Hi-Profile PBT Dye-sub (the time has come)

[matt3o]

better representation of the two profiles



we will 99% go with the one in foreground (beamspring-like). the other one is more SA-like.



to the upper right you see a color test for the modifier keys, alpha keys would be lighter.

[Muirium]

I'm in favour of whichever has the true Beamspring like scoops. SA is sadly flat compared to that.

Think deep dished DSA deep…



Then deeper! Much deeper!

[matt3o]

it's not much the scoop, but the profile and angle

[snuci]

Topre Hi-pros have deep scoops but a narrow key cap face so you are bound to hit one side or other when typing and that is painful after a while and certainly annoying. These look very good.

My colour preference is brilliant white because the white unpainted ones look a little better even in these latest pictures. Beige or greyish off-white always looks pre-discoloured and old but that's just my opinion.

These look awesome so afar.

[Stabilized]

Topre Hi-pros have deep scoops but a narrow key cap face so you are bound to hit one side or other when typing and that is painful after a while and certainly annoying. These look very good.

I completely agree, I just can't get on with the Topre HiPro PBT keycaps even though I really wanted to like them.

[Muirium]

Sounds like we need these guys in Topre mount!

[zslane]

I agree with Mu on the scoops. Ideally they would be deep(er than SA) like Beamsprings.

I have to say, however, that the tallness (and angle) of the SA-style row 1 keycaps is kinda nice. They reach out towards your fingers nicely. The other profile seems less, well, "high" to me. (Looks at subject title)

[Muirium]

Yeah, I like row 1 SA's aggressive shape as well. What Matteo's up to is trying to recreate Beamspring's geometry, including the effect of angled switch stems. Here's a great diagram Halvar made and I linked on page 1 of this thread, when I first suggested Beamspring:



Apparently, SA is a bit of a mistake. Others can chime in with the details (I forget) but the gist of the story is that SA copies Beamspring / Selectric caps' overall shape, but gets the base geometry wrong. Something to do with a curved vs. straight backplate clash? So the super forward leaning rows you get top and bottom of SA are an exaggeration and an accident.

That said, I do still quite like it. But we can do better. Especially regarding scoops.

[jacobolus]

Matt3o: can you put those on a numpad or something that doesn’t have a stagger to it, or else remove the keyboard case and take a picture from a reasonable distance from the side? It’s hard to judge the shape from the picture you posted.

As a general rule, I’d recommend making the ASDF row keycaps as low as you think is possible within your aesthetic goals, making the ZXCV row keycaps about the same height but tilted forward on the tops, making the QWER row keycaps noticeably taller, making the 1234 row keycaps substantially taller, and making the F-row keycaps as tall as possible without toppling over.

I’m really sorry Signature Plastics no longer makes their DSS profile; I’d love to mix and match DSS and SA to get something like:


On the following image, the purple outline is DCS profile, green is row-shifted DCS (this works surprisingly well), and black is the super-aggressive profile I wish someone would make (image doesn’t show any F-key row shape per se):


Or if you want some existing keycaps to clone the shape of, these are pretty good:

[jacobolus]

Apparently, SA is a bit of a mistake. Others can chime in with the details (I forget) but the gist of the story is that SA copies Beamspring / Selectric caps' overall shape, but gets the base geometry wrong.

My geekhack thread, “Hypothesis: SA is wrong when used on MX switches”

[zslane]

The thing is, we live in a world of flat backplates (raised to an angle that is partially determined by whether the back feet are deployed or not) and straight MX stems now. Which bygone manufacturing practice are we aiming to emulate? Curved backplates? Angled stems? Stepped rows? Some combination of these?

SA provides a gentle concave curvature on today's boards which is only "wrong" depending on which combination of past component geometries you believe is "best". When installed on a typical MX board like, say, a Filco, what historical keycap surface geometry will these new keycaps most closely resemble?

[matt3o]

there's something that needs to be fixed in the profile, we are already working on it



I agree with zslane that we have to keep modern keyboards in mind. I like what we have so far, and when you see it side by side with an SA it looks so much better!

[andrewjoy]

I think keeping it as close as possible to beamspring is the best option. Even if you have to modify it to work with straight MX stems.

[Halvar]

All modern cylindrical profiles like OEM, Cherry, DCS etc. are still stepped (in contrast to SA, which isn't when used on a modern keyboard).

From top to bottom: OEM, Cherry, SP DCS


In comparison, your new profile seems considerably less stepped if I'm not mistaken.

I'm using SA right now, and I would prefer it to be much more stepped.

[Muirium]

(Four names, but only three profiles i \n the diagram. I'm guessing you meant Signature Plastics DCS, rather than SA, which leans forward quite a bit on its top row.)

[Halvar]

You're right, sorry, I edited it. I'm sure jacobulus has better pictures of this, too, but I couldn't find them right now.

[zslane]

Are these going to be tall enough to be considered truly "high" profile? It's hard to tell from the photos. If the shortest keycap in the set is the same height as DSA, then something's wrong, I think.

[matt3o]

on the picture at the top of the page you can see the size difference with an OEM profile. definitely taller.

[zabuza1997]

Omg. I gotta say that this is really promising, matt3o. Monopoly sucks man!!!

Sent from my NX510J using Tapatalk

[kbdfr]

Omg. I gotta say that this is really promising, matt3o. Monopoly sucks man!!!

Sent from my NX510J using Tapatalk

off-topic-f10/tapatalk-sig-spam-pisses- ... 13807.html

[zabuza1997]

[zabuza1997]

Omg. I gotta say that this is really promising, matt3o. Monopoly sucks man!!!

Sent from my NX510J using Tapatalk

off-topic-f10/tapatalk-sig-spam-pisses- ... 13807.html

?Spam?
Really bro?
Since when commenting in a thread is branded as spamming?

[seebart]

It's specifically about using tapatalk.

[kbdfr]

Omg. I gotta say that this is really promising, matt3o. Monopoly sucks man!!!

Sent from my NX510J using Tapatalk

off-topic-f10/tapatalk-sig-spam-pisses- ... 13807.html

?Spam?
Really bro?
Since when commenting in a thread is branded as spamming?

Not your post was spam, of course,
but your automatic tapatalk signature (which you seem to have disabled now, thanks).

Edit: ninja'd by seebart - who perhaps will want to edit his post

[photekq]

You could perhaps offer more explanation in the future kbdfr, instead of just linking to the thread; it can come off as a bit rude (or grumpy, you might even say) sometimes

[zabuza1997]

Alright. Thanks for your reminder, bros. I hate that sig, too

[kbdfr]

You could perhaps offer more explanation in the future kbdfr, instead of just linking to the thread; it can come off as a bit rude (or grumpy, you might even say) sometimes

More explanation than a link to a thread with the title of the linked thread clearly appears?

off-topic-f10/tapatalk-sig-spam-pisses-me-off-t13807.html

Call me rude or grumpy, I don't mind



And while already being rude or grumpy,
zabuza1997: please don't call me "bro". I quite probably could be your grandfather

[seebart]

Edit: ninja'd by seebart - who perhaps will want to edit his post

No, I don't think I will.

Call me rude or grumpy, I don't mind

Grumpy yes, rude no.

[romevi]

Call me rude or grumpy, I don't mind

Hi, rude or grumpy.

[kbdfr]