Talk:Flag of the United States/Archive 3

Date linking
Why do we have a link to 9/11 (which is a redirect as well as an Easter egg), but not to, for example, Pearl Harbor? I think the link to Patriot Day is adequate for readers who wish to find out what Patriot Day is about. --John (talk) 18:29, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

'patriot day'
The day 9/11 is listed under both times to fly the flag at half staff and times to fly it not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.33.22.52 (talk) 18:12, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I deleted Patriot Day from the list of days to fly at full staff LarryJeff (talk) 21:38, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

United States Civil Flag
What about the Civil flag? 68.52.63.233 (talk) 14:36, 23 January 2009 (UTC)




 * There was a Wikipedia article on that, but it got deleted as a non-notable fringe theory (one version of it is was still at User:Oren neu dag/my sandbox1/United States Civil Flag). Anyway, it's based on a misunderstanding -- there's a passage near the beginning of Nathaniel Hawthorne's Scarlet Letter where he refers to the old Customs flag (variants of which are still used by Customs and the Coast Guard today) as "indicating that a civil, and not a military, post of Uncle Sam's government is here established" (i.e. distinguishing customs houses from U.S. Navy bases).  Some people who read this and misunderstood it have spun whole elaborate conspiracy theories... AnonMoos (talk) 21:36, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Well that's rather crappy. It deserves the attention of it's detailed history. Maybe the deletion is the conspiracy.... BOO! Premier Tom Mayfair (talk) 23:02, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


 * What "detailed history"? The detailed history of U.S. Customs and Coast Guard flags, or the detailed history of "civil flag" conspiracy theories?  If the former, then what we have is at Flag_of_the_United_States_Coast_Guard.  In the latter case, you can try, but a previous attempt was deleted for the reasons set out at Articles for deletion/United States Civil Flag. -- AnonMoos (talk) 23:48, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Since the discussion above, a version of the actual Customs flag has been uploaded. -- AnonMoos (talk) 23:49, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

"civilian" flag?
I came here trying to resolve the claim made by many websites that there actually two flags for the United States. The one we are accustomed to, these sites say, are military flags. But there is another that was actually a "civilian" flag. But I do not find any conversation about this on Wiki, nor have I seen an image like the ones they display.

Given the number of websites making this claim, I think it would be a good idea for whoever monitors this flag article, to verify or invalidate the claims these sites are making.

Here is an example website:

http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%20History/Two-Flags.html

They say this other flag can be seen described in Hawthorne's "Scarlet Letter":

"From the loftiest point of its roof, during precisely three and a half hours of each forenoon, floats or droops, in breeze or calm, the banner of the republic; but with the thirteen stripes turned vertically, instead of horizontally, and thus indicating that a civil, and not a military post of Uncle Sam's government, is here established." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sexmoron (talk • contribs) 06:18, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * See previous discussions: Civil flag, Vertical stripes?, United States Civil Flag. --Zundark (talk) 07:48, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * And just to make clear -- the separate "civilian flag" is complete fiction. It was the flag for the Revenue Cutter Service, presumably so that ships they wanted to board/inspect knew that the approaching ship had legal authority to do so, and later co-opted by the related U.S. Customs Service for use on their customs houses (Hawthorne was describing a customs house).  Some history on that flag here, which includes the photo of a 1919 flag ceremony at a customs house often (deliberately?) mislabeled as something else.  Another page on the hoax is here.  Carl Lindberg (talk) 14:53, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Hawthorne was probably wrong about the 13 stripes -- most versions of the flag have 16 stripes (the number of states in the U.S. when the first version of the flag was designed). AnonMoos (talk) 07:34, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, that's either archaic or bogus, there IS a military flag though, that's just the normal flag with yellow-gold fringe on the edges —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.51.114.199 (talk) 22:03, 20 August 2010 (UTC)


 * That is not really a "military flag"... fringes on flags is more of a decorative custom used in ceremonial circumstances (often by the military, particularly the Army, which specifies its use in many situations, and terms them colors), but there's nothing preventing civilians from doing the same. It's the same flag, as there is no intended meaning associated with the fringe, since it is purely decorative.  See here. Carl Lindberg (talk) 03:13, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

If an article regarding the "US civil flag" is unwarranted, perhaps a section on this article would do? Not so much about its (non)existence, but the relatively large "movement" around the internet supporting this modern myth. For, 1 2 3 and against, 4 5 ⇔ ChristTrekker 17:23, 14 June 2010 (UTC)


 * The problem with that proposal is that this article is already quite long, and the "US civil flag" thing could be considered a rather tangential conspiracy theory lacking mainstream credibility. I think a separate article would be better, but a separate article would have to overcome the objections that were expressed the last time around... AnonMoos (talk) 22:22, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Flag Patch
The image of the flag patch in the article identifies it as the type worn on military uniforms. This is not currently true, as all flag patches today are reversed for wear on the right sleeve. I'm hesitant to delete it, because there may have been a non-reversed patch at some point in the past. (Expeditionary vs. garrison?) Can anyone shed any light on this?--VAcharon (talk) 14:50, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * VAcharon, "all flag patched are reversed for wear on the right sleeve" is false. This is only true for the Army. The Air Force wears a "normal" flag. It makes no difference whether expeditionary vs. garrison. — BQZip01 —  talk 09:05, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Complex flag and chinese
I removed the "material" about the flag being complex and the chinese word, ect. Maybe cover this further into the article if sourcable and appropriate, but not in the lead it seems. --Tom (talk) 19:05, 24 March 2009 (UTC)ps, looks like it is covered near the end of the article. --Tom (talk) 19:22, 24 March 2009 (UTC)


 * The lede is too short, even with this material. I don't see the problem. Kauffner (talk) 11:27, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Flag for 1777–1795
I see that Image:US flag 13 stars – Betsy Ross.svg is much more commonly used than Image:US flag 13 stars.svg, with the latter mostly being used for ship articles. The Ross flag is used widely in infoboxes for Revolutionary War articles (e.g. Battle of Germantown) and other articles that reference those years. But reading this article, I am inclined to believe that the "stars in rows" flag ought to be used for those instances. It should only take a single edit to Template:Country data United States to effect that change in most articles, but I'd like to get some comments here before proceeding to do that. Thanks — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 18:36, 3 June 2009 (UTC)


 * There was really nothing approaching an "official" specification until later in the 19th century. During the 18th century, flags were not even fully standardized on 5-pointed stars.  Anyway, it's somewhat doubtful whether either the "Betsy Ross" or "Hopkins" flags were ever used on a revolutionary war battlefield... AnonMoos (talk) 18:05, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I kinda realize that, but I'm still wondering which of those is "better" to use for those battle articles. Flag icons are used on thousands of pages that use Infobox Military Conflict, so outright removal would likely be reverted.  I'd like to use the Hopkins flag for consistency with the table in this article, but don't want to start an edit war over which is the "right" flag.  — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 18:27, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Considering the article states there was no offical flag till at least 1795 the table should reflect that too, At the moment it reads as a contradiction,. Even the Hopkins flag  states "Many designs were in use that complied with the flag resolution, with stars arranged in a square, a wreath, rows, patterns, or the familiar "Betsy Ross" circle."  Other artiles state the Betsy Ross was used widly in revolution, And a picture in the  Betsy Ross article dipects it as the first flag; "The seal of the U.S. Veterans Administration uses the Betsy Ross flag to represent service to all veterans from the American Revolution to the present day."  I think the  Template:Country data United States should be altered to reflect the uncertainty, perhaps two flags for the period. Cilstr (talk) 13:36, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * There was an official flag -- there just wasn't anything approaching an exact official specification of the official flag until 1818 (and even the 1818 specification was an internal Navy document, which was intended for the regulation of flags used by the U.S. Navy). AnonMoos (talk) 13:49, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * There weren't really "two flags"; there was just a general design for the flag which allowed for a fair bit of variation. Really, a precise design was not made until 1912 -- the Army and Navy had somewhat precise definitions before that, but were different from each other.  I don't think using either depiction is "wrong" but I don't think we should have both -- throughout the 1800s there were many unique star pattern variants actually used and we should not be trying to show them all.  For that matter, the sizes of the stars on most the earlier flags are probably not "correct" -- they mostly use the same size as that on the 50-star flag, but flags in actual use almost certainly used much larger stars at the time (they were made smaller to squeeze 50 in there; even the 48-star flag used bigger stars).  But, that doesn't make them "incorrect".  Same with the orientation -- I don't think many flags at the time oriented the points upward, even though most of our examples do.  But showing them that way isn't "incorrect" either, as it would still be a valid version of the flag under the definition of the time, and showing them differently would imply a change in the definition of the flag which never happened.  Carl Lindberg (talk) 15:31, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Given the consensus that these alternate arrangements of stars in the canton are just as valid, I've added them to the list. I believe this satisfies the issue?  bahamut0013  words deeds 21:53, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Colors
What do the colors mean. They are not described in this article.


