CAA: Christian Anime Alliance

I HOPE this posts, because if it doesn’t I’m in trouble…

Oh kind and generous CAA’ers, I am in desperate need of your assistance!
I have just been given a project in one of my college classes that requires me to survey 50 people, that is more people than I know and more people than I have classes with in between now and FRIDAY!

So I come to you, denizens of CAA, though most of you don’t know me, and…the few that did don’t really remember me.

To the survey!

This survey is quite simple and asks you nothing but to state an opinion on the three color pallets bellow. As you can see the pallets are labeled: #1, #2, and #3. All I need you to do is tell me which pallet strikes you as “Expensive, well madeâ€

Expensive #1

Cheap#3

Moderate#2

Can do!

#1: Expensive/well made; the palette is aesthetically pleasing and congruous.

#2: Cheap; a huge jump in value from the white to the other colors, which seem picked at random to "look nice" instead of being made to work with one another.

#3: Moderate; while the palette has little variance in value or hue, it keeps a narrow hue range that is warm and pleasing to the eye.

Hope that helps! XD

#1 Expensive,

#2 Cheap,

#3 Moderate!

1: Moderate

2: Cheap

3: Expensive

(The more I look at it, the more my opinion changes...)

1. Cheap

2. Moderate

3. Expensive

[quote="Radical Dreamer (post: 1376135)"]Can do!

#1: Expensive/well made]

I HATE YOU, I WAS GOING TO SAY THOSE SAME THINGS. BUT YOU WORDED IT BETTER THAN ME.

so i'm just going to say "i agree."

1: expensive

2: cheap

3: moderate

#1: Moderate

#2: Cheap

#3: Expensive

1. Expensive :The colors are very eye-catching and vibrant.

2. Cheap: Not very many vibrant colors here. They look like the colors stuff at a second-hand store would be.

3. Moderate: Nice, but nothing special. Still lovely colors though.

#1 Moderate

#2 Cheap

#3 Expensive

[font="Book Antiqua"][color="Red"]Col. Roy Mustang[/color][/font]

1. Cheap

2. Moderate

3. Expensive

No. 1 Moderate

No. 2 Cheap

No. 3 Expensive

EDIT: If it helps at all, I consider products with a darker tone to denote sleekness of design, and a certain visual power and presence. Meanwhile, duller colors are cheaper, more worn, more earthy.

Also, my moderate group is composed almost entirely of colors I would find obnoxious.

[quote="Abassi"]the few that did don’]
Hey I remember you. D:

Although I'm pretty sure you'd rather I didn't. But anyway.

Expensive: 1

Cheap: 3

Moderate (by venue of process of elimination): 2

I hope this has helped. And seriously Gelka and I are the only two who think 3 looks cheap? C'mon! It's all dark and boring colors.

#1: Cheap

#2: Expensive

#3: Moderate

#1 Expensive
#2 Cheap
#3 Moderate

#1: Cheap. I'm sorry, but it reminds me of Walmart and people trying too hard to stand out. XD Pastels *shudders*
#2: Moderate. This is is a mix of several types of colors, so it fits well in the middle.
#3: Expensive. Not to flashy, but still classy and elegant.

Interesting fact worth noting: When you word colors as being cheap, moderate, or expensive, I automatically think of clothes. Does this mean I'm a too much a consumerist? XD

For someone who knows a little about color theory and commercial pigments, this is kinda tough!

1 The 'happiest' colors with the most traditionally expensive colors. HOWEVER, these colors also strike me more as the ones I'd see in a bargain throw pillow at Target or Wallmart. #1 Cheapest.

2 An odd combination, not initially pleasing to the eye as swatches. Seems random. HOWEVER. This is the sort of palette I would expect an interior designer to devise, and I can see these colors used in a posh floral drapery print.
#2 Expensive.

3 Cool dark palette--often suggestive of rich elegance, HOWEVER the lack of any warm tones or bright coordinating colors suggests less sophistication. #3 Moderately expensive.

Which scheme would I use in my house? None of the above. ....Oh wait, that wasn't on the survey.

Expensive: #1
Cheap: #2
Moderate: #3

I know I pretty much stuck with the example you gave, but that's what first came to me when looking at them ^^

Wha?!

Expensive: #3 (Gasp, probably expensive and well made, but the right side of my brain is begging me to reconsider)

Moderate: #1 (I like these colors the most, but generally snobby people like boring colors)

Cheap: #2 (Horrible color choices, who sticks red next to green O_O [The horrible glowing orange edges!])

Well, what I'm starting to wonder now is whether or not these color schemes are meant to be seen separately or as a full color scheme used on one particular item. XD The result could be different depending on which one it is. XD

1. Expensive
2. Cheap
3. Moderate

1. moderate. they are almost all full squares, and only have a few smudges and shadows.

2. cheap. The squares are warped most, and the shadow above and below the white square is ugly.

3. expensive. Most square like squares, little or no noticeable shadows, just a little smudging. Although purple is kinda sloppy.

Well... I guess it depends on the item. Lots of other factors help perception of it being "cheap" or "well-made". Anyway...
#1: Expensive
#2: Cheap
#3: Moderate

Expensive: #2
Cheap: #1
Moderate: #3

Radical Dreamer (post: 1376199) wrote:Well, what I'm starting to wonder now is whether or not these color schemes are meant to be seen separately or as a full color scheme used on one particular item. XD The result could be different depending on which one it is. XD

I don't know, my answers would still be the same either way.

But I see what you mean. If we're going to have the color choices from 1, 2, or 3 all on one shirt, we may run into trouble. o.O

Expensive #1
Moderate #2
Cheap #3

Radical Dreamer (post: 1376135) wrote:#1: Expensive/well made]

Pascal (post: 1376195) wrote:Cheap: #2 (Horrible color choices, who sticks red next to green O_O [The horrible glowing orange edges!])

Alright hold on there people, please understand (as it seems I failed to make this properly clear, I apologize) that the arrangement of the palette itself is not the issue (though clearly it affects your choices, I anticipated that, to a degree).

Radical Dreamer (post: 1376199) wrote:Well, what I'm starting to wonder now is whether or not these color schemes are meant to be seen separately or as a full color scheme used on one particular item. XD The result could be different depending on which one it is. XD

Ah, didn’t make this clear either I guess. You are meant to look at the colors individually within a particular palette, and then, overall not as a ‘color scheme’ but as a group of colors. If the overall feeling is cheap or expensive, that’s what matters, not how well they’d go together in a single product.

Rusty Claymore (post: 1376216) wrote:1. moderate. they are almost all full squares, and only have a few smudges and shadows.

2. cheap. The squares are warped most, and the shadow above and below the white square is ugly.

3. expensive. Most square like squares, little or no noticeable shadows, just a little smudging. Although purple is kinda sloppy.

Yipe! Easy there, it’s not about how well made the palette itself is, focus on the colors, just the colors, the palettes are only really there in order to separate groups.

Nate (post: 1376163) wrote:Hey I remember you. D:

Although I'm pretty sure you'd rather I didn't. But anyway.

Ha! I figured you’d remember me Nate!

I’m glad you do, I feel much better knowing I wasn’t completely forgotten.

Even if the arrangement were different my opinion would still be same, I just wanted to add some comic commentary - yes it was terrible, I know.

Abassi wrote:Yipe! Easy there, it’s not about how well made the palette itself is, focus on the colors, just the colors, the palettes are only really there in order to separate groups.

Haha, I know. I added the comments to be different.

1: expensive, Seems more cmplex to me.

2: moderate, seems a little less fancy looking

3: cheap, Looks boring and lifeless