point of correcting others for saying the wrong color name. My main point was to truly back up the meaning behind the fans' love for the colors and the institutions devotion to them by simply taking some of them and unifying them so that there is some real value and credence behind the names. Fans don't know their favorite team's color by "pantone 185 C", they know it by name. I'm well aware of the pantone system and how it works, and that they use numbers/letters instead of word names. And again, as I've said numerous times, the onus is on the institutions, not Pantone, although it would be nice to have some unified system to reference. That's all I was trying to say until I was told how wrong I am and how vague names are vs number codes, etc. Everything that has been said to me, I already knew. A couple guys seemed to get the basic message I was trying to convey, and I appreciate that, but I certainly didn't intend on creating such a hotly debated near-argument. It just bothers me when two "scarlet" teams don't wear the same shade of red, then a "crimson" team and a "scarlet" team DO wear the same exact shade. For a group who points out inconsistencies in the Jets' greens, and is aware of the Eagles "midnight green" jersey color-matching issues, I really thought a lot more of you would be on the same page. But again, I never intended to cause an argument or upset anyone.

Apples to Oranges.

You lost us when you tried to use RGB values to definitively define color names. Just doesn't work.

Pantone colors use RGB values to represent the colors; the formula ink mixes and their corresponding CIE-L*ab values are what make the colors what they are.

RGB and CMYK are purely simulations of the actual color.

And as I'm sure you already know, Newberry College uses 186 C for its Scarlet as well.

[Cosmic]

FWIW, scarlet is listed on Wikipedia with an exact definition like WavePunter states. The source is a book called A Dictionary of Color from 1930. But just because those authors gave definitions to specific colors and someone else put it on Wikipedia 80 years later, that does not make it the absolute truth.

WavePunter, you are right, but also wrong... you should listen to the people in this thread that know about this kind of thing.