keycap profile demonstration props

[Piperaceae]

Is this supposed to be the definitive thread for keycap profiles? Because it seems to be missing some. I don't see KAT nor OSA at least.

I don't think it's really meant for that. It's more to show a type of plastic mount that could be used to compare different keycap profiles side by side. It hasn't really been updated in almost a decade, so it's a time capsule of the hobby circa 2015.

[blondie]

I see. Is there a definitive source for all keycap profiles?

[dvorcol]

I see. Is there a definitive source for all keycap profiles?

While not comprehensive, Keycaps.info can be useful - https://www.keycaps.info/

[ander]

In case it helps (from Akko):

[zslane]

Why are the row profile numbers reversed on that chart? Row 1 are the tall keycaps at the top of a keyboard (sometimes there is a row 0), while row 4 is at the bottom (sometimes there is a row 5).

[dvorcol]

Why are the row profile numbers reversed on that chart? Row 1 are the tall keycaps at the top of a keyboard (sometimes there is a row 0), while row 4 is at the bottom (sometimes there is a row 5).

Actually, R1 = FN row (sometimes R0) to R4 = spacebar row (sometimes R5) are just the informal row names. The official row names of some profiles are different.

For example, from FN to spacebar:
  Keyreative's KAT =  R5, R4, R3, R2, R1, R1 (used in kit pictures for most KAT GBs)
  GMK's Cherry = F, E, D, C, B, A. (F and A only recently returned to use)

From Keyreative:


From GMK:


Edit: Deskthority talks about this - https://deskthority.net/wiki/Keyboard_profile#Numbering

[zslane]

But the "informal" row profile names are what get used in IC renders and GBs, right? I guess I've never seen the manufacturer data sheets that reveal the lack of a real standard before. How needlessly confusing.

[dvorcol]

But the "informal" row profile names are what get used in IC renders and GBs, right? I guess I've never seen the manufacturer data sheets that reveal the lack of a real standard before. How needlessly confusing.

Looking at the 12 most recent KAT sets in KeycapLendar (6 GBs and 6 ICs), only one calls the top row "R0." Eight use KAT labeling, while the other three don't label the rows at all. (pics here)

     [IC] KAT Retrobytes (posted 11/19/24) - top R5
     [GB] KAT Milkshake Double-shot (ended 8/1/24) - top R0
     [IC] KAT Space Cadet R2 (posted 7/1/24) - not labeled
     [IC] KAT Iridescent (posted 6/5/24) - top R4
     [GB] KAT Floofy Boi (ended 11/7/23) - top R5
     [GB] KAT Classic Retro (ended 10/5/23 but canceled) - top R5
     [IC] KAT Tattoo (posted 6/30/23) - top R4
     [GB] KAT Chinchillin (ended 2/28/22 but canceled) - top R4
     [IC] KAT Miami (posted 10/4/21) - not labeled
     [GB] KAT Overgrown (ended 9/6/21) - not labeled
     [IC] KAT Mint Chip (posted 9/4/21) - top R4
     [GB] KAT Great Wave (ended 7/21/21) - top R4

[zslane]

Maybe this is an Asian/Western cultural divide or something. All the GMK, SA, DSA, DSC, MT3, DCX, DCD, etc., etc. keycap set descriptions I've seen over the last ten years have used the de facto standard of ascending row profile numbers as you go from top row to bottom row. I don't doubt that there are more sales these days of Asian sets (like Taiwanese KAT sets), after all, there are probably more Asian buyers these days, but from a Westerner's perspective whose been into this since back when Chinese buyers had to go through proxies to get at the "good stuff", the Western standard is the one I'm familiar with. Am I really in the minority here in these forums now?