Learn to use the tools provided on the paint manufacturers' websites.

https://www.sherwin-williams.com/homeowners/color/find-and-explore-colors/paint-colors-by-family/SW7002-downy#/7101/?s=coordinatingColors&p=PS0

Thanks Beverly for responding. I am trying this, and have tried Downy, Futon, and Modest White samples so far. I even spoke, by phone this morning, with a SW color representative and she indicated the colors do not necessarily go up a shade with each C1,C2,C3,C4, etc. number. There is quite a difference between Downy C-3 and Futon C-4, for instance, on the walls or a white board.

Great info directly from SW - it's true, the colors are not ordered on the strip chips with any strategy. Sometimes all the colors don't even belong to the same hue family.

Most people learn this when they choose the lightest color on the same strip as their wall color for the ceiling and they get an unpleasant surprise that the two colors don't relate or "go together" and it looks weird.

What do you mean by "deeper"?

Darker?

Less gray - more colorful, more intense?

You could try having a sample size of downy mixed at 150%. That might do the trick & it's easy for Sherwin to do.

Lori, So nice to hear from you. I've watched you on you tube. When I said "deeper" I was thinking of a color that would show a bit more contrast between the white trim and the wall paint color. For years I've had Glidden Antique White on the walls, but the painter suggested Sherwin Williams, so I started looking at their colors....looking for something close to that Glidden color. I know I could have the formula "copied", but hoped to find a color that is already one of Sherwin Williams (or even Benjamin Moore.)

So I found Downy which does seems close to what I've had for years on the walls. I knew I didn't want to go lighter than Downy, so started to look at a few other colors in the warm range. Some of the colors are showing too much yellow, peach, or gray so far though.

Any suggestions for a light off white neutral? I have red oak floors and it is a North facing room. I was going to have the ceiling the same color as the walls. The living room flows through to the hallway also.

Take a look at Shell White SW 8917.

Interesting. The Shell White is actually lighter than the Downy and the only difference in formulas is Shell White uses Raw Umber in its formula, while Downy uses New Red. The color Deep Gold is in both.

According to the numbers, Shell White is barely brighter than Downy in terms of LRV.

But it probably won't look lighter to most people. Because Shell White is more gray, less colorful than Downy. Which is what the Value numbers show us (highlighted).

Shell White would probably fit in to the category of "greige" for many. It's a pretty color with an updated vibe. Which is why I recommended it.

the only difference in formulas is Shell White uses Raw Umber in its formula, while Downy uses New Red. The color Deep Gold is in both

:)

The formula means absolutely nothing when it comes to what the color actually looks like.

Many believe within an inch of their life and would swear on a stack of Bibles that the paint color formula holds some kind of secret clue to defining color appearance and anticipating what it's going to look like when it dries.

The truth is that's just not how it works.

Architectural coatings aren't anything like artist's oils, acrylics, watercolors, gauche, etc.

All paint colors are born in theoretical color space first. In other words, they're a kind of code to begin with. That code (think of it as color DNA) is used to develop the formula based on the chemistry of the paint base and individual colorants.

There are several different combinations of paint base and colorants that will result in the same color.

Which is why the formula on sample sizes don't always match the formula for a gallon. Also why it's possible to get colors matched in different brands using different bases and different colorants sets.

It's a whole big thing but none of the formula stuff is useful when it comes to describing, defining, communicating color - or anticipating what a color is gonna look like when it's dry.

I see the color number on my Glidden Antique white is different than the one shown on your chart. It is 40YY 83/043 (on both my paint chip and the can) and this has been on my walls for many years. I wonder if they have two shades/numbers for this particular color?

I'm trying your recommendation of SW Shell White on my walls to compare with my current color, however it has been overcast here for a week so the living room is darker in the daytime. It looks like it is a pretty color in the can though, as long as it isn't lighter, or too much lighter, than my Antique White.

If I do go with the SW Shell White, do you think my current door casings and baseboards, which are now Kelly Moore Swiss Coffee, would go okay with this.....or would one of the Sherwin Williams white colors look nicer? I also have some bookshelves, going halfway up the walls on either side of the fireplace, that were always painted the wall color to blend in. But now I wonder if it would look better to have them match the baseboard/door casings, rather than the wall? I've been concentrating so much on the wall color, I almost forgot about the trim/accent colors.

