On Aug 20, 2014, at 12:44 PM, Richard Hughes <hughsient@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 20 August 2014 18:45, drago01 <drago01@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> 64x64 is too small for high dpi screens (its the same as 32x32 for non >> hidpi screen) if "64x64" is your aim ask for 128x128. > > That would push the icon tarball from 6Mb to over 25Mb. I'm happy > doing both sizes for hidpi, but I think an easier fix is just to scale > the icons double size in the hidpi case in the client. Most icons appear to be originally created as vector graphics. Does making the icon format SVG solve both the need for hires icons and keeping file size down? The resampling method makes a huge difference. Conventional nearest neighbor, bilinear, and bicubic on 64x64 scaled up will either be jaggy, somewhat jaggy and soft, somewhat less jaggy and almost blurry – on hires displays, and it also depends on the artwork. This would probably do a better job: https://code.google.com/p/hqx/ On OS X Firefox went to 512x512 ic09 in firefox.icns in 2007. I'm not sure when they started to include the 1024x1024 ic10 in firefox.icns, but it's in Firefox 31. This firefox.icns file is 809KB and includes maybe 1/2 dozen icons of various resolutions and bitdepths. I don't know why they wouldn't just include 1024x1024 and expect the client to downsample. Chris Murphy -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
