Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:54 pm
I'm with Helmut, we need to hijack the icons from XnView Deluxe.
Secondedckit wrote:I'm with Helmut, we need to hijack the icons from XnView Deluxe.
XnView Software
Various discussion boards for XnView and related products
https://newsgroup.xnview.com/
New icon for XnView
Page 4 of 6
Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 2:24 pm
Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 4:10 pm
ckv, I don't understand, this is the icon I get in 1.82.1ckv wrote:XnView 1.82.1 is out and it haves a new main icon, but the 16x16 256 color icon looks piece of s*!
And once again I am forced to use my super powers and make a new shiny icon. *cough* arrogant bastard *cough*
On the left is 1.82.1 and on the right is my creation
which I do like... are you running windows with just an 8bit color depth?
Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 4:44 pm
Have you ever hear about XP icons?robc wrote:ckv, I don't understand, this is the icon I get in 1.82.1
I don't have XP so I don't get to joy those alpha blended true color XP eye candy icons.
You have XP and therefore you don't get the icon what I see. I thought that you know these things. 
No. Icons can have multiple color palettes. And those who don't have XP, will see the the true color or 256 color version of the icon and since since 16x16 icons haves only 256 (16*16=256) pixel in them, there's no point to make 16x16 true color icon.robc wrote:are you running windows with just an 8bit color depth?
Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 5:15 pm
I know that, ckv, I just supposed Pierre DIDN'T use alpha-blended icons since he said they didn't look good under W2K (of course)... I was mistaken.
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 7:30 pm
The following icons were extracted from “XnViewMediaDetector.exe”, which is part of XnView Deluxe 2. For convenience, I provide examples with different shades of background color: transparent, #ffffff (white), #d4d0c8 (light gray), #808080 (dark gray), #000000 (black).robc ([url=http://newsgroup.xnview.com/viewtopic.php?p=25071#25071]05/Feb/2006[/url]) wrote:[...] For the above reasons, sometimes (I remember noticing it several times) the 16x16 icon is altogether different from the 32x32 and up, since in many cases just reducing the bigger image yields disastrous results... If the deLuxe icon (which I had never seen) is going to be used, that's fine, it looks nice to me: we just need to find out if it scales down well and can be made transparent (I assume the whitespace behind it is transparent in the sample you provided), otherwise we need to design a simpler image, just for the 16x16 format. I believe whoever designed the deLuxe icon is perfectly able to come out with a nice, transparent 16x16 image suitable to be used as the main application icon.
Click to enlarge (60K)
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 10:56 pm
To be honest I'm a bit surprised to see a new icon in XnView 1.82. Perhaps I should have payed more attention to this discussion.
The new icon is o.k., though it looks very fragile. I think it should be a bit bolder. Also the orange looks a bit dirty and could be a bit fresher. The overall result is good, the "finishing" is a case for a real designer, I think.
The new icon is o.k., though it looks very fragile. I think it should be a bit bolder. Also the orange looks a bit dirty and could be a bit fresher. The overall result is good, the "finishing" is a case for a real designer, I think.
Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2006 12:17 am
Yes. Larger icons are not the best too...helmut wrote:To be honest I'm a bit surprised to see a new icon in XnView 1.82. Perhaps I should have payed more attention to this discussion.
The new icon is o.k., though it looks very fragile. I think it should be a bit bolder. Also the orange looks a bit dirty and could be a bit fresher. The overall result is good, the "finishing" is a case for a real designer, I think.
Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:56 am
The large icon (32x32) icon is the one I refered to in my above post. The 16x16 icon is just a bit blur, the rest is o.k..Dreamer wrote:Yes. Larger icons are not the best too...helmut wrote:To be honest I'm a bit surprised to see a new icon in XnView 1.82. Perhaps I should have payed more attention to this discussion.
The new icon is o.k., though it looks very fragile. I think it should be a bit bolder. Also the orange looks a bit dirty and could be a bit fresher. The overall result is good, the "finishing" is a case for a real designer, I think.
Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2006 1:55 pm
I definitely support the DeLuxe iconset, though I'm already satisfied with the current 1.82 icon.XnTriq wrote:The following icons were extracted from “XnViewMediaDetector.exe”, which is part of XnView Deluxe 2. For convenience, I provide examples with different shades of background color: transparent, #ffffff (white), #d4d0c8 (light gray), #808080 (dark gray), #000000 (black).robc ([url=http://newsgroup.xnview.com/viewtopic.php?p=25071#25071]05/Feb/2006[/url]) wrote:[...] For the above reasons, sometimes (I remember noticing it several times) the 16x16 icon is altogether different from the 32x32 and up, since in many cases just reducing the bigger image yields disastrous results... If the deLuxe icon (which I had never seen) is going to be used, that's fine, it looks nice to me: we just need to find out if it scales down well and can be made transparent (I assume the whitespace behind it is transparent in the sample you provided), otherwise we need to design a simpler image, just for the 16x16 format. I believe whoever designed the deLuxe icon is perfectly able to come out with a nice, transparent 16x16 image suitable to be used as the main application icon.
Click to enlarge (60K)
Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2006 8:22 pm
Another problem of the new, small icon:
On Windows 2000 the icon is very hard to see in the grey menus.
(Sorry for critisizing, again, but I really think the new icon has been introduced too early).
On Windows 2000 the icon is very hard to see in the grey menus.
(Sorry for critisizing, again, but I really think the new icon has been introduced too early).
Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2006 9:03 pm
I understand. The icon should be darker, but not much.helmut wrote:Another problem of the new, small icon:
On Windows 2000 the icon is very hard to see in the grey menus.
(Sorry for critisizing, again, but I really think the new icon has been introduced too early).
What you think? (lowest is current)
Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2006 9:12 pm
Exactly.ckv wrote:...
I understand. The icon should be darker, but not much.
Much better.ckv wrote:What you think? (lowest is current)
Personally I'd go for the second from bottom. The one at the top is too dark.Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 1:49 am
Nice, I like the second from the top. The second from bottom is still a bit unclear on grey background.helmut wrote:Much better.ckv wrote:What you think? (lowest is current)
Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 1:57 am
I agree, we need a icon that is clear for grey backgrounds.