 * White = purity and innocence
 * Red = hardiness and valor
 * Blue = vigilance, perseverance and justice
 * Stars = # of states —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.23.247.242 (talk) 16:05, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Except for the stars, that's not true; it's just urban legend. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  16:43, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


 * The attribution of a quote on the meaning of the colors to George Washington (as is sometimes done) is certainly bogus, but on the other hand the very-well documented book So Proudly We Hail: The History of the United States Flag by William Rea Furlong and Byron McCandless (ISBN 0-87474-449-0) says that Charles Thomson, secretary of the Continental Congress, wrote the following in a document on the seal of the U.S.:


 * "The colours of the pales are those used in the flag of the United States of America; White signifies purity and innocence, Red, hardiness & valour, and Blue, the color of the Chief signifies vigilance, perseverance, & justice."


 * "Pale" and "Chief" are technical heraldic terms for a vertical band and a horizontal band (at the top of the shield), respectively... AnonMoos (talk) 18:11, 31 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Yup. Thomson said the colors on the Great Seal are the same as those on the flag, and gave the above symbolism (which was accepted by Congress). I guess you can read it either as just defining the symbolism for the seal (inheriting the colors but not any symbolism from the flag), or as inheriting the colors and symbolism from the flag.  The pales are the vertical stripes, and the "chief" is the upper third area of a shield.   I don't think any of the flag laws have defined any such symbolism.  Carl Lindberg (talk) 05:35, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * That was Thomson's assertion, but it was simply his assertion. The Founding Fathers were no more unanimous on this than on any other matter. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  20:39, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, on the one hand, Congress and the U.S. government have not officially endorsed this interpretation; however, considering that the passage is contained in an official document, prepared at the Congress's request, which details the symbolism of the proposed Seal of the United States in pretty much its final accepted form, it has considerably more weight than just being the personal opinions of some random individual.... AnonMoos (talk) 01:58, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, that formed the law defining the Great Seal, and so was most certainly voted on and accepted (and therefore endorsed) by the Congress, and reaffirmed in 1789. (The Congress had rejected three previous seal proposals.)  However, The Eagle and the Shield by Richard S. Patterson and Richardson Dougall (pages 80-81) says the definitions were essentially pulled from a book called Elements of Heraldy by Antoine Pyron du Martre (Google books link), which William Barton had just leant to Thomson.  That book apparently states that argent (white) "signifies Purity, Innocence, Beauty, and Genteelness", gules (red) "denotes martial Prowess, Boldness, and Hardiness", and azure (blue) "signifies Justice, Perseverance, and Vigilance".  So, it seems pretty likely that the above symbolism was made up by Thomson specifically for the seal, and there was no such previous symbolism understood for the flag. Carl Lindberg (talk) 14:35, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I suspected some such. Like most folks of that enlightened era, Thomson was prone to romantic misinformation of the kind that the du Martre book represents, which is still to be found today all over the Net. 18th- and 19th-century heraldry is generally regarded as the nadir of that peculiar art/science. -- Orange Mike   &#x007C;   Talk  16:55, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Whether the colors were chosen for their symbolism, or the symbolism was added afterwards, the symbolism is widely accepted. I am currently an active member of the military stationed in Naval Station Great Lakes, Chicago, IL. I have heard this symbolism used as part of a speach given by the CO of the base during the living flag ceremony that took place today (the picture of which should be shown on the next army vs navy game). So whether or not it is official, it is the most popular view. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.171.163.118 (talk) 23:14, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

It would seem appropriate, then, to at least discuss in the article the dispute over the symbolism of the colors. AusJeb (talk) 21:44, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Although I cannot find any citation for it, I distinctly remember being told in school that the red of the flag symbolizes the blood shed by those defending this country. Is this merely a personal reminiscence, or can anyone else lend any weight to this theory? It seems to add a level of poignancy and personal connection that supports the intense dedication Americans feel to being American, and perhaps should be included if it can be substantiated. Contributions welcome. Jefferson1957 (talk) 00:17, 16 November 2012 (UTC)


 * If it's widespread, and documented to be widespread, then it could be included. The closest thing to an official U.S. government declaration on the subject is the Thomson text discussed above... AnonMoos (talk) 00:48, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Color specifications
I've already added a couple links to the note in the article, but just for reference, these are the links I came up with when searching for the government document which defines the colors of the flag (along with a ton of other stuff about how to make them). No idea if they help anything, but I thought I'd just note all this down here in case someone does find them useful. Carl Lindberg (talk) 02:35, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * https://assist.daps.dla.mil/quicksearch/ This is the search page for the ASSIST database Defense and Federal specifications
 * This is the DDD-F-416E/DDD-F-416F page, which lists the original 1970 specification, all activity on it, and the 2005 DDD-F-416F revision. It has PDF links to scans of the original documents.  The 2005 revision no longer mentions the specific cable numbers, but the color names and reference document remains the same.
 * The 1970 DDD-F-416E specification PDF
 * The 2005 DDD-F-416F revised version PDF
 * http://apps.fas.gsa.gov/pub/fedspecs/search.cfm is a search page for GSA documents. Searching on DDD-F-416E comes up with no information, but DDD-F-416F does.  Searching with FSC (Federal Supply Class) ID 8345, both active and cancelled, shows some other documents which may be related.  I'm getting errors at the moment, but they worked before ;-)
 * Active FSC 8345 documents
 * Cancelled FSC 8345 documents which says that document TT-C-591(1) was a 1934 specification (cancelled 1968) which by its title "COLORS, FOR FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES" apparently defined the colors for that period of time (no idea what it says; haven't found the actual document text)
 * A little bit of TT-C-591(1) information.

Vexillological templates
This page (and probably other flags) is in Category:Vexillological templates, because someone forgot to noinclude it in a template this uses. I can't see which. --  DasRakel  ✍  19:57, 19 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Template:Flags of North America was an issue. I fixed it (I think) but the category still shows them as members for the moment. Carl Lindberg (talk) 01:56, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Adding The Cuban Flag to "Similair Flags" section.
Hi, I have no idea how to do this myself, I just thought I would point out that the Cuban flag definitely belongs in this section.

I know I have read that the Cuban flag is in fact based on the American flag, however I can't find a reference online. The Cuban flag was designed by Narcisco Lopez, who wanted Cuba to be annexed by America. The connection is pretty obvious. I could probably find a book reference if that is needed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.202.7.81 (talk) 01:43, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Why is this page titled the way it is?
Around the world, this is The AMERICAN FLAG, not that 50 word title this page has! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.30.46.169 (talk) 01:39, 1 March 2010 (UTC)


 * It's titled the way it is to match the naming convention followed by articles for flags of other nations. And, if you search for "American Flag" it automatically redirects to this article.LarryJeff (talk) 21:42, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

51-star flag
According to an email I received from the Army Institute of Heraldry, the 51-star design featured in this article (as well as other articles), which is uncited yet attributed as "proposed by U.S. Army Institute of Heraldry", is not proposed or endorsed by that organization.