I wonder if they have two shades/numbers for this particular color?

40YY 83/043 (your Antique White) is Treasured Moment in Glidden's The Master Palette Architectural fandeck and 43YY 78/053 is Antique White RM.

Color names in The Master Palette have changed before. Also, it's an international brand so it's not unusual to find different names associated with the color name/notation.

43YY 78/053 and 40YY 83/043 are both notations, btw. Glidden is the only brand that uses a color order system notation as their color naming system.

First set of numbers/letter is the hue family. Middle number is LRV. Last is Chroma.

This notation is on all Glidden paint chips.

I see the color number on my Glidden Antique white is different than the one shown on your chart.

Here's your Antique White on the spreadsheet. It's even closer in terms of attributes to Shell White.

If I do go with the SW Shell White, do you think my current door casings and baseboards, which are now Kelly Moore Swiss Coffee, would go okay with this.

It could work. My rule of thumb for an all white wall/trim color palette is there has to be approximately 0.20 ish difference in Munsell notation Chroma between the two colors. It's actually a fun rule of thumb to try to prove wrong but it's not easy to get the Munsell Chroma value for colors.

That degree of contrast ensures neither color of white will make the other one look dirty or dingy.

But as I always say, we can't color by the numbers alone; color data values and notations are a framework to follow, not a formula or prescription.

Still have to test and visually assess to make sure it looks pretty.

Hi Lori, why do you think that Ben Moore and Sherwin Williams don't post the color information on their paint chips like Glidden does? It would be SO helpful!

why do you think that Ben Moore and Sherwin Williams don't post the color information on their paint chips like Glidden does?

Oh, gosh. Lots of thoughts on this. Will try to keep it as short as possible.

First, all paint brands already have these data values and notations for every color - they couldn't MAKE paint colors without it. It's that color DNA I'm always talking about.

Sherwin-Williams used to share the Munsell notations for all their colors. Learned this from a color scientist who used to work for SW - and I acquired that original PDF.

We don't use the SW Munsell notations, however, because we do our own here at The Land of Color. Just because I have major control issues when it comes to the data - it has to be perfect.

The Glidden notation is their own proprietary color system developed in 1978. It has its own color wheel, and LRV and Chroma scales. It's all published in the front of The Master Palette fandeck.

Their proprietary system is different from the Munsell color notations I like to use. Munsell is my favorite for several reasons but mostly because I've used it for so long it's second nature to me.

Glidden's system is a damn good order system. It is the first and, one and only, color system designed specifically for architectural coatings. Its formal name is the Acoat Codification System.

So, yeah, color order systems for paint colors specifically have been a thing for 42+ years.

All things considered from a color science perspective, I think paint brands choose to talk about undertones, color trends, and forecasts because they are intangible - no one is ever wrong talking about undertones, trends, and forecasts because you can make up whatever you want; there's a kind of banal safety in the inherent subjectivity of each one.

They don't have to hire anybody with any special color knowledge or experience to market their paint if they focus on intangibles like undertones, forecasts, and trends. Because, again, everybody is making it up as they go anyway.

When you get into the color science, data values/notations in particular, that's a special skill set.

You can't just make up whatever you want when it comes to the science of color, how color really works, because there's 100+ years of well-researched and well-documented sources and standards to reference about all things color spaces and systems.

And anybody can Google and find it - all of it.

Before I publish ANYTHING anywhere, I like to have 3, academic level, quality sources to cite in my back pocket. I don't do Wikipedia and I'd eat nails before citing a blog as a source for color information.

When you're speaking to color in such evidence-based, tangible terms, when you're talking about quantifying how the human eye sees color, you have to know what you're talking about.

Because it's science. It's physics. It's psychophysics.

I suspect that's more work, responsibility, and accountability than paint manufacturers are capable of dealing with. The murky world of undertones, trends and forecasts is cheaper, easier. And, honestly, probably more fun to spin in the intangibles and espouse opinions with reckless abandon, giving zero !@#$s if it's accurate or not.

The problem is, it's 2020 and the color tech tools like Color Muse, NIX, Color Reader is making the science, an evidence-based approach to color - data values specifically - available to anyone who knows where to look for them in the apps.

Which means more and more people are learning about the color systems that have been around for 100+ years and want to know why the frameworks of color data values and notations have been unshared.

