Color schemes

Figment · Post by **Figment** » Fri May 16, 2003 2:35 pm

Currently, Figment looks like every other boat out there.... white hull topsides, ivory deck and house, blue canvaswork (mainsail cover, cushions, etc...). In the long term, I'd like to change all that.

The wifey's taste defaults to dark blue hull. (tim, I TOLD you that your restoration website was THE reason I got her on board with the Triton idea!). Canvas color undecided. Because I've had a thousand other things on my mind, I've gone along quietly.

Then the other day an idea struck.... RED

Red hull topsides. Maybe stick with the ivory decks/house, maybe go to a silvered-teak deck with grey house. dark burghundy canvaswork.

At the moment this is just an idea. It came into my head quickly and is likely to leave just as quickly, but it got me to ask myself about what other color schemes might be attractive. Dark green? Soft butteryyellow?

Any thoughts from the Peanut Gallery?

Post by **dasein668** » Fri May 16, 2003 2:54 pm

Well, I'd like to steer you away from dark green/grey, but for selfish reasons: that's the way I'm going!

I think red is nice, if you go with a deep color (like Claret). My wife vetoed the claret, or I might have gone in that direction...

Personally, I like dark/bold colors myself. Not a fan of the yellow... red, green, blue, or black are the only choices, as far as I'm concerned!

But then again, its a very personal thing. You have to go with what makes your heart sing... regardless of what the rest of the world thinks. If you really liked seafoam green decks and a brown hull, I would say go for it--even though it might make me physically ill! hehe. After all, you are the one who'll be stuck with what every you decide on.

I would say, I'd tend to go more for a contrasting canvas color, rather than one that's closely related. I'm not sure if I'd go burgandy canvas with a red hull... but again, that's just me...

Post by **Tim** » Fri May 16, 2003 4:08 pm

Oh boy...

Color schemes are all so subjective. It's definitely nice to get away from the white/pacific blue look, which is just so...ordinary.

The red tones are definitely underused on boats. Bright red...well, that can go either way, looks-wise. Sometimes it looks good...sometimes not.

There's a bright red Triton here in Falmouth. It looks pretty good. Using a green bottom with a red hull (or a red bottom on a green hull) creates the obvious Christmas look, which I'm not a huge fan of.

Claret, a nice burgandy/maroon color, is wicked sharp. It's the direction I'm leaning for the Daysailor. You don't see it much.

I'm a sucker for Flag Blue, white boot, and green bottom. However, did you know that I must receive royalties from other Triton owners who wish to use that combo? ;<)

Another combo that looks nice is a cream color, like Hatteras Off-White or similar. Not nearly as stark as white, and rather classy. You can use almost any color striping and canvas with this. Extra trim (wood or paint) helps keep this from being too stark.

Whatever you do, do not use plain red for canvas--it fades instantly, and looks dreadful. Dubonnet Tweed is a decent alternative--a maroon with black threads. Red for canvas and trim on a white or off-white boat is an underused combination that is quite nice, I think. If you want different, definitely head in the red direction--even if it's just for the trim color, rather than the whole hull.

Classic white can be nice too. But it needs embelishment, which the standard Triton lacks. Plain white requires brightwork or bold trim schemes to offset the starkness. Adding a wooden rubrail can work wonders, or a proper cove stripe, or double boottop or some such.

I have some strong feelings personally about boat colors, and these feelings always drive my own color schemes. For example, I hate red and black antifouling paint. I like a contrasting boottop and bottom paint color--not shades of the same color. Yuck.

Another interesting color that can look excellent if done correctly is Gunsmoke blue, or Stars and Stripes blue. This is the unique grayish blue that was used on the Stars and Stripes America's cup boats in 1987. Again, when properly combined with the right boot and bottom colors (harder to do), this is a unique and stylish color.

I need to find my Awlgrip color card to get some more ideas.

Don't overlook the possible use of Micron Shark White for bottoms on some of these combinations. It's a platinum grayish color. It can look good with a red or green (or any dark color, really). However, it turns copper green at the waterline after a short time in the water, so keep that in mind. Shark white with a white hull or white trim would be boring. No thanks.

Black can be nice on some boats. It tends to be a little too...black. That's the beautiful thing of Flag Blue or the dark, dark green that Nathan likes. They look black-ish from a distance, but when the light and reflections play on the hulls, they are most certainly anything but.

Stay away from multiple uses of the same color category. Mis-matched colors that are trying to be similar look awful. Stick with contrasting colors (versus the hull) for boots, bottoms, and canvas. Trying to use Dubonnet Tweed with a Claret hull would be asking for trouble, and blue canvas with a blue hull can be questionable too.

And coordinate the deck and canvas colors, too, if applicable. If you like gray canvas, don't use tan or beige decks. Or vise versa.

Tim

Dan · Post by **Dan** » Sat May 17, 2003 11:42 am

When I repainted my B27 last spring, I decided to go with a classic white look. I like white on these hull shapes because you can see the shadows, which highlights the forms around the bow and stern. It accents the beautiful Alberg overhangs, where dark colors tend to hide it. I painted a dark blue boot stripe and gold leaf cove stripe. I think it looks pretty sharp...I'll post a picture when I get home to my other machine. That said, I really like some of the darker colors, and may repaint her dark blue or maroon in a couple years (if I run out of projects....). I currently have Pacific Blue canvas, but am in the process of changing everything over to Toast, which I think will look good with white or any color I may go with in the future.