Mr. (redacted),

As you know, any information submitted to Wikipedia is unofficial and often suspect. The American flag drawings or images alleged attributable to The Institute of Heraldry are the work of someone else. If conceptual drawings of 51-star or greater flags exist, they are pre-decisional and would not be releasable to the public. Any changes to the American Flag design would require appropriate legislation passed by the Congress.

We appreciate your interest. Thank you for contacting us.

Regards,

(redacted, unsure if I should include the name) Research Analyst The Institute of Heraldry Department of the Army

Therefore I am going to remove references to the Institute of Heraldry and instead caption it something like "an example of a possible 51-star flag".

It's worth noting that on the image's page, the author says nothing about the IOH. Dziban303 (talk) 20:17, 29 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I'd always wondered about that (it may have been misinformation elsewhere which was copied here), but good job doing the verification. Yes, we should remove that then.   What about the statement "The United States Army Institute of Heraldry has plans for flags with up to 56 stars"?  That seems like a similar situation, and is unsourced.  Looking back, the first IOH statement was added back in 2004.  The reference of "up to 56" was added by an anon in 2005.  The original image caption just said "proposed 51-star flag" by the way; the IOH part was added in this edit back in April 2008, possibly influenced by the "up to 56 stars" statement, thinking that was an IOH design (which, apparently, wouldn't be public if it existed).  Minor quibble -- the arrangement of the stars has been defined by a presidential executive order since 1912, not an act of Congress, but... it is true nothing would be official until something along those lines happened. Odds are the president would just approve a recommendation from the Institute of Heraldry, but who knows. Carl Lindberg (talk) 02:24, 30 April 2010 (UTC)


 * The info was taken from FOTW, I would assume -- see http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/us51star.html etc. AnonMoos (talk) 03:29, 30 April 2010 (UTC)


 * That is my assumption as well. Nevertheless, there is ironically the very same proposal made in this non credible source (along with many others) that I once stumbled upon while browsing online. Of course, the site specifically states that the proposals were made just for fun, so I certainly wouldn't suggest on taking this one seriously by any means.  Still, it was something that I felt it would be best to show for the sake of convenience.  American Imperialist (talk) 14:37, 5 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Anyway, someone should look at the July 1959 National Geographic article mentioned on the FOTW site... AnonMoos (talk) 16:47, 5 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I eventually obtained a copy of that 1959 National Geographic; I do not see anything related to 51 (or more) star designs in there at all.  However, it does provide a reference to remove the "original research" tag about nobody contesting Francis Hopkinson's authorship claims at the time; the 1959 article makes that exact point and has virtually the same wording.  Carl Lindberg (talk) 02:54, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

The American Flag on US Postage issues
The section "The American Flag on US Postage issues" is misplaced. Anyone know where it is supposed to be? ---— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk 11:58, 30 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Not sure whether it's misplaced, but its header level seems to be incorrect with respect to the header levels of surrounding subsections... AnonMoos (talk) 13:51, 30 April 2010 (UTC)


 * The subsections under it are "Folding for storage" and "Use in funerals", which should go under "Display and use". I think it should go under "History", but it should be titled "US postage issues". ---— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk 14:05, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Finally, authoritative color definitions
I posted this at commons:File_talk:Flag_of_the_United_States.svg, but here it might get more eyeballs.

Hi everyone,

I just figured out that I have access to old articles from the Journal of the Optical Society of America. One of them includes the spectrophotometric measurements and adopted standards (for the "TCCA Standard Color Card of America, ninth edition, and the U.S. Army Color Card") relative to which the Flag colors are defined. (Apparently there’s a 10th edition of this standard, but I don’t know where obviously to find it, and my guess is that these definitions did not change between the 9th and 10th editions.)

In particular, the colors for red, white, and blue, in Munsell renotations and xyY, and with sRGB shown below each swatch (converted by me from xyY to sRGB by first taking the white point to be a perfectly diffusing reflector, then using CAT02 for chromatic adaptation from Illuminant C to Illuminant D65, then converting XYZ to sRGB space and applying the sRGB nonlinearity), are respectively:


 * TCCA Cable No. 70180, Old Glory Red: 5.5R 3.3 / 11.1, x=0.560, y=0.308, Y=0.082
 * TCCA Cable No. 70001, White: 2.5Y 8.8 / 0.7, x=0.320, y=0.327, Y=0.753
 * TCCA Cable No. 70075, Old Glory Blue: 8.2PB 2.3 / 6.1, x=0.229, y=0.186, Y=0.040

I’m not sure whether we care about making white different from a computer display white, but the red and blue – at least – should be updated, especially since whoever changed the colors from the ones I had put in a version of this flag a couple years ago didn’t really provide much justification for the change.

The paper, for anyone who has access to the Optics InfoBase, is: Genevieve Reimann, Deane B. Judd, and Harry J. Keegan, “Spectrophotometric and Colorimetric Determination of the Colors of the TCCA Standard Color Cards”, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 36, 128–128 (1946)

For what it’s worth, these colors seem to me much more representative of the American flags I have seen than the colors currently being used.

Personally, I would opt for using the standard’s white definition as well, since real real flag cloth is not a perfectly diffusing reflector, or even bright magazine paper, but I could go either way on that. –jacobolus (t) 21:19, 29 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Just for reference, compared over at the right are the current colors and the colors converted from the standard (listed as "possibility a"), and pictures of the flag before and after the proposed recoloring. The current red in particular seems clearly too purplish. –jacobolus (t) 21:34, 29 May 2010 (UTC)


 * We could also pick some other luminosity to be our reference white point (that is, make all three of red, white, & blue a bit lighter than in my "possibility a" here, but still keep white a bit darker than #ffffff), if the "possibility a" definitions make the white too murky seeming. I’m not sure what would be an appropriate choice though; it’s not completely obvious what the proper choice is for translating the white of white cloth to a computer screen.
 * For example, if we decide to target our flag’s white to, perceptually, 95% of the lightness of #ffffff (that is, Y/Yn = 0.8776; this choice is a tiny bit arbitrary, but the resulting colors are either way dramatically better than the current ones), then we’d get the colors shown to the right as "possibility b". Or if we target our flag’s white to 97.5% of the lightness of #ffffff (i.e. Y/Yn = 0.9372), then we’d end up with “possibility c”.
 * Needless to say, these three possibilities aren’t exhaustive, and we could try to figure out some different way of converting the color appearance from cloth to computer display. I could try asking around for some expert opinions from color scientists. At this point though, I’m just trying to start a discussion. –jacobolus (t) 23:18, 29 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't know about you, but none of the possibilities seem right to me. From all the countless numbers of flags that I've seen, the current image seems much more accurate than any of your proposals.  All the possibilities in fact, depict the flag as if it were worn down by a very long exposure to sunlight.  Simply put, these don't look right to me at all. American Imperialist (talk) 13:46, 31 May 2010 (UTC)


 * The currently used red doesn’t look too purple to you, compared to physical US flags? –jacobolus (t) 17:33, 31 May 2010 (UTC)


 * In any case, I don’t know where the Pantone estimates for flag colors originally came from. I found them at the website of the US embassy in Britain, , sometime a few years ago, and from writing that down at Wikipedia, those definitions spread out around the web. I don’t have any idea where that embassy website got them from. –jacobolus (t) 17:57, 31 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't think it looks purple whatsoever. The current red on the flag is a lot identical to the red on the flags hoisted around buildings and people front yards, at least from what I've observed in all of the communities that I've visited in my area.  So are the blue and the white.  Maybe if we scroll through the commons and analyze a few actual photos of the flag can we settle this debate once and for all. American Imperialist (talk) 00:43, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Um? There’s an official government document which specifies the colors of the flag in terms of the “cable colors”, which are themselves defined in terms of Munsell or CIE coordinates. I don’t think you’re going to “settle the debate” by the color interpretations of whatever digital camera someone happened to use to take pictures of arbitrary flags of unknown provenance. –jacobolus (t) 01:07, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Is that so? I reasoned that the photos would be a more accurate source of info (regardless of the type of digital camera) on the actual tones of the flag than whatever specifications you got from an embassy's website based in some other country.  To me, a picture or a collection of pictures of an actual flag is the deciding factor on determining the actual depiction of the flag, especially since I believe that your source of choice is rather dubious.


