[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-artists
Subject:    Re: [kde-artists] Bug 163311
From:       James Richard Tyrer <tyrerj () acm ! org>
Date:       2008-07-07 10:13:58
Message-ID: 4871EC66.9080108 () acm ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

pinheiro wrote:
> A Monday 07 July 2008 04:21:10, James Richard Tyrer escreveu:
>> Kenneth Wimer wrote:
>>> Neutral, un-themed, generic, no-style etc. do not exist...it is a
>>>  myth and anyone who has done real artwork would know that. I am
>>>  sorry to put it that way and mean no harm or bad feelings but
>>> the truth is the truth.
>> I think that we are having a semantics problem.  While it is true 
>> that the Gnome, Tango, and KDEClassic themes are totally neutral, 
>> un-themed, generic, no-style, and etc. (what ever) -- they have to
>>  have some style
> 
>> otherwise they would look identical, it is also true that some 
>> other icon themes have a much stronger thematic aspect than these. 
>> I suppose that even the icons I made with the intention of their 
>> being totally unthemed have some theme aspects [see attached 1, 2,
>>  & 3].  In this case, I did choose a color for the shading to match
>>  KDEClassic. But, is that a theme?
> 
>> Just to remind you, my concern about icon style is not one of taste
>>  but rather of usability.  This was a large issue with CrystalSVG.
>>  It is much less of an issue with most Oxygen icons except that
>> some of them seem to have some of the same problems (e.g. lack of
>> tonal range, high average brightness).
>> 
>> I suppose that even the icons I made after that which do not 
>> include shading to match KDEClassic still have some style [see 
>> attached 4, 5, & 6]
>> 
>> IAC, the point which the spec should probably make is that icons in
>>  HiColor should be *more* neutral.  Which would be more correct if
>>  there is no 100% neutral.
>> 
>> I also note that I consider some of the other points in the posing
>>  much more important than the fine distinction between very little
>>  (less) style and no style.
> 
> JAmes apart from you, I see no one else demnding for this theme,

If you read the whole sub-thread, you will see that I said that a
HiColor theme would now be redundant because of the existence of the
Tango (icon theme) project.

> this hi-color theme, Hey I would even help in such a theme if it was
>  beter quality. And I meen art quality,
> 
Not sure what you mean by art quality.  My primary concern with an icon
theme is usability.  The CrystalSVG theme was very artistic but it had
serious usability issues.

I have noticed that some of the Oxygen toolbar icons (actions) have some
of the same issues although to a lesser extent (e.g. the Klipper icon).

> this one woud make us look like the desktop from the 80's.

Interesting point.  Yes, the icons from the 80s were quite usable (easy
to see).  In many cases, newer icons were designed to be what the
designers considered to be more artistic.  Unfortunately, the result in
many cases was a great reduction in the usability of the icons.  This is
certainly the case with MS-Windows icons.  The GNOME project continues
to have an icon theme (called Gnome) that is fairly plain (not very 
artistic); IMHO, it is much more usable than many other icon themes.

We do need to consider that the simple graphic icons are easier to see. 
    However, I don't see usability and aesthetics totally as competing 
options.  Many (if not most) of the Tango and Oxygen icons are both 
artistic and usable.

Note that I think that a substantial minority of users do like my simple 
and graphic icons.  I don't know if this would be enough to make it 
worthwhile to produce and support such an icon theme.  I would be very 
interested to know what commercial, business, and government users think.

-- 
JRT
______________________________________________________________________________
kde-artists@kde.org |  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-artists
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]