Alex Cooke write at Fstoppers that Australian researchers believe they have found the world's "ugliest" color as judged by the reactions 1,000 study participants had to it, which included such labels as "sewage-tinted" and "death." The world's ugliest color is opaque couché, also known as Pantone 448C. The research was done for an important reason. The Australian government will now use it on packaging to help deter consumers from buying tobacco products. People find the color so repellent it will be used to discourage people from lighting up. "''We didn't want to create attractive, aspirational packaging designed to win customers," says Victoria Parr. "Instead our role was to help our client reduce demand, with the ultimate aim to minimise use of the product.''"
The new color was found to have the most ability to "minimize appeal" and "maximize perceived harm" and was implemented on plain cigarette packs with health warnings across Australia. Pantone is keen to state, however, that no color is more beautiful or ugly than the next. Naturally, the company was not thrilled at the choice of its tone for the packaging: "At the Pantone Color Institute, we consider all colours equally," explained Leatrice Eiseman, executive director. There was, she said, "no such thing as the ugliest colour". Rather, 448C was associated with "deep, rich earth tones", popular on sofas and shoes and other things that might be found in a house.
(Score: 4, Informative) by takyon on Sunday June 12 2016, @11:55PM
The color described is rgb(74,65,42) or #4a412a.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @12:25AM
AKA... Poop color.
(Score: 5, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @12:52AM
politely called "Zune"
(Score: 2) by JNCF on Monday June 13 2016, @01:53AM
That is exactly how I wanted that, thank you.
I wonder what color SoylentNews will be next April 1st...
(Score: 2) by driverless on Monday June 13 2016, @03:09AM
Hey, that's taupe. My couch is that colour.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday June 13 2016, @04:07AM
Now you know the true source of that visceral disgust you feel so often.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by driverless on Monday June 13 2016, @04:23AM
Oh no, taupe is fine. If my couch was couché it'd be different.
(Score: 4, Funny) by kanweg on Monday June 13 2016, @05:12AM
The idea is that you won't be able to find your cigarettes when you leave them on the couch.
Bert
(Score: 4, Informative) by Whoever on Monday June 13 2016, @03:38AM
Isn't this the color of the Zune?
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday June 13 2016, @04:07AM
What can brown do for you?
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by davester666 on Monday June 13 2016, @07:16AM
commonly known as "Zune Brown"
(Score: 2) by KritonK on Monday June 13 2016, @08:46AM
Is it , though?
This color looks nothing like the color in the accompanying video and looks kinda nice, at least on my screen. From a screen shot of the video, that color is (89, 74, 11) or #594a0b and is more or less what came to mind when I read about "the world's ugliest color".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @12:06AM
When I was a child neon colors were all the rage. When I ran out of neon green I used neon blue and neon yellow... You can layer on more colors to make other colors. I discovered the ugliest color in the world is Neon Brown.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @01:31AM
That *is* neon brown.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @03:06PM
I don't think it's especially pleasant, but it's not "the ugliest", but I'm colorblind, so it might not look like what it's supposed to for me.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Monday June 13 2016, @05:57PM
Where's the *facepalm* mod?
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @12:14AM
No where near pathetic as Lebron and Cavs. Clevelanders, really?! That how you roll?!
Lebron, the moron, he could have been something genuinely special, but, now you know, now you know the value of education and character building.
Lebron is a bitch, and that's an insult to all the bitches out there.
(Score: 2) by deadstick on Monday June 13 2016, @12:19AM
The color of diseased shit is unattractive. Video at eleven...
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @05:15AM
That's racist!
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @12:23AM
Pantone makes the Tobacco Plain Packaging Act 2011 [comlaw.gov.au] look politically incorrect. Well played.
(Score: 3, Informative) by butthurt on Monday June 13 2016, @12:29AM
An article from 2012 specifically names Pantone 448C as the chosen colour, saying it was described as "olive green" until the Australian Olive Association complained.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/does-this-colour-turn-you-off-20120816-24bf4.html [theage.com.au]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @12:29AM
That's the predominant color in my wardrobe.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @01:00AM
The Röhm look has never gone out of style.
(Score: 2) by Flyingmoose on Monday June 13 2016, @12:58AM
I think puke-green would be uglier... Brown isn't too bad.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday June 13 2016, @01:30AM
Puke-orange beats both, truly a sight to behold.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Monday June 13 2016, @06:00PM
That's why you don't drink the spiked Kool-Aid.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @01:33AM
I don't think colors themselves are ugly, it depends on the context in which they are used.
And brown for tobacco products kinda fits, doesn't it?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by takyon on Monday June 13 2016, @01:37AM
I can't see any scenario where colors like these will repel people unless it is massively scaled up: such as the paint color of a car or walls of a room.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @02:17AM
Bingo.
