On Wednesday 03 September 2008 00:10:32 Mr.doob wrote: > On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 11:04 PM, Cory K. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Ken Vermette wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 12:29 PM, Kenneth Wimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > >> > >> On Tuesday 02 September 2008 18:18:41 Ken Vermette wrote: > >> > I liked Antons folder icons, so I've tooled my own to look more > >> > >> like his, > >> > >> > attached is yet another revision of the folders, with more minute > >> > detailing. Also, this one has closed folders... > >> > > >> > http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y111/raraken/example_mk3.png > >> > >> Could you add a smaller version (something like 22x22)? It goes a > >> long way to > >> understanding the lines and dithering problems which can occur. > >> > >> > >> > >> 22x22 us up! I had to post on Deviantart, I don't want to compress > >> these images. > >> > >> http://raraken.deviantart.com/art/Ubuntu-Folder-Concept-mk5-96838710 > >> > >> added examples of... > >> - 22x22 > >> - dark outlines > >> - emblems > >> > >> and fixed a positioning problem that caused fuzzy borders. > > > > Kick ass! IMHO :P > > > > -Cory K. > > > > -- > > ubuntu-art mailing list > > ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com > > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art > > I agree. Although I don't know which one is better (dark outline or not). > Dark outline makes the small version easy to identify. But doesn't > look too cool on the big icon. > Maybe, having a bit of outline when small, but not that dark?
Exactly right. Even with photorealistic icons (or semi-realistic) the small versions need a small line around them (perhaps not totally opaque) to help define the form and outer lines. Note that this is only necessary on the small versions. In addition I would suggest increasing the brightness and/or decreasing the contrast a bit on the smaller versions. -- Ken -- ubuntu-art mailing list ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
