Poll: Which of these look better?

Which design looks better?


  • Total voters
    38
Joined
Jul 10, 2019
Messages
161
Reaction score
155
Location
Chilliwack BC
I'm working on a custom CPC cash set - quasi Cali color theme (yes, I know that the green should be the quarter). After reading about color blindness in a thread here, I was going to make each chip with a different edge design, but @Lemonzest encouraged me to consider using a single pattern (or at least minimal progression) to bind the set together.

After comparing the two options, I have to say that Lemonzest has a point, the single pattern does look more coherent IMO. But then I'm the guy that leaves the house with one black sock and one blue sock on my feet, and thinks that a denim shirt and blue jeans is alright attire for most occasions (drives my wife nuts).

So I'm seeking feedback from the community - which looks better?

(BTW, green = 5c, pink = 25c, blue = $1, Arc Yellow = $5, black = $20, white = $100, DG Tiger = $500)

Each denom with different (progressive) edge pattern:

Edge_Progression.png


All denoms with same edge spot pattern:

Same_edge.png
 

Beakertwang

4 of a Kind
Tourney Director
Supporting Member
Joined
May 22, 2018
Messages
5,415
Reaction score
6,554
Location
Iowa
I don’t actually think they both look like crap, but I think the progression could be better.
 

allforcharity

4 of a Kind
Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2017
Messages
6,577
Reaction score
6,158
Location
Burnaby (Greater Vancouver), BC
Hey, Bart, I have an idea that you could try out.

Now, I know that we talked about this the other night before Tony's game, but I want to reiterate here. If you're going to use only one colour of edge spot per chip, make sure it is not the same (or very close to) the colour of any base chip that is within 2 denominations of that chip. This is to minimize the risk of dirty stacks.

For example: Your base Blue $1 has Orange spots. This means you should not use a similar Blue colour for edge spots for your 0.05, 0.25, $5, or $20, but would be safe for your $100 and up. Conversely, you don't want to use a base Orange colour for your 0.05, 0.25, $5, or 20$, but would be safe for your $100 and up.

You also told me you want to be able to host a variety of cash games ranging from 0.05/0.10 all the way to 2/5. and you prefer to keep your designs to L1 or L2 because of cost (you budgeted for 1000 chips). This means your workhorse chip will change from game to game. Consider using two different edge spot patterns that alternate denominations.

For example, use one pattern for you 0.05, $1, and $20. Use another pattern for your 0.25, $5, and $100. Since you only plan for a barrel (or two) of $500, you can afford to splurge on a higher level pattern for this one, as the capstone of the set.

There's a huge perfusion of orange shades in your set. I'd seriously think about moving your $5 from base Arc Yellow to Canary. I'd also consider a more "greyer" shade for your $20, maybe Charcoal instead of Black. All the rest of your chips are bright base - the contrast with your Black $20 may be jarring.
 

allforcharity

4 of a Kind
Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2017
Messages
6,577
Reaction score
6,158
Location
Burnaby (Greater Vancouver), BC
And as far as your breakdowns, you wanted 1 table of 10 for your smallest and largest games (0.05/0.10 and 2/5), and 2 tables of 8 for your middle ground games (0.25/0.50 to 1/2). I'll assume that each person buys in for 100BB and rebuys 1.5 times.

0.05/0.10 game: 10x0.05, 10x0.25, 7x$1; rebuys 5x$1, 1x$5; total required 100/100/145/15/x/x/x
0.25/0.50 game: 12x0.25, 12x$1, 7x$5; rebuys 6x$5, 1x$20; total required x/192/192/256/24/x/x
1/2 game: 10x$1, 14x$5, 6x$20; rebuys 5x$20, 1x$100; total required x/x/160/224/216/24/x
2/5 game: 10x$1, 14x$5, 6x$20, 3x$100; rebuys 10x$20, 3x$100 or 1x500; total required x/x/100/140/210/75/(15)

total 100/192/192/256/216/75/(15)
or roughly 100/200/200/300/200/80/20 = 1100 chips
bank 23755
 
Joined
Jul 10, 2019
Messages
161
Reaction score
155
Location
Chilliwack BC
And as far as your breakdowns, you wanted 1 table of 10 for your smallest and largest games (0.05/0.10 and 2/5), and 2 tables of 8 for your middle ground games (0.25/0.50 to 1/2). I'll assume that each person buys in for 100BB and rebuys 1.5 times.

0.05/0.10 game: 10x0.05, 10x0.25, 7x$1; rebuys 5x$1, 1x$5; total required 100/100/145/15/x/x/x
0.25/0.50 game: 12x0.25, 12x$1, 7x$5; rebuys 6x$5, 1x$20; total required x/192/192/256/24/x/x
1/2 game: 10x$1, 14x$5, 6x$20; rebuys 5x$20, 1x$100; total required x/x/160/224/216/24/x
2/5 game: 10x$1, 14x$5, 6x$20, 3x$100; rebuys 10x$20, 3x$100 or 1x500; total required x/x/100/140/210/75/(15)

total 100/192/192/256/216/75/(15)
or roughly 100/200/200/300/200/80/20 = 1100 chips
bank 23755
Awesome! Thanks for doing that.

