On Wed, 2008-07-02 at 18:21 +0200, Mark wrote: > You or martin really need to explain why that shit color keeps being > used with software boxes... > take a look here: > http://images.google.nl/images?ndsp=18&um=1&hl=nl&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:nl:official&q=software+box&start=0&sa=N > NONE have that shit color. > Because: * I like that colour * You are the only one complaining about it * It's picked from the colour palette * Even though real-life packages are lighter than that, this fits Echo more, we are not doing photo realistic icons > And to be somewhat more modern i would go for a shape like this one: > http://www.di-o-matic.com/press/Library/fswin/fswin-box.jpg > We are talking about icons, not about real life. We need an icon to look decent, have easily recognisable shape, even by colour blind people, suggest what it symbolises. In a small icon (22x22) you can easily mistake such box for credit card... > And if you then still decide to use that shit color then use the real > cardboard one and not that over darkened one: > http://www.climatechangecorp.com/resources/images/content/large/20073147294_cardboard.jpg > As I said earlier - the brightness of the icon is result of me trying various choices and comparing the results with other icons. I didn't chose the one that looks most like a paper box, I chose the one that looked most echoey. > And besides that all the box is the deep. cut of 1/3 of it > It's intentional. Due to other elements apart from the box, it looks weird when shorter. But as Luya said, if you feel like you can come up with something better, you are welcome to do so, if we feel like it's an improvement we'll approve it. Thanks, Martin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Fedora-art-list mailing list Fedora-art-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-art-list