Colors aren't ugly in isolation, but they can be deployed in garish and/or tasteless ways.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @02:47AM
When I saw the color I thought 'wait a second' I have seen that color before.
Yep it is the one millions of people use to paint their homes in. It usually looks pretty good.
It is silly to think that people cant make things look good even in monochromatic colors.
(Score: 1) by Francis on Monday June 13 2016, @03:31AM
That's true, the KKK thinks black looks better in Africa.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Monday June 13 2016, @02:03AM
The world's ugliest color is being used to prove that the nanny state is actually run by a bunch of fascist sons of bitches.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday June 13 2016, @02:58AM
Yeah, fuck all that evidence we have about smoking causing cancer and so on, right? And to hell with the harm it does to society as a whole, driving up our medical costs, not to mention the misery of those afflicted by smoking's downsides, and sure, advertising using peer pressure to hook kids and teens is totally cool. Fuck 'em.
I can't tell if you're actually evil or if you just lack the ability to think ahead more than one or two steps, but honestly I'm leaning toward evil :(
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Hairyfeet on Monday June 13 2016, @03:25AM
If anybody gave a shit about that (instead of taking more money via taxes) we wouldn't have had the FDA pass the ban on vaping WHILE adding a "2007 exemption" that gives what is left of vaping to big tobacco.
You want to watch a politician choke? Its really easy, simply go to one of their rallies and offer this "modest proposal" and watch them just vaporlock "I will sign an ironclad contract that if I get sick from ANYTHING that I personally do the ONLY treatment I will get is morphine, one of the cheapest drugs we currently have, and in return you remove ALL "sin taxes" and penalties so i have complete control and responsibility for my own body...how about it?"
You will instantly turn ANY politician, no matter how slick, into the biggest waffler since Hillary Clinton as its never been about health, its about control and someone having power over YOU, over YOUR body and YOUR life. Jesse Ventura may be a whacko on a lot of things but one thing he said was right on the money...can you name one thing in your life that the government doesn't get SOME measure of control? From healthcare to the little tag on your pillow, from the moment you get up until you go to sleep, everything you have and interact with has some government agency sticking their two cents in.
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by Runaway1956 on Monday June 13 2016, @04:10AM
The cancer doesn't matter. Your health doesn't matter. It's all about CONTROL. The words "cancer" and "health" are just trigger words to turn on your emotions. The jackass down the street engages in self destructive behaviour? Big focking deal - it IS his life, after all. You're smarter than he is, and you understand that smoking can be hazardous? Fine - don't smoke. He's not going to force you to light up, is he? Second hand smoke? Again - big fucking deal. If you are going to die because you caught a whiff of his burning tobacco as he walks past your property, that's tough noogies. You were going to die anyway with the next wildfire in the next county over when the smoke blew across your property.
It's fascist control is what it is. If your neighbor wants to suicide, you might counsel him. But, YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO INTERFERE IN HIS LIFE!
Who died and left you God?
(Score: 5, Informative) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday June 13 2016, @06:43AM
Jesus motocrossing Christ. Your kind really are stunted, rebellious teenagers who never aged out of this "fuck you I won't do what you tell me!" phase aren't you?!
I suppose you think the FDA's labelling requirements for macronutrient content are "about control" too? Or the warning labels about not drinking when you're pregnant? Or the ones on cigarettes, since we're on the subject, stating that yes they fucking cause cancer and you're an idiot if you smoke?
You really don't have any sense of proportion and your risk-sensing mechanisms are totally out of whack. The government overreaches, for sure, but this is not one of those cases. You can't tell the difference between an egregious First Amendment violation like "free speech zones" and a requirement to label a deadly, addictive substance as such? That does not bode well for you and how well you can function as a sane, rational adult.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday June 13 2016, @07:01AM
Oh, FFS. I'll see your Jesus motocrossing, and up you a Jesus motoguzzi.
Every mother bucking pack of cigarettes in the world today carries a warning that cigarettes might cause you to get cancer. Every child who has attended school in the past 30 years of more has been indoctrinated by the fearful that cigarettes cause cancer. There isn't a living, breathing soul alive today in the first world, and probably not in the third world, who doesn't know that sucking carcinogenic smoke into your lungs can cause cancer. We've all been warned. And, it's their RIGHT to ignore the warnings, if they so choose.
Labeling foods? That's fucking WONDERFUL! People should be able to read labels, to see what is in their foods, and to decide for themselves whether they wish to consume the shit that the food industry has packaged into nice pretty cartons and wrappers. Labels are righteous, proper, moral, ethical, and even good! Label stuff all you like, I go along with that.
