Paulson vs CPC Colors (2 Viewers)

I have to disagree with @RainmanTrail on that point. In the recent sets I've seen, DG yellow still looks bad. Canary looks better though, based on @Toby's awesome Emerald City customs, which has inspired me to get a set on Diasqr next time it comes around.

Color has never been my main hangup on CPCs to be honest. It's always been the fuzzy and imperfect edges that the chips had. Diasqr seems to be much better with that problem though, so I'm hoping my set will end up looking good.

I love DIASQR - there's something about the way the mold imprint catches the light that I love... The mold has a lovely luminosity.

CPC colors will never match Paulson (for a hist of reasons I'm sure have been discussed). But there's something very special about being able to order your very own personal set of custom clay poker chips, using technology that hasn't changed much in over 100 years.

A CPC custom set is a precious, special thing. That the option exists for us to order the clays still exists is a marvel. It's a testament to the love underpinning the company for the real McCoy - it'd be all to easy to offshore production, pump out cheap crap, mass produced sets... But they don't. Because (I believe) they care about their product and the tradition of Chip making.

Variance in spots and consistency is a testament to the authenticity of the process - it's tricky and it's never 100% certain getting accurate results. That's all part of the beauty for me. If you want dull, uniform chips, go injection molded instead! :)

Some of the most celebrated chips in my games have been the "rejects" - the waifs and strays with weird imperfections, or missing a spot. Players love those chips, they're special, unique. One-of-a-kind chips, in a one-of-a-kind custom set that's yours alone. They attain a "lucky" status (and can even influence play!). I love that. :)

I love Paulson chips, dig casino history, etc. But I'm a bit OCD. I *think* I'd rather do a custom CPC set that is individual / original to me than get a used casino set. I find that more exciting, doing something new and personal to me. Not everyone's bag, natch!

There are some amazing examples of killer CPC chips on PCF. In the galleries, "gone but not forgotten" thread etc. No shortage of inspiration. But as the colors do change over the years, it's worth refreshing your CPC (ideally labelled) color sample intermittently I'd say.

Gawd bless CPC - and all who sail in her!
 
I have to disagree with @RainmanTrail on that point. In the recent sets I've seen, DG yellow still looks bad. Canary looks better though, based on @Toby's awesome Emerald City customs, which has inspired me to get a set on Diasqr next time it comes around.

Color has never been my main hangup on CPCs to be honest. It's always been the fuzzy and imperfect edges that the chips had. Diasqr seems to be much better with that problem though, so I'm hoping my set will end up looking good.

To each their own. I love how the new DG Yellows came out in my Cali Rounders set. It's a significant upgrade from the previous DG Yellow.





IMG_20190924_224500.jpg
 
To each their own. I love how the new DG Yellows came out in my Cali Rounders set. It's a significant upgrade from the previous DG Yellow.





View attachment 610774
Yeah, those photos really confuse me. Is the scroll sample the new dayglo yellow? It looks like a mistake chip which is really just canary, because it looks nothing like the dayglo yellow in your scrown rounders set or the color chip right next to it. It also doesn’t look like the sample set I have, or the DG yellow spot in the Emerald City set (which is from just a few days ago). If you’re saying the scrown sample is the new version, then I think the color is just generally bad. It’s not really vibrantly yellow, it looks slightly green.

Edit: spelling
 
Last edited:
There has already been a noticeable difference between Majestics & Royals in just a few years time.
Yeah, but that's been at the expense of them becoming more plastic. Color isn't everything..
 
Yeah, those photos really confuse me. Is the scroll sample the new dayglo yellow? It looks like a mistake chip which is really just canary, because it looks nothing like the dayglo yellow in your scrown rounders set or the color chip right next to it. It also doesn’t look like the sample set I have, or the DG yellow spot in the Emerald City set (which is from just a few days ago). If you’re saying the scrown sample is the new version, then I think the color is just generally bad. It’s not really vibrantly yello, it looks slightly green.
Scroll is older color, scrown is new.
 
Yeah, but that's been at the expense of them becoming more plastic. Color isn't everything..
I know color isn't everything but the colors between the two are definitely noticeable and I don't notice a different in feel so I think that trade-off was very successful if they did in fact become more plastic.
 
