Re: Crystal Icons

faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf

main
parent
thread

Re: Crystal Icons
by Ascay on Wednesday 16/Nov/2005, @01:44

My problem with the Crystal Icons is that they don't look really good at 32x32 (a bit blurry) and 16x16 (a bit hard to distinguish from each other).
If you have a small monitor or just want to use a lot of icons on desktop, toolbars and Konqueror they are not the best choice. For example I have a desktop resolution of 2560x1024 (Xinerama) and still prefer 32x32 for the desktop and 16x16 on quickstart bars.

In 64x64 or 128x128 they look really great, but who uses such big icons? A good example is the wallet icon. It looks fantastic - but not on smaller icon sizes.

Oxygen seems to go into the same direction. In this respect I like the Tango concept a bit more (yet it has some other disadvantages e.g. some icons like the speaker are very hard to recognize at smaller sizes).

Related Links

·   Articles on Graphics and Art
·   Also by Ascay
·   Contact author

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )

Re: Crystal Icons
by MamiyaOtaru on Wednesday 16/Nov/2005, @01:50

And yet Oxygen is being made to use 128x128 optimally. Toolbar icons are being designed for 32x32 at least, but who knows how they'll look in 16 or 22, and mimetypes designed for 128 may just look terrible in detailed list view..

I would hope they address it, but it doesn't sound like they are paying any more attention to making sure small icons are usable than Everaldo did. SVG just isn't hot at 16px

We'll see I guess, there's just an awful lot of acclaim being lobbed at what amounts mostly at this point to words.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Crystal Icons
by bangert on Wednesday 16/Nov/2005, @05:08

actually - i really hope icons are going to be 'bigger' in the future...

and i really hope that screens will start to become 'bigger' as well. i want higher resolution in terms of ppi so that nice icons don't fill that much...

give me 19" screen with 4000x3000 pixels and i put 128x128 in my toolbar right away...

but, thanks to the limits in windows, hardware vendors will not give us that... hoping for vista

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Crystal Icons
by Pingveno on Wednesday 16/Nov/2005, @20:57

Some types of screens can not become larger. For example, I'm currently typing on a laptop with a 14.1" screen. If the screen got much bigger, it would loose its portability. Since a significant amount of people have a laptop or a small monitor, KDE will always have to keep these people in mind.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Crystal Icons
by Evan "JabberWokky" E. on Thursday 17/Nov/2005, @09:57

Yes, but physical screen size has no direct correlation to size of icons without factoring in resolution.

Which is to say - your future 14.1" screen with a 4000x3000 resolution will need large icons (around 128px) to have them be the same size as today's medium icons (around 32px). Physical screen size will likely maintain a range of sizes to suit the consumer's taste, but resolution tends to always increase. Thus large icon sizes satisfy increasing resolutions on any physically sized screen from your small laptop to large widescreen displays.

[ Reply To This | View ]

The Fine Print: The previous comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )


		"Ok, maybe my approach is over-engineered." -- Simon Hausmann
KDE®, "K Desktop Environment", "KDE Dot News", "got the dot?" and the KDE Logo® are trademarks or registered trademarks of KDE e.V. in the European Union, the United States and other countries. All other trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the poster. The rest: Copyright © 2000-2008 KDE e.V. for The KDE Project. For further information or comments on this site, please contact the Webmaster.