There was a very large boat on the cover of 'Sail' or 'Cruising World' a couple months ago. A dutch couple built it for chartering. You should take a look - its a burgundy/maroon color and is absolutely gorgeous. If I do repaint, I'll have to think real hard about replicating it. I'll see if I can find a link to it somewhere.

Dan

Dan Fox · Post by **Dan Fox** » Sat May 17, 2003 11:59 am

Here's the link to a shot of that cover I mentioned. Look at the February or March 03 cover of CW. The electronic version doesn't really do it justice, but you get the idea.

http://www.the-direct-source.com/

Post by **Tim** » Sat May 17, 2003 4:37 pm

There is definitely something to be said for the white, and what Dan said about the shadow lines and such is very true, particularly with the Triton. There's a delicate curve and slight tumblehome at the aft end of the hull above the counter that tends to show up less with a dark hull than a white. It's an important, delicate design feature that makes the stern look lighter.

With dark hulls, you can only really see this swept-up character feature when the boat is viewed from an angle off the bow. One of the reasons I like this recent photo of Glissando is that it highlights this very curve and makes the stern look lighter than it does from straight on.

Any lighter hull color would probably allow the shadows that show this curve. The darks definitely hide it from some angles. Compare this photo with some of the others on the site and you can see the subtle difference.

Dan--are you sticking with the B27 after all?

Tim

Dan · Post by **Dan** » Sun May 18, 2003 4:23 pm

Here's a shot of my boat I took during her launch last spring shortly after repainting her. The job came out pretty well, and this photo shows well what I'm talking about wrt the shadows. They allow you to see the contour of the bow and stern very clearly. Darker colors tend to mask those contours; I think that photo of Glissando illustrates what I mean.

Regarding keeping the B27, I think I will. I figured out the Typhoon wouldn't fit in my garage with the trailer, and I definitely don't want to go smaller. I really like the B27 - I was thinking of getting something smaller for the sake of simplifying as we're in the midst of moving, starting new jobs, etc. Anyway, the wife and I are taking a 4 day cruise in two weeks, which will be our longest time aboard since we got her. We're going to do the lower Chesapeake and finally end up in our new marina, which is near Yorktown. Current itinerary includes Tangier Island, Onancock, and maybe Urbanna if we have time. Can't wait.

Post by **Tim** » Sun May 18, 2003 4:58 pm

Dan,

Hope you don't mind, but I edited your URL post so that the image would show up here for all to see.

This photo shows that shadow line perfectly. That is totally lost in dark hulls, though certain light conditions show it off in person. But it hardly ever is noticeable in photos.

Tim

D. Fox · Post by **D. Fox** » Tue May 20, 2003 11:24 am

No problem at all Tim. But tell me, how do I make it post as you did? Is it the "Img" button? Also, is the image now stored on your server does it go back to mine for it?

Dan

Post by **dasein668** » Tue May 20, 2003 11:44 am

Dan,

Yes, the Img tag is used to actually place the image in the message.
It goes like this: [Img tag] link to the image goes here [/end Img tag] Then, when someone views the message, the server (triton381) will then go get the image from wherever you linked to, and place it in the message. In other words, it is still housed on your server (or wherever it was originally), but the forum software places it inline whenever someone views the message.

When you are writing a message, if you mouse over the buttons for the various tags, a description of the syntaxt for using the tags will show up just above the message box.

Post by **Tim** » Tue May 20, 2003 1:19 pm

Dan,

The other thing I changed was to link directly to the photo file on your web server. You had posted a link to a web page that you had placed the photo on; to link directly to the photo, I right clicked the photo and looked under "properties", which gives the server location for that photo.

Then, be sure to use the "IMG" tag above to both open and close your image file. It needs both tags or it won't work. To do it, click on the IMG button above, enter the http address for the photo (as I described above) and then click again on IMG to close it. You can do this with any photo on any website, and it will make it show up here. The photo remains on the original server.

And what Nathan said is also true--mousing over the buttons above show you the proper protocol to use for that tag.

Tim

Figment · Post by **Figment** » Tue May 20, 2003 3:08 pm

Since this has morphed into a webtech thread....

Tim/nathan, Why is it that on this thread only the text doesn't maintain a respectable margin? (my screen needs to be twice as wide as it is)

A bug in the thread, or a bug on my machine?

Post by **Tim** » Tue May 20, 2003 3:41 pm

That's because the photos that are being installed by the server are so wide. When you point to an image file on a server, it uses the photo at whatever size; there's no way to resize it to better fit without first uploading the smaller one to the server in the first place. When you're using someone else's photo, this isn't possible. (Well, it is, technically, but it takes time.)

That's the downfall to the method...it's more readable to resize the photos to better fit the screen. But it's not always practical. I wish this particular BB software had a better photo-insertion interface. But beggars can't be choosers.

Dan's photo in particular is very large, which is what's spreading the text fields in all subsequent posts.

Tim

Post by **Tim** » Tue May 20, 2003 3:54 pm

By the time you read my answer in the post above, I will have already resized the three photos in this thread. Your text should now wrap properly.

Dan's photo was 2200 pixels in width, which is insane! I resized his, and both of the two I had posted, to 600 pixels wide. That's a more appropriate size.

Dan: in order to resize your photo, I saved it and posted it on one of my servers. Hope you don't mind! I wouldn't do it if I thought it was a problem.

Tim

Dan · Post by **Dan** » Wed May 21, 2003 9:50 pm

No problem of course, and thanks for the tutorial. I'm new to building web pages (could you tell?) and posting photos. The photo was taken with a 3.2 MP camera and was posted without modification, hence the large size.

Dan