Drinking while pregnant? Again, the warnings are out there. I doubt that there is a woman in the first world who isn't aware that alcohol might damage her baby. Funny thing though - lots of women DO DRINK while pregnant, and they don't all deliver retards. Hmmmm - maybe this is a case of "maybe we don't know as much as we thought we knew"?? Granted, women who get falling down drunk, and pass out in alleyways throughout their pregnancies have an increased chance of delivering retards. Women who sip a glass of wine two or three times throughout their pregnancy MIGHT have SOME chance of having a retarded baby. I mean - it's not like any other substances might be involved, right? It could ONLY be the alcohol.
And, finally, the government does indeed over reach, in all cases. And, yes, this IS one case in which they over reach.
Basically, we're down to one thing here: YOU get to judge what risks are acceptable for EVERYONE.
Let's make a deal. You just accept that not everyone is worth the effort of saving from themselves. Yes, there are millions of us in the world who have no value. Our stupidity puts us so far beyond having any value, that you should just give up on all of us. Smokers are retards, and not worth saving. Just accept that - and we can all kill ourselves peacefully.
Hey - we're gonna die anyway, why should you waste your effort trying to convince us that we're killing ourselvs?
If that's to reasonable a tone for you, then I can be more blunt.
All of you fascists need to just fuck off and die. In a free world, people have the RIGHT to decide which highway to hell they want to travel.
But - you don't really want to live in a free world, do you? You only want to live in a world that you consider to be "safe".
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday June 13 2016, @07:26AM
And who the fucking hell gave YOU the right to decide that some people have no value?! Explain to me the way one calculates this value, if you can. Value to whom, exactly?
You can gussy it up in high-sounding pseudo-philosophic jargon all you like, but at the end of the day you're just another sociopath. And you're doing the work of the very control freaks you claim to hate, who are just as psychopathic as you but coming from the other direction. How does it feel to be a useful idiot in the elites' divide and conquer plan?
I'm not even going to address the "fascist" comment; my political leanings are somewhere between left libertarian and social democrat, but of course anyone who isn't a complete anarchist must be statist, fascist scum, am I right?
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday June 13 2016, @08:34AM
" but of course anyone who isn't a complete anarchist must be statist, fascist scum, am I right? "
Are you not trying to justify the state's dictates here? Or - have I misunderstood what you have said?
I'm stating quite clearly that the state has no fucking right to tell people what they may or may not do with their own lives. None. The state has some obligation to keep people somewhat honest - thus, I approve of labeling foods with their actual ingredients and nutritional value. But, if I really, really, REALLY want to eat a chemical soup with garbage filler, then the state has no right to prevent me from doing so.
Would you pass me that package of Fake Ramen noodles, please? Yeah, I know it has 37 different ingredients known to the state of California to be carcinogenic, but it really tastes good. Thank you, California, for educating me.
(Score: 1, Offtopic) by aristarchus on Monday June 13 2016, @09:18AM
I am Runaway1956-2626, and I must protest the continued hijacking of my user name, This interloper is making me sound like an uneducated buffoon, a non-plussed tallywacker, and a hillbilly extra-ordinaire. If only some authority, like a state, could force other people to stop impersonating me! Vote Hillary, y'all! Former first Lady of Arkansas! WhoooHoo!!
(Score: 1) by tractatus_techno_philosophicus on Monday June 13 2016, @07:45PM
I am Runaway1956-2626, and I must protest the continued hijacking of my user name, This interloper is making me sound like an uneducated buffoon, a non-plussed tallywacker, and a hillbilly extra-ordinaire. If only some authority, like a state, could force other people to stop impersonating me! Vote Hillary, y'all! Former first Lady of Arkansas! WhoooHoo!!
Huh?
No moral system can rest solely on authority. ~A.J. Ayer
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @07:56PM
Huh?
Runaway has been cloned in a prior discussion thread. He is now legion. The original username may, or may not, actually be the real Runaway1956-2626. And it looks like Runaway is trying to break through Aristarchus' account. Soon, there will be Runaways running rampant all over SoylentNews, kinda like Agent Smith in the Matrix. I, for one, welcome of new chain-smoking overloads.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 14 2016, @02:10PM
Requiring warnings is one thing, but doing things equivalent of putting pictures of goatse in packaging is another. I don't even smoke and it strikes to me as annoyingly obvious manipulation that I'd love to rebel against. Maybe it's not too late to start a new habit?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @07:12AM
I'm really fine with your reasoning as long as smokers are denied *any* kind of publicly funded (in anyway whatsoever, i.e. even indirectly funded) healthcare for their mouth/throat/lung diseases (cancer, pneumonia, etc.). Let them pay Every. Single. Cent. of it. 'Cause you know what? They end up being more expensive than the taxes they pay on their cigarettes.
