[ubuntu-art] Deadline for community art: May 15

[Billy]

On Tue, 2006-05-09 at 04:05 +0200, Étienne Bersac wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> > >         
> > >         Tangerine is a tangoish Human theme that blend very well
> > >         with other Tango icons.
> > 
> > Well, I don't know what happen there but aren't all three are supposed
> > to follow the same guidelines and palette? Can't imagine otherwise.
> 
> Obviously does Human *not* follow Tango guidelines. It was discussed
> earlier.


Sorry for not closely following the details but all I recall is people's
opion on whether or not Human follows Tango guidelines.


> > I agree the fonts are very bad but you can't say Tangerine is very
> > clean and readable (there's nothing to read!). 
> 
> Those tiny icons give the information users want : is this places a
> device ? is this places local or remote ? Most users don't care about
> which protocol is used. That might be even disturbing for people which
> does not understand that, especially smb (people search for Windows
> Share) and dav that is auto detected with avahi.
> 
> Latest update of Tangerine include this in Changelog :
> 
>     - icons for dav, ftp, smb and ssh by Lapo
> 
> Here is a screenshot :
> http://bersace03.free.fr/pub/captures/dapper-artwork/tangerine-0.11.png
> 
> Sadly, dav icons is not properly use. The same problem appear with smb
> icons which are *very* comprehensive for user. That might be a naming
> problem. The ssh icons with a shield means the protected connection by
> ssl. That is meaningful. Ftp is not so readable, if find it hard to
> understand the moving file/directory.


ooo...symbols are bad, text is better



> > It's one and the same icon for three types and that is not useable. So
> > while the font needs to be cleaned up in Human at least its there, and
> > is somewhat useable. Not true for Tangerine.
> 
> Users largely prefer less than confusing/ugly.



It can't be anymore confusing than with no info at all


> > I do see blurry icons. 
> 
> And that is not polished nor realistic.



Polished? No. Blurry has nothing to do with concept.


> > Tango doesn't have this problem at small sizes because it doesn't use
> > shadows at small sizes. I agree that if it is not done right, that is
> > the best route to take. However a lot of the small Human icons look
> > good so, picking out a few means nothing when it is a WIP.
> 
> There are not few. Almost all icons that comes from Human are blurry
> where Tangerine icons are very clean and readable. I'm still waiting for
> a real polished Human icon theme. This is the case for games category,
> show desktop icons, etc. See all tiny icons in
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DapperUbuntuIcons?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=desktop-icons.jpg



This is what I mentioned earlier about not being able to just export and
add shadow. The icons have to be completly redone to be effective. The
svg's, slightly redone and exported with no shadow are better. BTW, got
any icons that you have made?



> WIP ? but where is the Changelog ? Tangerine seems more open than Human.


Yes, I have never understood the secret concept behind Human themes. 


> > Not true. They were to be Humanified Tango. You got it backwards.
> 
> Nop. As said at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ArtworkTeam/TangerineIcons
> Tangerine is a tangoification of Human. Sorry but *You* got it
> backwards.



http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=145376
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/OrangeTango



> > Human looks fine with Tango, so perhaps your issue is that Human
> > inherits from Tangerine and shouldn't.
> 
> Nop. This is fact that Human does not blend well with Tango. This was a
> base target of Tangerine : conciliate Human and Tango. (formerly
> OrangeTango)


http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=145376
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/OrangeTango


> 
> > As an themer, I care more about realistic shadows than a minor
> > consistency issue that is bound to change over time. If I can't enjoy
> > my desktop....if I don't feel the icon is a realistic interpretation
> > of what it represents, I won't notice the color inconcententcies
> > because I won't be using the icon theme!
> 
> If you care about realistic icons, then forget all the glassy effect of
> directory, computer and other Human icons !!! Tango and Tangerine
> shadows are nicer than you admit.



You need to read on before commenting.
"The most important is to be realistic, whether that be a cartoonish (or
whatever) feel doesn't matter."
You can have whatever efects you want. Just be accurate.


> > The most important is to be realistic, whether that be a cartoonish
> > (or whatever) feel doesn't matter.
> 
> You should really consider consistency and accessibility.


I will when the basics have been done right!


> > What matters is that we feel like we are looking at what the artist
> > wanted us to. 
> 
> sorry but icons are not just art.


Did I say otherwise?


> 
> Usability, Readability and consistency are more important than realism.


Not at all. If it doesn't look like a folder, computer (we use a
monitor), a filetype (paper) they are not Usable, readable or
consistent, are they? Realism comes first. Computer Graphics 101.


> Tango spec are about consistency, readability and usability. It let
> artist make them realistic or not, given it follow the spec, it get
> consistent.


ooo...I'd like to see that guideline. Someone should let Jakub know it
slipped by him.



> Just a question, are you the guy who decied which iconset is used by
> default ?
> 
> Étienne.


Of course not! But I have hammered away for years about these lame svg
shadows everyone uses and pushed for svg icon themes to be exported to
png. Maybe someone actually listened? Or maybe someone just had a little
common sense? You may remember all the past Human svg icon themes had no
shadows. Why? Because they look horrible if not done right, and even
then they are not near as good as png. Do we keep using these
unprofessional svg shadows for another year or two, or more, until it
can be done quickly and easily and right, while giving linux graphics
(svg) and bad name in the industry? No, do it right or not at all and
stick with png's! It takes a lot more time do attempt to get them right
but it can be done. Look at Tango Original. Overkil but lightened up it
is far better than what was reverted to.

Billy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-art/attachments/20060508/4fb1895e/attachment.htm