Hello!
To use the forum, login or register above.
(If you are already logged in above, please click here)
Scheduled for deletion (44140 flat silver)
Does anyone know why part 44140 in Flat Silver is scheduled for deletion? The other colours do not seem to be affected. The only oddity I can see with this part in flat silver is there is no image for it, could this be the reason? Just curious.
Powered by Vanilla
Comments
The other site is linking that color to three sets and differentiating it from Pearl Dark Gray, Pearl Light Gray, and Pearl Black... it is very off though that this site never schedules something for deletion if it's not tied to any sets.
Is LEGO not showing this color tied to any sets? It's not impossible that this is a manual error over there or it's absolutely correct. They get the same LEGO data that BO does. There is a pic there that certainly looks Flat Silver, but depending on the lighting for that camera/room, that part could have been in reality Pearl Light Gray or Pearl Dark Gray.
This sounds like catalog admins should investigate... unless someone here has this in Flat Silver in-hand?
I know that pearl light grey and flat silver, especially in Bionicle are notoriously hard to tell apart at times and I don't take BL as gospel either. I have dealt with a lot of Bionicle and agonised over these two colours a lot epecially in Bionicle weapons.
I'm happy to delete the ones I have and re-list as pearl light grey if that is the consensus but the ones I have, do err more on the flat silver side when comparing under natural light to pearl light grey.
I’ve been working to correct these errors on both sites.
- Flat Silver correlates to LEGO 315 Silver Metallic (new 2010 silver).
- This part is from 2003-4, meaning it can only be Pearl Light Gray. Some Pearl Light Gray parts display extreme levels of variation, and this part’s plastic is the reason it looks much darker than normal Pearl Light Gray.
- Pearl Light Gray correlates to LEGO 131 Silver (original silver up until 2005 and once again from 2007-2010).
- The plastic used for this part is also the reason that it took so long to add Pearl Red, Pearl Green, etc. as the parts are not as pearly as parts made of normal ABS plastic.
The issue with variation within Pearl colors is that it creates a standardization problem. Pearl Light Gray parts that are noticeably darker than other known PLG parts are put under Flat Silver, despite being a variant of PLG. It’s the same reason Rust was created on BL. BL Rust did not correlate to any official LEGO color for about 20 years, until I had parts in TLG 216 Rust moved to said color. Brickowl was already picking Lego Item Numbers up in 216 Rust for a long time before Bricklink started moving LEGO Rust parts to BL Rust. All those “Rust” technic gears and axles are just basic Red that display as much variation as Brittle Blue.
The Bionicle accessory tubs of 500 pieces contained all sorts of remnants in an array of colours, some of which were impossible to nail down with any certainty. I have parted out sealed multiples of 6620 and 8713, and 6620 in particular was a nuisance as the contents of each didn't always match.
I have 60930 (Jetpack) listed as both Flat Silver (296) and PLG (131) in my store - I have multiples of two different colours, and not a variety of shades but two distinct colours. But from what you say this shouldn't be pe possible.
My worry is, I suppose, that people are talking about things as though they're facts, when in truth the only ones who know for sure are Lego. Did the colour changes occur at the same time in all the different factories for example? Most people consider Ryan H to be at the forefront of identifying Lego colours, and for all I know he is, but even he has changed his mind on some things over the years, and I know Cool Silver is one of those he has difficulty with.
I'm not trying to deter you from tidying up the catalogue btw, just adding to the discussion.
296 Cool Silver is noticeably lighter than 131 Pearl Light Grey, while 315 Silver Metallic is, for me at least, noticeably different from either. But the peculiarities of BL's original cataloguing means that 296 and 315 are listed together, and as a result 315 and 131 are often misidentified. But I don't see an easy way to fix it either.
Cool Silver should have only been used in sets released in 2006, meaning that if a part was released in 2008, like the jetpack, it could not possibly have come in Cool Silver. Bricklink is now merging both 131 and 296 into the Pearl Light Gray color, while giving Flat Silver to modern Silver. I have always had a problem with Flat Silver and Cool Silver being lumped under one color, as the former is much darker. The good thing about merging 296 and 315 is that if it came in a set from 2006, and you know enough about LEGO colors, you'd know for a fact that those parts are 296. The problem with that is that 296 is lighter than 131, so to sellers Cool Silver becomes Pearl Light Gray, and Silver becomes Flat Silver.
Variation within 131 does not make things any better. Though, I find that 296 is comparable to 150 Light Gray Metallic.
Bricklink's Flat Silver contains Cool Silver Element IDs (I am working on clearing those out and moving them to Pearl Light Gray), 131 Silver parts, and a ton of 315 parts.
Brickowl also seems to have a few leftover 131 Silver IDs in the Flat Silver/Cool Silver BO color, so I'm going to try to get those removed. Most of them are 4493XXXs+.
This 131vs296vs315 project has been at the forefront of my BO/BL priorities list. Part of fixing this problem is moving Element IDs out of colors where they do not belong, and establishing which parts appeared in those colors. Cool Silver has about 135 Element IDs (including unreleased parts), and just about all of those parts also have TLG 131 Silver IDs.
I would like to see a Light Silver color added for Cool Silver parts. Sets with second releases from 2005, 2006, and a few 2007 sets may contain this color. It should not have been used elsewhere.
The jetpack is a conundrum for sure. I could understand if they were all PLG and each slightly different, but there are 2 distinct colours. And they have been pulled from sets bought all over the place, across many years. I've seen it said that PLG came in 3 different shades, but I don't have enough experience of the these three colours to corroborate that. If it is true, that would explain the two shades I have though.