I had poured over a ton of threads to figure out the best layout, and came up with an exact duplicate of your 1100 chip conclusion, but I never understood why I needed three stacks of $5, and was wondering if it was possible to go with 100/200/200/200/200/80/20 for a total of 1000 chips.

Looking at your breakdown, I think it might be possible to use a few $20 for rebuys in the .25/.50 game, and a few $100 in place of $5 for buy in and rebuys in the $1/2 & $2/5 games to reduce it to a 1000 chip set (or just spend the extra $200 and get all the chips I will ever need).

Thanks again.
 

Beakertwang

4 of a Kind
Tourney Director
Supporting Member
Joined
May 22, 2018
Messages
5,415
Reaction score
6,554
Location
Iowa
This is just my preference, but I like number of spots and/or complexity to increase as the values go up.

This mock-up kind of goes along with what @allforcharity said. In this case, you’re below L2 on your nickel and quarter, your hundo is L3, and your 500 is L5. I think something like this is a nice mix of colors and spots. Of course, it’s your set and your money, so play with the designer a ton, and have fun! Can’t wait to see your finished set!
1570721289395.png
 
Joined
Jul 10, 2019
Messages
161
Reaction score
155
Location
Chilliwack BC
I LOLed at the 3rd poll option, then I realized some one chose that and was sad :(
Yes, there are the same number of people choosing the “looks like crap “ option as there are people choosing “all the same “.

Hopefully those choosing option 3 will give some suggestions on improving the design (thanks to @allforcharity and @Beakertwang for doing so )

Cheers!
 
Joined
Jul 10, 2019
Messages
161
Reaction score
155
Location
Chilliwack BC
add an inlay to the mockup (doesn't have to be your artwork, the chip tool has a plain black , white, and CPC inlay you can use) so we can get a better feel for what the chips will look like.
I’ll do that as soon as I can. I have a rough version I’m working on, but self teaching Illustrator is a steep learning curve. I’ll try the CPC sample in the meantime.
 

AWenger

Flush
Joined
Jan 12, 2014
Messages
1,520
Reaction score
1,636
Location
Washington DC
I was going to make each chip with a different edge design, but @Lemonzest encouraged me to consider using a single pattern (or at least minimal progression) to bind the set together.
For 7 denominations, instead of 4 or 5, I'd vote none of the above -- split the difference and do the lower denoms with one pattern, and the higher denoms with a different, more progressive, pattern, or do three different patterns, with a 3 - 3 - 1.

Reminds me of the WSOP chips they use for some of the higher buy-in events, where (I think?) the larger denoms used quarter-pie spots, to go a long with 8 1/8" spots for the lower denoms.
 

allforcharity

4 of a Kind
Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2017
Messages
6,577
Reaction score
6,158
Location
Burnaby (Greater Vancouver), BC
For 7 denominations, instead of 4 or 5, I'd vote none of the above -- split the difference and do the lower denoms with one pattern, and the higher denoms with a different, more progressive, pattern, or do three different patterns, with a 3 - 3 - 1.
This is sort of what I was suggesting with my "alternating spot" idea. No matter what your stakes, you'll be able to have at least a couple of different patterns in play.

As far as the 1100 chip total, that's assuming that your rebuy rate is at least as aggressive as I defined. It may be less aggressive at the top, and therefore it may be possible to shave 1 or 2 racks off.
 

smsguy927

High Hand
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2019
Messages
87
Reaction score
112
Location
Austin, TX
You are off to a good start. I think alternating the x14 and xDS316 spots is a good idea. I think you should have more colorful spots, especially on the higher denominations. Some of the two color spots are L3, and some three color spots are L4. It might stretch your budget, but I think it would be worth it.
 
Joined
Jul 10, 2019
Messages
161
Reaction score
155
Location
Chilliwack BC
Many thanks again to @allforcharity , @Beakertwang , @smsguy927 , @AWenger & @Chippy McChiperson for the suggested improvements.

I've amended the edge colors to avoid the nearby base colors, upped the bling on the $500, changed the $5 to Canary (still think I prefer the Arc Yellow), and did mockups of alternating Tri-moon/3DS16, 3-3-1 Tri-moon/3DS16, and a hi-lo split of progressive x14/xDS16. The last one has CPC labels and Arc Yellow $5, I didn't have time to go back and add labels to the first two.

As for adding two color edge spots, I'm also building an 1100 chip Tournament set, so for 2200 chips I need to keep everything below $2/chip (which is closer to $3/chip $CDN), and with the 11c DG surcharge and the 53c Bright White surcharge, it is a stretch to sex up the $500, let alone jump a level or two on the others.

I welcome your continued feedback! I'm kind of liking the last one best, although some of the edge colors may still change (don't like the Blurple on two different chips). Thoughts?




Trimoon Alternating.png


1570940250689.png



ProgressiveLabel.png
 
Last edited:

Beakertwang

4 of a Kind
Tourney Director
Supporting Member
Joined
May 22, 2018
Messages
5,415
Reaction score
6,554
Location
Iowa
I love the bottom set! Maybe you could throw a trimoon in there. Perhaps the $5 or $20?
 
Top Bottom