Oh, and as long as I don't have to breathe their smoke. Because it stinks. A lot.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Monday June 13 2016, @07:35AM
But, YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO INTERFERE IN HIS LIFE!
As he (or she) has no right to interfere in mine. But if I catch
a whiff of his burning tobacco as he walks past [my] property
then he (or she) is VERY DEFINITELY INTERFERING with my life, and I DO have the right to defend myself; and I choose to do it via my government. If anybody doesn't like it
that's tough noogies.
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday June 13 2016, @08:39AM
Well - if you're going that route - your odor trespasses on my right to breathe clean, natural air in between cigarettes. You dump those nasty chemicals all over your body, rub it into your armpits, shake them down the crack of your ass and around your crotch, even shake them into your shoes. Fekking chemicals. You've been brainwashed into believing that your cologne/perfume/deodorant/etc ad nauseum smells better than your own sweaty arse. Which is all cool - but WTF right do you have to force ME to breathe that shit?
I'll consider not smoking, while you consider not polluting the air with your chemical soups.
(Score: 1, Troll) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Monday June 13 2016, @10:32AM
Well - if you're going that route ... with your chemical soups.
Trying to make a constructive reply... okay, you spelled "arse" correctly (but you needed two attempts).
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @03:42PM
I'll let you look this one up on your own, good practice and I don't have time right now. But smokers are cheaper for our Healthcare system because they die much younger. The real drag on the system is the bastards that cling on for years after their worth is expended. Smokers are convenient in that they die around the age of retirement.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday June 13 2016, @04:29PM
Ah, yes, because money is God and how dare anyone cost more than the priesthood of Mammon decree they should! Fucking hell, this site is infested with people who know the price of everything and the value of nothing. At least make an account so we know who you are.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 3, Interesting) by archfeld on Monday June 13 2016, @03:24AM
Does anyone actually believe that the packaging or the color of the packaging has anything to do with the decline in smoking ? I am a former smoker and all for people quitting smoking, but the amount of money spent and the general misinformation, outright lies used in the 'truth' campaigns is astonishing. My favorite is the insidious second hand smoke sneaking its way in to the neighbors babies lungs via the open window then through the vents and directly up the babies' nose. I genuinely think just the straight dope info and social pressure will kill things which are self destructive. The demonizing of things like alcohol and tobacco only make them more attractive to rebellious teens. Let the parents smoke pot and cigarettes, and they won't be in anyway cool to the kids anymore. Remove the deterrents from alcohol and only alcoholics will abuse alcohol. I was exposed to beer and wine as a small child and allowed to drink a beer or wine with dinner and it became a non event.
For the NSA : Explosives, guns, assassination, conspiracy, primers, detonators, initiators, main charge, nuclear charge
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @04:16AM
I've noticed that some young women like to pull stuff out of their purses; it's a sort of nervous tic that makes them feel at any given moment that they have something they can do. Cigarette boxes are designed to be decorative and attractive, and fit easily in the palm of one's hand.
But smartphones now fill that need for both sexes, so I'm guessing that cigarette usage may have fallen among younger people (less than 35) compared to what it was 20 years ago.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @06:21AM
Bubkis...
There are two components to the decline. One it is no longer 'cool'. Second cost. Want to know which group of people have the least amount of money? The group you just pointed out. At 5+ bucks per pack it adds up quick. The companies make the things for 20-30 cents a pack. The rest is taxes that our gov has quietly squandered.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Bot on Monday June 13 2016, @06:36AM
People starts with cigarettes because it makes them feel grown up, macho (men) or sophisticated, sexy (women), thanks to the big tobacco war on popular culture.
So, the proper style for a cigarette pack is flashy, toy-style. PUT FUCKING TELETUBBIES ON IT.
But so it will attract little children, you say?
Well, my sister did discover a cigarette pack when she was young, took one, ate it, and felt so sick that she had not touched another since, which seems a pretty good deal to me.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 4, Funny) by Aiwendil on Monday June 13 2016, @07:31AM
Am I the only one that got an urge to play Quake I when I saw that colour?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @08:27PM
Since the government obviously feels it can dictate the packaging details of something it doesn't like, why not declare that each package of tobacco products be attached to the underside of a live pocupine (or weasel, if pocupines are deemed too cute for the purpose).
Self-limited government power is unlimited.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @10:02PM
Not enough echidnas, is the "why not."
(Score: 2) by korger on Monday June 13 2016, @09:43PM
Enjoy!