I'll take a look at my PLG/FS once your work on these colours is done. Good luck and thank-you for your efforts.
315 Silver Metallic IDs start at 4591XXX or so (with a statue 4545XXX ID, though it is the outlier)
I would still like to see a Light Silver added, as Flat Silver would be confused for 131. This project will definitely take a while.
Unfortunately, because 296 replaced 131, which then replaced 296, many sets were first released with 131, then 296, then 131 again. Inventories should not be edited until a new color has been added. I believe I have a full list of Cool Silver IDs, both released and unreleased. Variation is tough!
At one time I researched a set that was believed to have both PNG and LS, in the same part. The TLG replacement parts page only listed it in a single color, not both.
131 Silver/Pearl Light Gray: 1998 - 2011. I remember still getting this color in the first wave of Atlantis sets back in 2010, and then noticing that it had become much darker by the next wave. A few 2011 sets probably still used this to clear out some old stock.
296 Cool Silver/???: 2004 - 2007. Some sets from 2004 that were available until 2005/6 used this color in those set’s final release waves, after 131 had been retired, but before 131 had been brought back again. This color was on the palettes from 2005 to 2006. 2007 sets may have still had a few parts in this color for the sake of cleaning out some old stock LEGO still had.
315 Silver Metallic/Flat Silver: 2008 - Present. Sets like the 10188 Death Star were first released when original silver was still in production, and lasted until an era when modern Silver was in production. So, while this color doesn’t *technically* appear in sets until the latter half of 2010, it did come in later copies of sets like 10188, which aren’t separated by different entries (that would be ridiculous).
Any Silver color from a 1998-2004 set is (with a few notable exceptions) absolutely original 131 Silver. Sets from 2005-2006 would need to be looked at to make sure they came with both 131 and 296 across different releases. If it looks Flat Silver and is from 1998-2007 (or is from a few 2008 sets only released up until 2009) it is Pearl Light Gray. If it is from 2005-2006 and is much lighter than other Pearl Light Gray parts from that era, it is 296 Cool Silver. 315 Silver Metallic is much darker than regular instances of both and should be present in a few 2008 sets (as alternates), a handful of 2009 sets released up until 2010 and 2011, pretty much every 2010 set as an alternate color/part, and then regular from 2011 onwards.
While most parts I can distinguish between LG and MSG quite easily in the right light, once I get into the plastics of the smaller Technic pins, for example, or the smaller Technic bushings, I give up and just put a Public Note, listing them all as MSG and stating that there is a chance some LG may be mixed in.
But I digress... you do raise an interesting issue re pours though and how that may influence this conversation! I think BrickBuyer's comment re 10188 is a great example... a color and/or pour change over the course of years of production.
Use Case 1
Someone is parting out a set in question, let's say one of those Bionicles with the jetpack. They are doing this from scratch, and retrieving the inventory from Brickstock/store or Brickset (which hopefully match, BTW). They buy all their parts, and let's say the inventories say to expect PLG. They instead receive what to their EYE looks like FLS. While it may be correct in terms of what LEGO released, they will perceive it as an error because they expected PLG and are unaware of the accuracy/catalog challenges with this color and pours. So they're not delighted...
Use Case 2
Same situation, but let's say they already have most of the set and are just buying a couple of missing parts - maybe they bought a lot online and are replacing a missing part or two so they can resell it as used. They already have one of the PLG/FLS parts and need a second one. To their EYE this looks like FLS, they order it in FLS, but let's say accurately it's supposed to be PLG to the eye - so they receive a part that is a different color to the one they have on hand. So they're not delighted...
I would posit that while accuracy is important, perception is even more important in these scenarios. Which is why I would lean toward listing as how our eyes perceive the color...??? (unless there is a new correct color added AND all inventories for the sets sync to it, e.g., Brickstock/store, Brickset, LEGO....)
The word that comes to my mind is ‘hurdle’ … Will a seller be taken through the streets of a medieval marketplace on a hurdle for listing them incorrectly ?
Getting colors right is important, and I understand that. Trying to deal with a color, where the ground is shifting under your feet, is (to borrow a phrase) like tap-dancing on an avalanche.
The problem with that is that Cool Silver (lighter than Flat Silver) IDs are under Flat Silver. I do like that they are there as of now, but when the time comes to fix these inventories, buyers cannot be led to believe that Flat Silver = 131 Silver/315 Silver Metallic/296 Cool Silver and Pearl Light Gray = 131 Silver/296 Cool Silver.
The only pro to having TLG 296 Cool Silver Element IDs under Flat Silver is that I have been able to find parts that appeared in said color, without being confused about which Element IDs belong to 296, 131, or 315. 315 IDs start much, much later than 296 IDs. This is better than putting them under Pearl Light Gray, as 131 and 296 both existed around the same time. Brickowl and all other active fan sites all suffer from the same problem that is failing to recognize the existence of 296, thus, leading to a mass Flat Silver/Pearl Light Gray/"What is 296?" problem.
As far as I know, the algorithm adds available Element IDs to a part if the part has a Design ID attributed to it. When Brickowl added "Medium Yellowish Orange", the algorithm was able to find all existing Element IDs in the LEGO parts database as long as the part in question had a Design ID. I would like to propose the addition of a new "Light Silver" with all corresponding Element IDs moved/removed from Flat Silver to represent LEGO's 296 Cool Silver. It will make correcting inventories much, much easier.
@nita_rae "tap dancing on an avalanche" is my new favorite phrase, that fits this challenging situation really well!