Yeah, those photos really confuse me. Is the scroll sample the new dayglo yellow? It looks like a mistake chip which is really just canary, because it looks nothing like the dayglo yellow in your scrown rounders set or the color chip right next to it. It also doesn’t look like the sample set I have, or the DG yellow spot in the Emerald City set (which is from just a few days ago). If you’re saying the scrown sample is the new version, then I think the color is just generally bad. It’s not really vibrantly yellow, it looks slightly green.

Edit: spelling

It's probably just your monitor. The every monitor renders colors differently. The scroll chip is the old DG yellow. The scrown is the new one. The is one is not a mistake chip though. The new DG yellow is very vibrant. The pics look like the real chips on my monitor. It does look a bit like a neon yellow. But it's a lot better than the canary "Grey Poupon" yellow in my book.
 
Took some photos this morning — as others have stated there is a marked difference in the saturation or vibrancy of the CPC colors. It’s not even close. That said I’m still working on a set.

C0EC7677-F3C8-436D-A382-5B18931EA4DE.jpeg
CFD75F6F-6D04-453B-B99C-28679D64B19E.jpeg
7762C7BA-B651-4343-ACF5-E0BF8A6F0AB0.jpeg
B271CA01-BBD7-4C47-B9B7-7FB5454E5690.jpeg
 
Took some photos this morning — as others have stated there is a marked difference in the saturation or vibrancy of the CPC colors. It’s not even close. That said I’m still working on a set.

View attachment 611060View attachment 611061View attachment 611062View attachment 611063
I would say that it is close if you cherry pick

Putting up the retro red, dayglo tiger, dayglo yellow, dayglo arc yellow, and dayglo green against their Paulson rivals, none comes out ahead but it’s in the same ballpark.
 
I think, for the most part, the CPC colors are pretty solid. There are a few colors that are just awful, and need some attention, including:

Dayglow Saturn - The closest natural thing I have ever seen to this is probably a key lime. I don't know about you but I don't like the pie and I surely don't want any key lime chips.
Orange - Way too dark, much closer to brown than actual orange
Dayglow Orange - Why? It's not significantly different from orange and I think Dayglow Tiger looks far more "Dayglow Orange" than this does. Toss this color and relabel Dayglow Tiger to Dayglow Orange

Other than those, you have plenty of options to make quite a few solid sets.

And, am I they only person that digs the Jockey mold (which is my favorite)?
 
Dayglow Orange - Why? It's not significantly different from orange and I think Dayglow Tiger looks far more "Dayglow Orange" than this does. Toss this color and relabel Dayglow Tiger to Dayglow Orange
Get rid of orange instead because it's the one with brass flakes and CPC needs more chips without them.

And, am I they only person that digs the Jockey mold (which is my favorite)?
Nope...

20210101_094433.jpg
 
Took some photos this morning — as others have stated there is a marked difference in the saturation or vibrancy of the CPC colors. It’s not even close. That said I’m still working on a set.

View attachment 611060View attachment 611061View attachment 611062View attachment 611063
Yes, Paulson colors are better but this is an unfair comparison imo. Spotted, inlayed paulsons vs A-mold solids. Spotted chips look better because there’s more contrast, same with inlayed v.s solid. Also, the A-mold is imo one of the worst looking cpc molds, while that doesn’t affect colors, it adds to the overall impression.
 
My biggest issue with CPC is not the colors, but the weight. To make matters more challenging in that area, the brightest colors (e.g., DG Peacock, DG Tiger, etc.) are not weighted with brass flakes, so even lighter :/

OTOH I've been in the community long enough to remember being able to buy TRK custom sets, but waffled for a while and then they up and closed shop. Have no insight into CPC's finances (they certainly seem busy), but despite my hesitation about the weight, I'll probably spring for one if I ever come up with an inspiring theme.

If I got a set of customs, I'd just lean in to the more muted palette. E.g., on it's own, CPC's yellow (not canary, but the mustard yellow) looks a bit dull, but with the right spot combos, makes for a really beautiful chip.
 
My biggest issue with CPC is not the colors, but the weight. To make matters more challenging in that area, the brightest colors (e.g., DG Peacock, DG Tiger, etc.) are not weighted with brass flakes, so even lighter :/
It remember thinking that I was lucky when I was selecting the colors for my 44mm for this reason, that extra size, and thus weight, allowed me to disregard the differences in weight and just choose what I liked most...I would’ve made sacrifices and had all brass flake colors as my base colors if I did 39mm
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account and join our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Back
Top Bottom