artwork
Shentino
shentino at gmail.com
Sat Oct 24 23:43:21 UTC 2009
Well I won't be quite so angsty about it but I will share my two cents.
When I saw the plain white logo at the bottom when I upgraded in place to
karmic beta, I was very surprised.
Actually, surprised is mild. I honestly thought that the lame artwork was a
bug of some sort. Considering NVIDIA's recent hissy fit with KMS, plus my
video card going kaput under karmic after a driver update.
But I would myself like to see that warm blend of yellow, red, and orange
that says "ubuntu".
The progress bar, however implemented, was notably absent...and for a brief
moment I thought that karmic had decided to crap out and lock up.
It is my opinion that a boot screen should be the pulse of the boot process,
providing the user with a reassuring "yes I'm ok and I'm booting just fine".
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Martin Owens <doctormo at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello Coz,
>
> Lets not call for people to be fired just yet, I'm sure things can be
> improved with some community involvement and a little unmooding of the
> style.
>
> Though it's totally subjective, as style usually is. A lot of people
> call my graphics too cartoonish and not serious. I tend to iconify
> instead of illustrate and that's reflected in my styles.
>
> Is there an art team? much like the technical board?
>
> Regards, Martin
>
> On Sat, 2009-10-24 at 19:18 -0400, coz DS wrote:
> > Hey guys,
> > I had been on the art team for a number of years.
> > I am really surprised that some of the artwork, ie,,,boot splash and
> > splash screen with progress bar , were able to be considered let
> > alone actually used.
> > I have to tell you that that the choices for these images and
> > colours are completely not ubuntu in any way and certainly the worst
> > choice.
> > When booting into karmic, the white ubuntu symbol should have had
> > the colours gradually fill it in as a progress bar...and the following
> > boot splash the ubuntu logo certainly should have had color and the
> > background for that image most definitely should NOT have been
> > used...it implies a dark..albeit muddy,, theme is going to be default
> > system theme.
> > I have seen none of the major distributions have any
> > inconsistencies...including ubuntu...with graphics during install..or
> > boot..as radical and inappropriate as karmic has.
> > Who ever has made these decisions is most likely a developer and
> > there are NO developers capable of making final choices for anything
> > without discussing the options with at least one "qualified" artist.
> > Creating and deciding on graphics , especially for a distribution
> > as globally used as Ubuntu, takes as much skill and time and mental
> > capabilities as it does to code "any" application...or DE..and any of
> > the developers who think otherwise should be kept as far away from
> > decision making about graphics permanently!!!
> > To mr shuttleworth,,, if you are making final decisions then you
> > need to pull yourself away from graphics altogether and let the art
> > team back in as official...if on the other hand you are relying on an
> > "artist" at cononical to make these final decisions ,, then please
> > give them their walking papers.
> > coz
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
> Ubuntu-devel-discuss at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-discuss/attachments/20091024/a1ab5dd4/attachment.html>
More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss
mailing list