 * Besides, I believe that the common depiction of a flag and not its official specifications (regardless of what they may be) should always be the model of choice on Wikipedia, primarily because they are more commonly recognized by the general viewer. If we can't find common ground here, then I see no point in continuing this debate. American Imperialist (talk) 03:08, 2 June 2010 (UTC)


 * If it was unclear, the colors currently used on Wikipedia are the ones originally† from a US embassy website in London. The proposed ones are based on official documents. Secondly: I’m just starting a discussion here, not actually trying to force any immediate change. Since it’s not actually clear to me what “common ground” would be, and since I haven’t exactly staked out any definitive position, I’m not even sure we can call this a “debate”. [†: as far as I can tell. I don’t know where the Embassy website got those pantone equivalents from, but they were listed there as early as 1998 (although slightly different: “Blue PMS 282”, perhaps a typo, and “Red PMS 193”). The same pantone equivalents were listed at FOTW page since 2000 or so. I haven’t seen any earlier source than the embassy website.] –jacobolus (t) 22:09, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

If I saw a picture of the flag using the colors in "possibility a" with no explanation of how the colors were determined, I would wonder why it was gray, dark, in shadow, etc. The current colors, possibility b, and possibility c all look fine to my perhaps-less-than-discriminating eye. LarryJeff (talk) 15:43, 2 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I think you’re right about "possibility a" – the grayish looking white is what it would look like if you posted a cloth flag in front of an extremely reflective white surface, but in a real scene (in front of, say, a blue sky, or some trees) the white is going to be substantially darker. I’m going to send an email to a color scientist (i.e. a real expert), and see what his advice is about colors in sRGB (that is, viewed on a computer screen in an average surrounding) which would have the same appearance as a cloth flag colored per these specs. –jacobolus (t) 22:09, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't notice this discussion before. I see two general problems: 1) There is no exact or one unique conversion between a device-independent color system such as Pantone or CIELab etc. and computer monitor RGB. Computer monitor RGB is inherently device dependent, dependent on external illumination, etc. -- so that precise translation from Pantone to computer monitor RGB is only possible for a particular monitor which has been carefully calibrated under one particular set of lighting conditions. 2) It's generally a bad idea to render flag white as any other color than pure #FFFFFF or (255,255,255) in a non-photographic computer image. The result almost always looks "dirty", and the off-white is distracting to many people. Some people on Wikimedia Commons have insisted that greys or off-whites are theoretically "correct" for the Polish and Italian national flags, but this led to great controversies which resulted in pure white being used in images of those flags in most Wikipedia contexts. I see little reason to start a new controversy of this type about the U.S. flag... AnonMoos (talk) 23:50, 20 June 2010 (UTC)


 * (1) Okay, but sRGB is the official standard color space for the web (in HTML, CSS, SVG, etc.), which specifies particular RGB primaries, white point, and viewing conditions. There are still a variety of possible approaches to converting colors from paper or cloth to screen, but the device-dependent nature of a specific monitor’s color space doesn’t really enter into a conversion to sRGB. (2) Do you have links to the discussion about this (maybe we can have a discussion somewhere in common), or even better some advice from a source more authoritative than “some Wikipedians on a page somewhere”? I think you’re right that we should at least make the flags quite light, since they are used in the context of mostly-white Wikipedia pages, and so any white stripes will appear darker than they would in grey or black surroundings.
 * The main issue though, the reason that I brought this all up, is that the Pantone swatches used as source colors for the US Flag are not, in fact, good approximations to the official flag colors (and the US embassy in London which listed them as flag colors didn’t state anywhere how they came up with them), the red in particular not being yellowish enough, and the blue being too saturated and not purplish enough.
 * –jacobolus (t) 18:04, 21 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, sRGB is not the answer to all problems, because sRGB info only guarantees device-independent display on a properly calibrated system, which the majority of random Encyclopedia website readers probably do not have. For past white/off-white discussions, see commons:File_talk:Flag_of_Poland.svg, commons:File_talk:Flag_of_Italy.svg etc. (there were a lot more contentious discussions about grey vs. white in Polish national symbols, but I don't feel like making any great effort to find them right now)... AnonMoos (talk) 22:10, 21 June 2010 (UTC)


 * (a) sRGB is designed to be a rough approximation to an “average” CRT (uses the same standard primaries as HDTV, etc.), and most LCDs/their firmware/etc. are designed to be at least roughly similar to sRGB, and (b) any browser which follows the CSS/SVG/etc. specifications should use color management to map colors from sRGB to the color space of the display (for instance, Firefox on OS X will do this, and I believe that Firefox on Linux at least has an option for it, perhaps using LCMS? I have no idea what Windows color management is like these days – in XP it was virtually nonexistent, but it might have improved in the interim. Anyway, as far as I can tell, sRGB is the best we can do without going to each user’s house and characterizing his screen, and given that it’s written into the specs, is pretty future proof too.
 * I wonder whether the important part of the past off-white discussion re: other flags is about white not being *bright* enough period, or not being the precise white of the computer display. Because it’s clear from the spectrophotometric measurements of the cable colors that the white of a standard US flag is a slightly but distinctly yellowish white. That is, are users against the slight chromatic content of the white stripes of a flag, which make it appear as the flag would under any lighting conditions (i.e., slightly off-white), assuming the observer is adapted to the light source, or are they only opposed to the gray appearance that comes from using a color noticeably darker than the display’s white point?  If the former, then something roughly like the “possibility c” above should be used; if the latter, we should set the white to display white, but still use a proper red and blue. –jacobolus (t) 00:59, 22 June 2010 (UTC)


 * sRGB may well be the wave of the future, but it seems to be only very partially implemented in the present, so that it can't eliminate the practical need to choose basic (uncorrected) RGB colors which are likely to display well under a variety of viewing conditions (and of course there's no single exact conversion between device-independent color and uncorrected RGB). And the fabric of a flag may well be slightly yellowish when you take a photograph of it, but if you try to use a noticeable off-white in an abstract geometric flag image, then many people interpret it as indicating an underlying off-white color (not as an attempt to imitate cloth spectral reflection characteristics), and it can become a distracting point of contention (as seen in the past). AnonMoos (talk) 08:23, 22 June 2010 (UTC)


 * No, you misunderstand. “practical need to choose basic (uncorrected) RGB colors which are likely to display well under a variety of viewing conditions” exactly describes the design goals and practical use of sRGB. It’s a “best guess” at a reasonable description of most displays under various viewing conditions. But it also precisely defines a set of primaries and viewing conditions that anyone wanting to do better than “best guess” can shoot for. Displays and other output devices (TVs, laptops, cell phone screens, printers, etc.) strive to deal properly with sRGB, because they know that input devices (digital cameras, scanners, consumer-level software) is also striving to output sRGB images. Everything mostly works, even when no real device-specific color management is used. –jacobolus (t) 17:45, 22 June 2010 (UTC)


