faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf
main
parent
thread
|
Re: Icon design
by furanku on Wednesday 16/Nov/2005, @07:20
|
I think it's just about aesthetics, nothing more.
> A set doesn't look consistent, when the imaginary
> view point axis isn't the same for all icons.
What is a "point axis"?
I think you want to talk about the the "vanishing point", which is the point where parallels in some perspectivic point of views intersect. This has nothing to do with the orientation of the depicted object, and is also for a two dimensional desktop irrelevant, because then you would need to change the view of the icon depending on the position on the screen (which would be easier to implement if you would go to a real three dimensional Desktop).
So maybe you mean that all icons should have the same perspectivic point of view, but the actually are consistent in that. The speaker is in the same perspectivic view as the printer next to it, the object itself is just rotated. I think it's legitim to do that. A speaker for example has it's "chakteristic view" of the cone, chassis and the coils if seen in a "semiprofile". If you look at it in a frontview you basically see concentic circles, which are not that easy to identify as a speaker. Similar observations lead to other (rotational) views on other objects, but the perspective stays the same. |
|
|
![[KDE Dot News]](http://www.kde.org/dot/Images/kdedotnews.gif)