I will say this, whichever paint brand is the first to "get it" when it comes to an evidence-based approach to color and publishes Munsell notations on their apps, website, and paint chips, is going to win not only the internet but paint world in general.

Thank you Lori, for that information. As someone who loves facts, systems and organization, I am fascinated by the science of color. Have you ever contacted anyone at the paint manufacturing companies to inquire about adding the Munsell notations?

Yes. It's like talking to a brick wall.

They don't get it. Same with independent paint stores who you'd think would want to get a leg up on their competition.

Many also think they know everything. There's an attitude that they're authorities on color just because they mix and sell a lot of paint.

Paint expertise and color expertise are not the same thing.

For example, they think including RGB or HSL values on their website makes 'em all cutting-edge and stuff.

When in fact those values are the wrong values - they are exclusive to graphics/print and do not relate in any way whatsoever to defining, describing, communicating the appearance of paint colors.

The misstep publishing RGB and HSL only goes to show how much they do not know.

I've been seeing the fallout of those incorrect color values for years - especially from SW. People try to use RGB and HSL values as a framework for figuring out a color's attributes and, of course, it doesn't work.

I shouldn't complain because it drives a lot of traffic/clients my way who want to know why it didn't work, but publishing erroneous values (RGB and HSL) like they do misleads people and causes them to spend money and time on the wrong colors.

Again, whoever is first to figure out the correct data values/notations to use stands to gain a lion's share of the market.

Lori, while I agree that the current marketing of paint is very "voodoo", I still doubt that sharing the true dope (either expressed within Munsell or other) would change market share much. That said, for those fascinated by the intersection of science and tech and color and light, sure exploring the data could give them further insight. I just don't think that it would make a trip to the paint store all that different for the average consumer.

As it is now many average consumers are already trying to find some rhyme, reason and framework to use to help them find the color they want.

Right now happening online as we speak, and in paint stores across North America and beyond, the average consumer:

• Believes there's a code to crack in the formula and is wasting time (and maybe money) trying to decipher colorants.

• Believes RGB (or HSL) Values describe how much red, green and blue a color has *in it* and is spending time gathering these data values and trying to use them to compare colors.

• Is already using LRV to gain insight about lightness/darkness. So, for many a quantified color attribute is not a brand new concept.

• Is going to EasyRGB attempting to figure out the numbers. And/or a few other websites that are awful so I won't mention them because I don't want anyone visiting those websites.

• Believes there's some magical order to fandecks and are counting chips on strips; that all the colors on a strip are the *same color* just darker and lighter versions.

• Believes only the part they want to change (hue, value, chroma) will be affected by cutting or increasing the formula.

• Believes colors have undertones and the problem is they don't have a "trained eye" to see them. Never occurs to them that undertones are rooted in individual, subjective perception.

Many average consumers bought into the idea - a long time ago - that there has to be a better a way, that there's some kind of framework or color code to decipher.

So many questions.

What would happen if they were provided the correct information upfront instead of leaving them to scrounge, Google and try to interpret color information on their own?

What if they were introduced to - and funneled to - just the 3 psychological dimensions of color hue, value, chroma plus LRV - the original color DNA? Away from the whack-a-doodle pseudoscience frameworks they're already trying to make work?

I think consumers are casting about

for a shade that looks "good"

or a shade that looks exactly like what Suzy has at her house only 'darker'

maybe a colour that matches their sweater

or that will make the room bright and light & that is neutral and works with everything

or a colour that is the exact same one that adorable HGTV Lady uses all the time.

Well, the last is actually (kinda sorta) a wish the paint store can fulfill. The rest, even with all the scientific info in the world at the consumers fingertips,not so much. Even matching the sweater via ColorMuse won't necessarily look like a match to them on the wall. That all typed, mo' better info is always a good thing. And I sincerely respect your passion for the subject enormously as well as all the knowledge you've shared.

edit to add: In regard to matching an object I admit my (now) hubs, years ago, did create 4 walls that mimic-ed the specific orange/coral I wanted from a piece of lobster shell I was eating. ( btw,did ya know the shell colour fades and evolves really quickly?) Do you think his MFA (Painting), his mad desire to woo his witchy girlfriend, his arsenal of pigments, or the summers painting walls for folks in the Hamptons where he was deemed "Mr.Perfectionist" ,helped the most ;-)