 * As for the slightly off-white color. If you look around at real flags, they are clearly slightly off-white. I don’t know what an “underlying color” is, but the “underlying color” of a flag is typically slightly off-white, so if it’s interpreted that way, that seems fine to me. I think that, for instance, “possibility c” to the right is so slightly colored that it’s unlikely anyone will think the stripes and stars are not “white” (do they not seem white to you?). Anyway, I really can’t tell whether the past contention was because of a slight color variation, or because the colors chosen before (for polish/italian flags) were distinctly grayish compared to the computer display’s white, and therefore in a setting of a mostly white web page (as compared to set against a sky, or some trees, etc.), looked “gray”. I hope these “many people” you’re speaking for will share their own opinions, because I’m far from convinced they interpret as you claim. –jacobolus (t) 17:45, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

You do know that there's a country-western song titled "There Ain't No Yellow in the Red White and Blue"? If you try to make File:Recolored Flag of the United States-c.svg be the main flag image, then some people will think that you're trying to change that... AnonMoos (talk) 00:11, 23 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Okay, I added a table, some text, and a few footnotes to the “colors” section of the article. Any thoughts? –jacobolus (t) 19:22, 28 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I guess that the table is a nice compromise. Its okay with me for now.  Hopefully we can find more verification soon.  American Imperialist (talk) 19:53, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


 * What would be “more verification”? I asked a color scientist (Mark Fairchild), who suggested what I put as the “relative” colors (I’m not precisely sure what the most unambiguous name is for these; hopefully their definition is clear enough from the text/footnote) would be a reasonable way to reproduce the flag colors on screen. There’s no official US source on screen/print reproduction colors, so unless some official government agency decides to specify some, which seems quite unlikely, I think this is the best we’ll be able to do. Anyway, I’m glad it works okay for you. –jacobolus (t) 23:02, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


 * All I meant was that more sources, if available, would be helpful (as always). Maybe I just didn't chose the right word.  American Imperialist (talk) 23:30, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


 * :) –jacobolus (t) 23:44, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

By the way, an image of the flag using the colors now listed in the article is to the right. I will if there are no serious objections ask for an admin on wikimedia commons to replace the current US flag image with this one, in not too long. –jacobolus (t) 19:58, 13 July 2010 (UTC)


 * There’s an interesting note in the Descriptive Color Names Dictionary (Edited by Taylor, Knoche, Granville, Container Corporation of America 1950), about the colors of the flag:
 * “In other instances the actual color of a material is lower in purity than the color name associated with it. A classic example of this is the blue of the national flag of the United States. The color of the official wool bunting is a very dark blue, but printed reproductions of the flag, as well as merchandise supposed to match the flag, present the color of deep blue much brighter than the official wool.”
 * –jacobolus (t) 20:08, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

WOW! Never would have guessed. That's pretty much news to me. It still doesn't look right to my eyes (despite the fact that it is the official tone), but I think that's just simply because I'm more used to the more common rendition. Well, I personally find this to be a complete jaw dropper, but I certainly won't question the source considering that it is a dictionary. American Imperialist (talk) 23:29, 13 July 2010 (UTC)


 * To be clear, the source for the colors shown in this image is still the spectrophotometric measurements of the TCCA color card paper in JOSA. The Descriptive Color Names Dictionary is just an interesting comment that gives us some idea that brighter colors than the “official” ones have been used for a very long time for printed reproductions of the flag, to the point where they maybe even seem “more correct” to a typical viewer than the actual official colors. –jacobolus (t) 04:38, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't see much difference between the two unless I kind of squint at them up up close... AnonMoos (talk) 02:54, 14 July 2010 (UTC)


 * It depends somewhat on your display and the viewing conditions. For me, the pantone swatch version is quite noticeably more colorful, its blue is less purple, and its red is less orange. –jacobolus (t) 04:38, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Just one thought that I have here: shouldn't we have two separate images on this article that show both renditions of the flag, official and actual? Something tells me that somehow would be better. American Imperialist (talk) 14:29, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure what you mean. Flags purchased by the US Federal government are required to match the “official” colors (and dimensions). The Pantone swatches don’t really match any flags I’ve ever seen. It’s not clear what the “actual” colors would be (if not those used now). –jacobolus (t) 15:09, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * What I meant by "actual" was the rendition that is typically purchased by the general public, the one that more commonly displayed outdoors (at least from where I live). American Imperialist (talk) 23:46, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * More specifically, I mean the rendition with the brighter tone of blue. Since this is more common then the official rendition, wouldn't it make sense to show both versions of the flag on this article, or am I mistaken?  American Imperialist (talk) 16:20, 17 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I don’t know how we could come up with a specific color for that that wouldn’t be original research. I’ve seen no evidence that the pantone swatches listed on the US London Embassy website (the colors formerly used for the flag image) actually match the colors of cheap mass-market flags. I suppose someone could buy a bunch of such flags and take spectrophotometric measurements of them; if you find a source that did, we could certainly mention it/cite it. –jacobolus (t) 17:52, 17 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Oh. Well I don't think that I will be able to dig up anything unfortunately.  I did forget about the possibility of inadvertently putting in original research as well.  I do wish I could be able to do something, however. :(  American Imperialist (talk) 20:15, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

I for one think the new blue is horrible and way too pale and purplish with the red still looking maroon, therefor I propose this coloration of the flag--Thegunkid (talk) 14:37, 27 July 2010 (UTC)


 * You propose it based on what? –jacobolus (t) 19:39, 27 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Based on the official Whitehouse photo of Barack Obama --Thegunkid (talk) 05:43, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * But that's presumably a lossy YCbCr JPEG whose color values depend on the lighting, the particular cloth used to make the flag, camera characteristics, etc. It's not at all simple to translate from such concrete photographic JPEG colors to the originally-intended abstract colors. AnonMoos (talk) 06:35, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Finally after searching high and low for a Government agency that actually has a flag(though partially) on their website that's a graphic and not a photo, I finally found one --Thegunkid (talk) 11:11, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * “The Government” is not some single omniscient monolithic thing. The GAO is not an especially reliable source about the flag. –jacobolus (t) 17:22, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Well still, this is the closest I've gotten out of all the government agencies to actually have a flag on their website that isn't a photograph --Thegunkid (talk) 18:02, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Colors according to Official PDF Graphic From The Government Officer Of Printing Publication "Our Flag"
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/serialset/cdocuments/sd109-18/sd109-18.pdf

