Thorsten Wilms wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 10:59 -0400, Cory K. wrote:
>
>> So while the general idea is to combine Human and Oxygen what other
>> things should we add? The finer details.
>>
>> Just my thoughts:
>>
>> -Aesthetic
>>
>> * Outline around icons smaller than X? Are outlines even needed?
>> * Palette? Where's the Human one?
>>
>
> I think slight outlines are a good thing if you use them to simulate
> ambient lighting on the outer edges of the icon. They don't have to be
> dark and can still help to make the icon better stand on various
> backgrounds (I hope, at least :)
>
I'm in favor of a slight outline only at small sizes. Under 24px?
> Regarding palette, I will repeat that we should try to just define
> "recommended/anticipated" background colours (desktop bg, toolbars ...).
> If an implicit palette doesn't come from this automatically, we can
> still define an explicit one, now based on actual work instead of being
> pulled out of thin air in advance.
> While some icons like the folders can be used to bring in strong Ubuntu
> colours, most of the colouring should prioritise icon recognition ("what
> is that thing"?).
>
Agreed.
> In the last Community Council meeting, Mark Shuttleworth said, starting
> 22:09:
>
> in terms of audience, i think we have to aim for young professionals who
> are web-savvy
> ...
> so, the only reason i focused on young web-savvy professionals is they
> will be the standard-bearers for taking ubuntu to a wider audience
> and they are probably attracted to particular ideas in design
> like the iphone used web 2.0 ideas
>
In general, I think we should stay away from the "Web2.0" shine effect".
It's *SO* overused an gets lost fast in smaller sizes.
> (http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2008/09/02/%23ubuntu-meeting.html)
>
> While I don't know what all that means for icons, I think we should not
> just skip it. Just copying Apple's icons can't be it, of course.
>
>
> I think we should aim for some kind of hyper-realism. With a very
> clearly defined lighting and perspective. Not straight photo-realism, as
> in some cases we might want to optimise for strong shapes and should not
> flood everything with details.
>
> In light of Ubuntu's spirit, the icons should smile at the user, but
> cannot look like clowns.
>
> Most important icons should look like something you can and want to
> touch ;)
>
>> * All source icons will be in .SVG form created at the size they are
>> meant to be used.
>> * Sizes = 16px, 22px, 24px, 32px, 48px and scalable.
>> * 16-48px will be rendered in the built package with .svg used for
>> anything larger.
>>
>
> How to manage pixel-based optimisations applied on top of SVG exports?
>
I'm not really aware of any examples of where they would be needed.
There might be a corner-case but generally if we draw it in SVG at the
appropriate size the PNG export should be just enough.
--
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
