[OSM-talk] Rendering of Farmland not 'Light' enough?

[Rob Nickerson]

Hi All,

(full text and images at
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6J5ZA1hu93bYm9IWXdlVHM1N1U )

Recently landuse=farmland (or simply landuse=farm) has been added to fields
near me. This has led to a discussion about how the rendering 'looks' with
some arguing that it doesn't look that good. I believe that this may be due
to the shade of colour used – specifically the farmland 'brown' is not as
luminous as the default 'grey' (actually I think it 'lightness' rather than
'luminosity' that matters to the human eye but I got very confused when
searching the two).

 Consider the image below, showing current rendering:

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6J5ZA1hu93bZDBTN2dZZkpDenc

 On the left we have farmland tagged. The 'brown' has a Lightness value of
83 percent (luminance of 85%). Compare this to the default canvas 'grey',
which has 93 percent Lightness (and 93 percent luminance).

 Now consider the following (and please check your screen calibration at
http://www.photofriday.com/calibrate.php ). I have taken the farmland
'brown' and raised it's Lightness to the same 93 percent as the default
'grey' (that is, I have left the Hue and Saturation the same):

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6J5ZA1hu93bSzk5NDZVMm5GZkE

 In this final image, I have adjusted the Hue and Saturation to provide
more of a 'green':

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6J5ZA1hu93bZXhzdVJMVU44X2M

 What are your thoughts? Which do you prefer? Have I gone too 'light' with
the change and should some value in-between be used instead? Am I barking
up the wrong tree?


Regards,

Rob

 Note: To focus discussion I want to avoid the argument that some people
see farmland as the default and therefore it does not need to be tagged –
it is a legitimate land-use tag and if people want to tag it then let them.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20130105/a56960b5/attachment.html>