Hopefully this will put this to rest --Thegunkid (talk) 11:30, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * That document says nothing about the colors. If you want to write a letter or call the Government Printing Office (or some similar agency), and you get a response with a clear description of colors intended for use on a computer display, that might be a useful project. Otherwise, this PDF file isn’t especially helpful to us. –jacobolus (t) 17:25, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Excuse me? How is a official PDF document produced by the Government Printing Office for Congress with a full colored scalable vector graphic of the U.S. Flag, a image file which can only be used on a Computer, not using the colors intended for use on a computer display?--Thegunkid (talk) 17:59, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * It’s not a standard or specification, and there is no evidence attached to it that the colors weren’t just chosen arbitrarily by eye by some single person. It’s a PDF file, that appears to be the digital file intended for process printing on some unspecified press. If it were a document specifically about standards for the colors of the flag, with the colors chosen described explicitly as authoritative, that would be different. –jacobolus (t) 20:26, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * As evidence that the colors might be arbitrary, consider that the proportions/positions of the stars in the image in the PDF do not match the official proportions. Why would the colors have been chosen by an expert, if the proportions clearly weren’t? –jacobolus (t) 20:28, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * As further evidence, the colors of several state flags are clearly wrong, most obviously Texas and Ohio, which are officially specified to use the same colors as the US Flag: just look, the colors in this document of the Texas, Ohio, and US flags are dramatically different from each-other. –jacobolus (t) 20:33, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Well the colors we are using in the current version sure as hell aren't the proper ones —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thegunkid (talk • contribs) 10:13, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Speaking of Texas, I checked The State Government Code on State Symbols and it gives a pantone of 193 (red) and 281 (dark blue). --Thegunkid (talk) 11:46, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Huh. First it says “(1) the same colors used in the United States flag;” Those Pantone colors given are assuredly different than the colors used in the US flag, even if they may be the best someone could do among colors in the Pantone swatch book. In any case though, even if the US flag is specified in terms of the Standard Color Card, and Texas flag colors have been redefined in terms of PMS coated colors, that’s somewhat irrelevant to my point above, which was that the colors of (among others) the Texas and Ohio flags in the document you linked to are quite obviously wrong. The blue of the Texas flag in that document does not look remotely like PMS 281 C, nor does it look like the Standard Color Card’s “Old Glory Blue”. –jacobolus (t) 12:15, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Well considering the London Embassy also gave the same pantone colors for the U.S. flag, atleast it's consistent, meanwhile the colors appear to be consistent with the with these images published by the Army Institute of Heraldry, which according to their discription, use Old Glory Blue and Old Glory Red in their fringe, though they are heavily distorted by JPG Artifacts due to their small resolution, meanwhile for some reason the US flags on this page seem to use a different more saturated set of colors. --Thegunkid (talk) 13:20, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * As is clearly described in the article (in much greater detail than before, even), various Pantone suggestions were given by different semi-official sources. Just because they were the closest PMS swatches someone could find (it's quite unclear who, or precisely when these originated), doesn’t mean they are all that close to the official colors. –jacobolus (t) 15:19, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Thegunkid -- I have to agree with Jacobulus here. The PDF file you linked to is interesting, but it does not attempt any precise color specification, and colors do not appear to be entirely consistent between different parts of the file. The area of device-independent color specifications is rather involved and sometimes counterintuitive, and just relying on "commons sense" and a few rough rules of thumb may not produce correct results. AnonMoos (talk) 13:05, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * You know what, at this rate, why doesn't someone contact the Government Printing Office and see if they can provide the official colors of the flag in Hexadecimal since Pantone isn't cutting it —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thegunkid (talk • contribs) 13:23, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * In most cases "hexadecimal" colors are device dependent colors, which can only be "correct" when calibrated in one particular set of lighting conditions etc. Pantone is not the answer to everything, but there has been a strong effort to make it device independent. AnonMoos (talk) 13:40, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Well clearly these Cable Colors we are dependent on textiles, and not suitable for computer display, so why are we using those as the standard considering it had white displayed as clearly gray? --Thegunkid (talk) 14:07, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I think you misunderstand. There is no universal definition of “white”. If you measure an official-spec flag’s stripes, you find out that it reflects some high percentage of incident light, but not all of it. By the 9th edition of the TCCA color card, if the value of (luminance) Y = 100 is assigned to a layer of magnesium oxide (a diffuse reflector, but extremely reflective), then the white of the flag is Y = 75.3. That is, it reflects about 75% of the light that hits it (which because human lightness response is non-linear appears to be about 89% as light as that magnesium oxide layer). Of course, since most objects in a scene reflect much less light than that, the flag appears to have white stripes. A computer display is emissive rather than reflective, so there’s no “right answer” for making it appear the same white as the flag’s white stripes, under arbitrary viewing conditions. What we did here instead is assume that the flag’s white stripes should appear as white as the computer display can manage, scaling the other colors the same way. Does that make sense? I can refer you to color science resources if you are interested. –jacobolus (t) 15:12, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * It’s rather necessary that flag be “dependent on textiles” – it’s a flag we’re talking about. –jacobolus (t) 15:35, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Properly, PMS numbers refer to object colors – special paint chips sold by Pantone. There is no single right way, as far as I know, to convert them to screen display, especially since these colors are out of the sRGB gamut. –jacobolus (t) 15:22, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Feel free to contact the Government Printing Office. –jacobolus (t) 15:16, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Why don't you go ahead and contact them? And as for above, I still think the Pantone RGB approximations at better then nothing considering that's what the Army Institute of Heraldry appeared to have used in their images--Thegunkid (talk) 22:48, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * What do you mean “better than nothing”? What we have now is based on some careful research into the official colors, as described in Federal Specification DDD-F-416F. –23:39, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Clearly these colors are incorrect regardless of who published it for Computer Display due to the over whelming Purple tint of the color and paleness, especially the Blue Canton, and based the official photos of the official flag where the colors are vastly different, for this we require Hexadecimal RBG colors, which you seem to have a problem using which is odd to me since we are simply asking for the proper and official ones endorsed by the U.S. Government Printing Office, which will put this to rest. --Thegunkid (talk) 23:54, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Just out of curiosity, what kind of computer display do you have, and what operating system, and what browser? –jacobolus (t) 00:57, 30 July 2010 (UTC)


 * A Dell, Flat Panel '17 1400x900 60Hz LCD, Why? Also my operating system and browser are irrelevant --Thegunkid (talk) 10:50, 30 July 2010 (UTC)


 * They make a big difference, because color varies dramatically from device to device, and depending on whether there is any color management, and what kind. Unfortunately Wikipedia’s back-end software does not (as it should) apply color profiles to PNG previews rendered from SVG files. (There's a bug about this in the mediawiki tracker, but who knows whether anyone is really paying attention.) Anyway, without color management, these colors will only be about right if your display has primaries, white point, and “gamma” close to sRGB, and I don’t think your display necessarily does (if it’s the E1709WFP you have, Dell’s website claims it has “65% color gamut”; I can’t really tell from that what the primaries are, but they’re certainly not sRGB). As far as I know the only browser which will do proper color management of such untagged images (that is, will assume they are sRGB and then convert them to display color space) is Firefox, with the gfx.color_management.mode setting set to 1. Especially if you’re running Mac OS X < 10.6, you’re likely to see the blue much paler on your screen than it would be under properly color-managed conditions. This is a browser/OS/mediawiki bug though, not a problem with the SVG source image. –jacobolus (t) 18:19, 30 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I have gfx.color_management.mode set to 1, also still doesn't explain why the blue is below 50% on saturation while Red is 352 in hue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thegunkid (talk • contribs) 21:01, 30 July 2010 (UTC)


 * HSL/HSV “saturation” is nearly meaningless, and “hue” angle is non-uniform and rather arbitrary; to understand why read the HSL and HSV article. I don’t see your point. –jacobolus (t) 00:49, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Regardless of how small a difference there is between between different monitors, how did we even come up with the onscreen equivalents of these Cable Colors if pantone equivalents provided by pantone their self is not qualified enough to be used, considering before this horrible color choice, I never heard of Cable Colors, nor can I find anywhere showing how to acquire them. --Thegunkid (talk) 04:08, 31 July 2010 (UTC)


 * The article links to a JOSA paper which defines the “cable colors” (these were a swatch book called the “Standard Color Card of America” put out by the Textile Color Card Association of the United States) in both Munsell and CIE coordinates (under illuminant C, reflectance relative to magnesium oxide). These coordinates were converted to sRGB by scaling white, and then performing a chromatic adaptation using the CAT02 transform. This is all quite clearly described in the footnotes. As for “hearing of them”, the federal standard for the flag explicitly states that they are the colors. –jacobolus (t) 06:19, 31 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Well regardless this color standard is highly unsuitable for computer display after comparing the cable colors specified for the Washington State Flag to the pantone colors, and computer graphic provided by them on their website. Here I even made a comparison using the color cables specified on the Washington State Secretary's Official Website to the cable colors onscreen equivalents provided here.


