Filling man_made=pier with color

[Commodoortje]

man_made=pier does not get rendered anymore, it's looks like rendering blancs: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/451067705 Is that a conscious choice or did something go wrong?

[Tomasz-W]

This was discussed in https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/2652, but I still don't find land-colour fill a proper one for this feature.

[polarbearing]

It's also discussed in #3343 where I proposed to use the parking colour. First, the pier bridges land and sea, and the land part is invisible when using land colour as it is. Second, it's kind of a parking place for the boats, for reasoning the choice of colour.

[kocio-pl]

Hm, I see nothing wrong with a current color.

man_made=pier does not get rendered anymore, it's looks like rendering blancs:

What difference do you see? I'm not aware of anything like that, we just made linear piers thinner in #3267, but as far as I know nothing has changed for areas, especially the color.

[Tomasz-W]

I see nothing wrong with a current color

In my case it's like when I see land colour, I'm intuively treating it as "there is nothing here". Of course it's good to have at least land colour to see piers on the water, but I think we shouldn't use land colour for any other feature than a blank land. As footway-like fill was rejected and I think parking fill is not a good idea because boats etc. park not on the pier but next to it, I propose to try with some darken shade of fill colour. They would be distinguished then, and some kind of brown would refer to wood colour which most of piers are build of.

[Adamant36]

I like the idea of some kind of brown color. 4049 piers have the surface tag, of which 2981 are tagged as wood. There's 318,281 of them overall though. So it might not reflect the surface of piers in general, but I do think the default surface for most people when they think of piers is wood, whatever material any particular pier might be made out of in real life.

[kocio-pl]

My idea would be to start with something subtle, just to show there's not bare land, like different small x (like 1, 2, 5, 10...) in:

darken(@land-color, x%)

[Tomasz-W]

When I'm doing my amateur test renderings in Photoshop, I'm using usually "round" numbers by moving each value by -5 or +5, so I suggest with trying 5, 10, 15% etc., otherwise it would be a straight way to go insane, because as we are mostly men here, we would propably have big problems with rating such subtle colour differences (current looking for minor/ major buildings proper shades is an exeption) ;)

[polarbearing]

I would not drive colour decisions from the surface material here. Probably my parking comparison wasn't a good argument either. But a pier is not land, it is a built feature. Stepping back for a wider perspective, using a greyscale colour would fit into the colourspace of manmade features. It should be light so that the piers are recognisable but not too dominant.

(current @land-color is f2efe9, thus not neutral grey)

[Kogacarlo]

Gimp exercise fff3d7:

[Adamant36]

I just don't want another Beigeish/off yellowish color. And it would be cool if it was clear where the land stops and the pier starts. Its not so clear with fff3d7. At least in the example. What about a variation of the footway area or leisure colors? Either that, or we can go with something slightly lighter then parking like @polarbearing suggested.

[Kogacarlo]

I like the idea of some kind of brown color.

Gimp exercise 543a00: (please note OSM rendering would be slightly different because of no real anti-aliasing in my images)

[Adamant36]

Thanks. I was imagining something a little lighter, but its to bad. People would definitely know they were there. Although it might scrue up rendering of amenity stuff due to also being brown.

[Kogacarlo]

Adamant36, what do you mean with "I was imagining something a little lighter, but its to bad." ?

I find this funny, color 957890:

[Kogacarlo]

I was imagining something a little lighter,

Color b27b00, the poop color. This may be the best color after all because usually piers are all shitted over by cormorants and ducks.

[Kogacarlo]

Last one. Looking at an aerial picture of the marina my boat is in, I matched the color as close as possible. Actually I like this a lot but I don't know what this would look like on other zoomfactors. Color 848484:

[Adamant36]

I like the last one. Id be willing to test it when I have the time if know one beats me to it. Thanks for doing the mockups.

[Tomasz-W]

3% darken land colour: light #faf7f0: bridge fill re-use:

[meased]

I don't think any of the above renderings are an improvement over what we have now.

Perhaps instead of changing the fill color the casing color could be tweaked? (like a bridge casing)

I would like to leave the pier color alone and allow combining it with landuse=retail/commercial/industrial/....

[Kogacarlo]

I find the last render shown by Tomasz-W called bridge fill re-use an improvement. It shows there is something rather than nothing. Thanks Tomasz!

[polarbearing]

leave the pier color alone and allow combining it with landuse

What would that mean exactly?

[Tomasz-W]

Basing on a visualisations above I think that only '3% darken' and 'the same fill with some outline' versions are worth further testing.

[meased]

leave the pier color alone and allow combining it with landuse

Well, to explain with an example, I think Brighton Pier should be retail pink:

[kocio-pl]

I'm afraid that piers are so thin, that the outline would dominate them too much, especially at lower zoom levels. Bridges are typically wider.

But maybe it would be enough to move the piers layers (like piers-poly and piers-line) before landcover layer in project.mml, so they have their own, delicate color, but would be eclipsed by some other color if this area has some landuse tagged for example. Could somebody test if it would work this way?

[meased]

bridge fill re-use an improvement. It shows there is something rather than nothing.

I think that's just the point. Piers are nothing. They are just an extension of land that goes out a little farther over the water. If there is "something" on them, that should be rendered separately.

While bridge casing may work where the water meets the pier, I do not think it would look good to have a casing where the pier meets the land (for piers mapped as an area).

[matthijsmelissen]

Well, to explain with an example, I think Brighton Pier should be retail pink:

That would require rendering piers below landuse colors. However, it would also mean that the parts of piers on top of beaches would become yellow (de facto invisible).

[polarbearing]

Piers are nothing. They are just an extension of land

They are not nothing, they are man_made objects. The can be party over land and are partly over water.

[jeisenbe]

I've mentioned a possible way to render landcover over piers in https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/330#issuecomment-551416169 - this requires implementing #3854 first.