> I also dispute the whole notion of a 512px "icon". By definition, an > icon is a simple image which looks good at a small size. Even if you > have the source graphics, an icon which works well at 48px is likely > to look stupid when upsized to 512px. /grumble
Perhaps this will help: http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/documentation/UserExperience/Conceptual/AppleHIGuidelines/XHIGIcons/XHIGIcons.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/20000967-SW1 ;-) Mac OS X applications have had 512x512 icons this since Snow Leopard and some are quite amazing. http://www.cultofmac.com/icon-porn-feast-your-eyes-on-snow-leopards-beautiful-icons/15764 Although I am not sure if the hi-res icon for the Market is used in the same way because it does not have an alpha channel On Nov 18, 9:25 am, String <sterling.ud...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Nov 17, 10:58 pm, Zsolt Vasvari <zvasv...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > So did any of you actually create a 512x512 icon? I had to upsize my > > 72x72 icon to 512x512 just to be able to upload my update. WTF? > > I was fortunate in that I'd already created 512px icons for a > different market. But yeah, definitely pretty damn annoying that this > is suddenly *required* with no advance notice. > > I also dispute the whole notion of a 512px "icon". By definition, an > icon is a simple image which looks good at a small size. Even if you > have the source graphics, an icon which works well at 48px is likely > to look stupid when upsized to 512px. /grumble > > String -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