 * As you can see Cable Colors are clearly unusable. --Thegunkid (talk) 04:04, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * That source you linked does not actually show the TCCA color card colors (instead it shows a poor approximation to the centroid of the ISCC–NBS block in which the color falls; some of these blocks are quite large and the TCCA color is not necessarily close to the centroid), and your image is therefore quite inaccurate. I’ll try to put up some reasonable sRGB depictions of the 9th edition of the TCCA color card colors them sometime, at their wiki page. –jacobolus (t) 05:46, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Basically, you’re getting all this information (and similarly for the “meaning of the colors” information) second-, third-, or even fourth-hand, and if some of the intermediaries have a poor methodology or misunderstand something along the way, you end up making even less supportable claims than they do, sort of like the telephone game. This is why Wikipedia stresses the use of reliable sources, and discourages original research. –jacobolus (t) 05:57, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Please do provide the RBG equivalents of the Cable Colors promptly, all I see is some cable colors, designed for textile use, converted to RGB by you, also, would you also care to convert the cable colors specified by the Washington Sectary of State as the official Colors of their flag to RBG so we shall have a proper comparison between those colors and the official version of their flag?


 * Also why does the Army Institute of Heraldry use a set of colors explicitly specified as being Old Glory Blue and Old Glory Red in the captions of their graphics that appear to be ether based, or using the pantone colors officially specified?


 * meanwhile that out of date document(1981? Seriously?), simply cites the textile colors, with you then linking to a article that does not exist that is cited as to be using an other out of date source from the 1940s that you are using to find these colors, regardless of the fact nether of the sources have the power to dictate the exact colors of the flag. Now cite the act of congress, law, or executive order that states those exact cable colors, which are for use on textiles, and not computer montiors, or else I will not recognize these colors you picked as the colors of the United States Flag, considering the pantones with reliable onscreen equivalents provided by Pantone their selves', are recognized by the State of Texas's Legislature and State Law and the London Embassy Website as the official colors, instead of your obscure cable colors which have no legal standing. --Thegunkid (talk) 14:24, 1 August 2010 (UTC)--Thegunkid (talk) 14:31, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Seriously, how are you so god damn sure those Pantone colors given are assuredly different than the colors used in the US flag, despite the fact they are set in ink in Texas State Law, and they are also thee same as the pantones cited by the London Embassy other then the fact they aren't the same as your precious cable colors? --Thegunkid (talk) 14:35, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * First, there’s really no need for you to cuss at me. See Civility. Secondly, I have no idea what your italicized "out of date" document sentences is talking about. The law specifying the flag colors is quite explicitly clear when it says that the colors shall be Old Glory Red, Old Glory Blue, and White, taken from the TCCA’s Standard Color Card of America. I’ve linked twice to it, and it’s clearly linked in the article. I’m getting kind of tired of this argument, because instead of bringing any new evidence or careful reasoning, you are simply repeating yourself ever louder and more angrily, in telling us things we all already know. –jacobolus (t) 16:39, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Thegunkid -- I have no idea whether Jacobulus's detailed Pantone-to-quasi-sRGB calculations are correct, but what I do know very clearly is that "color science" is a rather complicated field which involves a lot of mathematics of various kinds, and that just taking the "hexadecimal" colors from an image on a government website is not necessarily the answer to anything. The image at right was taken from a government website -- do you want to use its colors? -- AnonMoos (talk) 14:48, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * So are these


 * But I do know The State of Texas has legally specified these pantone colors in their Government Code, and they are consistant with the colors specified by the London Embassy, which give them a hell of a lot more sway then these crap cable colors selected by one person, which can't even be applied to a computer display due to their nature as textile dyes.


 * --Thegunkid (talk) 15:11, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * The circumstances of Texas’s statute change are unclear, but the two numbered points in that Texas law are in clear conflict, so I’m somewhat puzzled by it. It’s certainly worth mentioning in the article (as it now is). Either way, notice that Pantone paint chip colors are no more obviously convertible to sRGB than cloth swatches are. In neither case is there a single right way to approximate a reflective medium on an emissive display. –jacobolus (t) 16:39, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes but pantone atleast provides equivalents on their website, and for Texas, considering the Embassy Of London specified the same pantones as the specific colors of the US flag, common sense would dictate those are indeed the official pantones of the U.S. flag simply being reclarified by the Statue to stop the confusion we have right now, though it would have made more sense for them to put it in the Definitions instead of as a second point, still doesn't subtract from the fact two government sources have specified those to be the correct Pantone colors of the flag, with one dong so legally, which is sure as hell a hundred times more authority then some obscure manual that predates RGB computer displays with no legal standing.


 * Oh and on a slightly unrelated note, I also went and checked the Ohio Flag Statue to see if it had any pantones listed, I found to my surprise it does not list anything other then the basic colors of the flag, simply "Red" and "blue", with nothing stating it is the same colors as the United States Flag to add contrary to your earlier claims just so you don't make that unsupported claim again ;)


 * Also I am still waiting for you to provide the RGB equivalents of Irish Green 80210, Oriental Blue, Spanish Yellow 80068, and Eggshell 80004 to see how well they stack up to the official RGB flag graphic provided by the State of Washington --Thegunkid (talk) 17:48, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * You know what would end this, if someone could acquire a official federal flag, and take 3 scans of it using a scanners, and taking 3 samples of each colors on each scan for a total of 9 scans for both blue and red, and just average them up to get to get a pretty solid set of colors, and considering the Capitol sells official flags that have flown over the capitol, there should be no doubt about the officiality --Thegunkid (talk) 18:03, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Huh. I looked at that page from Washington’s website. As far as I can tell there is no color space listed along with those graphics; we really can’t take them to be at all accurate when assigned the sRGB, without some specific knowledge; they are therefore of only marginal use as a basis for comparison. I agree with you though that Wikipedia’s image of the flag of Washington should be updated to use the proper colors from the Standard Color Card. –jacobolus (t) 18:36, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * A particular point of confusion: the same Washington State website provides several graphics with dramatically different colors: one, two, and three. The first two don’t have any color profile or listed color space, and so their colors are impossible to judge. The third is a CMYK image tagged with a SWOP coated profile at least. It is likely a better source than the other two. –jacobolus (t) 18:41, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

I know that I have been silent for a long time now, but whenever I look more closely at the individual flags that I see almost every day, I noticed that they aren't actually consistent with each other after all, and not just in terms of the tone of the colors. They are also inconsistent by the proportions of the stars; some flags present them in a smaller size than others. No wonder everyone keeps bickering at one another (and I'm sorry if I was somewhat rude to you Jacobolus several weeks ago). Now I'm beginning to question whether or not we will be able to settle this once and for all. I now believe that the flag specifications are all relative, and that there may be no two authoritative sources that are consistent with one another. The one Jacobolus dug up earlier may in fact be the only one that tries to specify the color tones in any way. American Imperialist (talk) 18:54, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * It’s a big country, with a lot of flags. It’s amazing enough that they can get everybody to agree on the basic design. :-) –jacobolus (t) 19:16, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Wait wait wait, American Imperialist, are you seriously telling me a the Second Largest U.S. State's law that specifies exact Pantones, that are consistent with what the London's Embassy's has as the Specifications; against a 30 year old Manual that simply cites the textile colors that lacks any legal standing; of no overriding Authority on this matter? Maybe if it was a lil' ol' State Like Mississippi, but we're talking about Texas here.


