bvc Posted January 26, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 26, 2005 (edited) bug bug bug http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=155752 http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158823 specifically http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=161467 this workaround is not always for sure and even when it works other bugs make them look like crap so still png....but updated...clearer and smaller in size ;) http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=19775 in fact...they're getting clear enough to see my bad artwork :lol: :woops: still better than all the cartoon crap for gnome though ...sure wish someone that knew what they were doing would make somethin Edge GTK has also been updated and majorly optimized...faster!!!! Edited January 26, 2005 by bvc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iphitus Posted January 26, 2005 Report Share Posted January 26, 2005 hey! i like the default gnome icons, or at least when they have the industrial ones used with them...they just need a bit of work to complete them i think i know what that dude meant tho. svgs dont look as good when exported to different raster sizes, whereas a native raster, created as a raster at that size looks better. why? well the svg renderer can only display so much detail at each size and inevitably parts will get chopped or cut off. when it was created as a raster though, the designer made it so it looked good and what needed to be seen could be seen at that size. for example, take one of your more detailed ones and export it to 16x16, 32x32 or maybe even 48x48 and im sure you could see a few pixels which you would be able to touch up in the gimp to make it look better iphitus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bvc Posted January 26, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 26, 2005 well I know it's personal taste and unfortunately most gnomer's are gnome purist and like ugly crap, but the fact is there not one single excellent icon theme for gnome when concerning quality ;) Even etiquette was crap until this latest update...they look good now and how long did that take? please! jump over to xp or mac and resize all you want....no change, no loss in quality ;) it's a linux thing...again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bvc Posted January 26, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 26, 2005 (edited) oh, and why export to diff sizes? I wish these icon'ers would stop filling up my hd, not that I'm short on space, with icons of every size. Gnome scales 128 png's just fine without loss of quality so you can't use the 16x16 export excuse because it shouldn't be done anyway. 128 is all that is needed and looks fine. Edited January 26, 2005 by bvc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iphitus Posted January 26, 2005 Report Share Posted January 26, 2005 well I know it's personal taste and unfortunately most gnomer's are gnome purist and like ugly crap, but the fact is there not one single excellent icon theme for gnome when concerning quality ;) Even etiquette was crap until this latest update...they look good now and how long did that take? please! jump over to xp or mac and resize all you want....no change, no loss in quality ;) it's a linux thing...again <{POST_SNAPBACK}> winxp icls have both large 32px and smaller 16px icons and they're really the two main sizes you see you dont seem to get my point, if i put one icon on my toolbar as a svg scaled to 32x32, and i put the equivalent icon, created from scratch as a raster, the raster will look much better. your pack contains svgs, so i can see what he meant, no need to get all defensive..... i wasnt saying anything about including different iconsizes in a tarball or anything. i agree on that, there should only be the 128 px icons. although the alternate argument there is that the computer has to scale the icons when it displays them... go figure lol... there will be no awesome icon theme for gnome. or at least, no icon theme that is awesome for everyone... with every theme, some will like it, others wont. for example, i hate kde crystal ;) though i do agree, while the gnome icon theme is good, its not awesome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bvc Posted January 26, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 26, 2005 People have long complained about svg not scaling down good. The same people complain about the quality of 128 png's ;) They just complain :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arctic Posted January 26, 2005 Report Share Posted January 26, 2005 People have long complained about svg not scaling down good.The same people complain about the quality of 128 png's ;) They just complain :) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iphitus Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 People have long complained about svg not scaling down good.The same people complain about the quality of 128 png's ;) They just complain :) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yup!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bvc Posted January 30, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 30, 2005 I've better rounded the inside of the folders and rounded the bottom rt corner of the folders, which was desparately needed. The shadows have been redone and I've made a cookie cutter Home icon ...hey, it's better than that blury thing on the folder. I think so anyway. Do you? I know the shadow is a bit much but this is stretched and at smaller views like in nautilus or in the toolbar, it's a necessity. comments welcome! http://bvc.kernow-webhosting.com/theme/devel/Edge-pre.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arctic Posted January 30, 2005 Report Share Posted January 30, 2005 (edited) the shadows look good and the home-icon is funny. but there is a liitle "mistake". take a look at the upper black border. the angle/perspective is not correct there (same on bottom right side). you need to cut off a bit of the black on the top area. it is too large, making the black area bigger in size than the original image and thus hurts the look. on the bottom right, you need to cut off the last edge of the black. try to align the upper and lower black borders in the horizontal to the center line with a ruler and (i hope) you will see what i mean. but anyways: good job :) Edited January 30, 2005 by arctic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bvc Posted January 31, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2005 (edited) no sorry, I'm not sure I understand. This is the new one. The old was a little too plain for the set. I had to leave so I just kinda threw it together. Still, I don't see a lot wrong with it as is so if you can either explain better or edit this one (without the shadow) and show me it'd be appreciated. I think I know what you mean but when I had it that way it looked really silly. http://bvc.kernow-webhosting.com/theme/devel/home.svg Edited January 31, 2005 by bvc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bvc Posted January 31, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2005 (edited) updated http://gnome-look.org/content/ Edited January 31, 2005 by bvc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bvc Posted February 15, 2005 Author Report Share Posted February 15, 2005 I've uploaded the new tarball with the edited Home icon and a new evolution. Like it? I have not updated at gnome-look.org. I've been having hardware issues for over a week now so haven't had time to work on icons....and the desire to is dying :unsure: screenie http://bvc.kernow-webhosting.com/theme/scr...Edge-Ubuntu.jpg download http://bvc.kernow-webhosting.com/theme/dev...cons-0.4.tar.gz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.