 * Common sense dictates that State Law Specifying Exact Pantones > Non-Legal Army Manual Citing Obscure Dyed Textiles


 * Seriously, tell me how this army manual has ANY Authority at all in this matter? --Thegunkid (talk) 21:48, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * The only way to end this is ether revert to the colors specified by the State of Texas, Contact the Government Printing Office to acquire the Officially endorsed RGB, or acquire a official capitol flag from a congressperson and scanning it 3 times and sampling Red and Blue 3 times each scans and averaging all 9 samples to get a proper set of colors, which ever is easier. --Thegunkid (talk) 21:53, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I can’t tell whether you’re actually making any effort to read or comprehend anything anyone writes here, or are just being deliberately obtuse to be obnoxious, but here, it’s really quite clear:
 * DDD-F-416F
 * FEDERAL SPECIFICATION: FLAG, NATIONAL, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND FLAG, UNION JACK
 * The General Services Administration has authorized the use of this federal specification by all Federal Agencies. [...]
 * 1. Scope and Classification: 1.1 Scope. This specification covers requirements for United States of America National Flag and Union Jack. [...]
 * 2. APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS. [...] 2.2 Other publications. The Color Association of The United States. THE STANDARD COLOR REFERENCE OF AMERICA, 10TH EDITION and supplement, THE U.S. ARMY COLOR CARD.  (These color references can be obtained from The Color Association of the United States, 315 West 39th Street, Studio 507, New York, NY 10018, telephone: 212 947-7774, www.colorassociation.com.) [...]
 * 3. REQUIREMENTS [...] 3.5 Color.  The colors, from the Standard Color Reference of America, 10th Edition (see 2.2), of  the US National Flag are as follows: Old Glory Red, White, Old Glory Blue [...]
 * I’m really not sure how the federal specification for the flag has suddenly become “non-legal army manual citing obscure dyed textiles”. Such a characterization could be charitably called absurd. –jacobolus (t) 22:19, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * As for why I’ve provided colors from the 9th rather than 10th edition of the Standard Color Card: I don’t have colorimetric data on the 10th edition, while there is a nice paper describing the process of standardizing the colors used in the 9th edition. The colors themselves did not change (and indeed the 9th edition was cited in DDD-F-416E which was last re-affirmed in 2002), but it’s possible that the CAUS (formerly TCCA) has published some more convenient colorimetric data (e.g. if colorimetric coordinates under Illuminant D65 instead of Illuminant C were known, that would obviate the need for a chromatic adaptation transformation) along with the 10th edition (feel free to call them and ask). –jacobolus (t) 22:26, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * When the The General Services Administration get the power to legally define colors? Regardless Cable Colors were never meant for any use outside of of Textiles, unlike Pancode which are applicable across the field, and have official RGB colors, and have pantone colors exactly specified by two different Government sources that state the same 2 set of colors, and are widely recognized as the official colors of the flag, Pantone 193 and Pantone 281, and have legal bearing since for some reason Congress has never been bothered their selves to specify the color, nor has the government put of a official flag graphic, and clearly aren't the colors used by the Army Institute of Heraldry in their graphics of flags which are explicitly referred to as 'Old Glory Blue' and 'Old Glory Red', after using a RGB to Pantone converter, I found out of most of my samples of the Color red used in the graphics, it came back as 193, the Blue, how ever, kept coming back as 300 with 281 being in the top 10
 * And Again, where are those Cable Color to RGB Conversions of the colors specified for the Washington State flag I asked for? I seriously want to compare the colors you came up with using the same system to come up with the colors you found for the Colors of the U.S. flag to gauge how accurate cable colors are. I know I am looking at two official sources stating the same Pantone and those being accepted as the official colors, so unless a higher government source can be found stating those pantones are incorrect, I suggest we revert the flag back to the version that's based on the Pantones that were officiated by the State of Texas in 2001.
 * Also the issue of the editions used were never relevant as I from where I stand stand, all cable colors are highly unsuitable due their limited nature.
 * And could you contact the government offices for me? I can't currently due to some issues --Thegunkid (talk) 23:44, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah and speaking of that military document, what are the cable colors specified for the Union jack? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thegunkid (talk • contribs) 23:45, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I mean no disrespect, but at this point I’m fairly convinced you’re trolling me. At some point in the not too distant future I’ll get around to replacing the Washington Flag and Union Jack images with proper colors. –jacobolus (t) 23:50, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I am not trolling you, I am demanding you provide the RGB colors for the Cable Colors specified for the Washington State Flag, and now the Union Jack just to see how off or accurate these cable colors are since you are so assured of their on-screen accuracy to ether support or lessen my claim said cable colors are unsuitable for a computer graphic --Thegunkid (talk) 00:06, 2 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I mean really, you're the one who's asserting these colors are the 100% correct colors for computer display simply because some military document cited them, even though they clearly are not the correct colors, and every time I bring up the pan tone, you assure me the pantones are incorrect, despite being specified and widely accepted as being the official colors, with the State of Texas even declaring them legally to be the official colors of the United States Flag, albeit in a slightly fumbled manner, even though it clear they were defying the colors for the U.S. flag by the preceding portion of the law, while you just come up with clearly incorrect colors based on a system that was never meant to be used outside of the field of textiles, and surely never as a measurement for solid colors, meaning even if you can get a RGB from the Color Cables, they are flawed due to their very nature no matter what system you use to 'correct' or 'adjust' them --Thegunkid (talk) 01:41, 2 August 2010 (UTC)


 * We’ll keep this simple. Which military document are you referring to? –jacobolus (t) 05:14, 2 August 2010 (UTC)


 * DDD-F-416F, which in no way what so ever trumps the pantones specified by the State of Texas, which you say are assuredly different then the official colors, when it is these Color Cables, which are assuredly different then the official colors. --Thegunkid (talk) 01:35, 3 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Okay, you clearly don’t understand: DDD-F-416F is the official US Government document which specifies the flag for all government uses. Every flag procured by any US Government agency must match the criteria specified in DDD-F-416F. –jacobolus (t) 03:38, 3 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Ok, yes I see now, but still, these only specify the textiles to be used for cloth flags, which are still regardless of who specified them inappropriate for computer graphics since they are, again, textiles, and just as bad as using a photo to attempt to acquire the correct colors, due to the fact they aren't solid colors, but fabrics, unlike pantones, which is why I think we should change the colors back to the Pantones since these current colors are clearly incorrect by just looking at them.


 * Oh and sorry for the earlier misunderstanding, I just saw 'General Services' and thought 'Joint Services' as in the Military --Thegunkid (talk) 05:44, 3 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Hmm, odd, I've come across the Millennium Challenge Corporation, and they cite the same Pantones as the London Embassy, and the Texas State Legislature, AND, they list the CMYK, RGB, and Web Colors for them. --Thegunkid (talk) 01:58, 3 August 2010 (UTC)


 * American_Imperialist -- There's actually a reasonably clear and exact official specification of the flag geometry (length of stripes, size and placement of stars, etc.). However, colors can lead to a lot of complications... AnonMoos (talk) 04:17, 2 August 2010 (UTC)


 * This I do understand right now. It wasn't until a week or two ago that I found out how ignorant I actually was on the matter.  I had based my assumptions upon the design(s) that was typically mass-produced for the general public.  I knew from the start that the proportions of the entire flag were actually larger than those that you would  see everyday, but I never would have guessed that the color tones were so inconsistent somehow. American Imperialist (talk) 19:04, 2 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Isn't the idea of creating a graphic for what should only be a material (cloth) object such as the U.S. flag (or the military patch of the U.S. flag) part of the reason not to attempt to inject such folly as trying to create one? I would think the opposite of what's being tried here, an exceptional photograph of some current officially displayed flag, is the best way possible to convey the intended cable colors last decreed in Ike's executive order over the internet (i.e. Wikipedia) today? George Orwell III (talk) 21:21, 2 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Photos are great too – if you have a great flag photo, add it! – but there are all kinds of uses of flag images on Wikipedia where they aren’t appropriate. –jacobolus (t) 21:31, 2 August 2010 (UTC)


 * George, I already suggested that since these cable color approximations are highly inappropriate for graphics use --Thegunkid (talk) 01:35, 3 August 2010 (UTC)