Re: [ubuntu-art] Curiousity:)

[Daniel Moore]

On 22/11/2007, at 5:41 PM, Donn wrote:

>> I think another big turn off for us Linux / FreeBSD users is the fact
>> that KDE is a direct rip off of Windows, and that's not fun,
> I don't grok this. How is the essential layout and set of concepts  
> between
> Gnome, KDE and Windows any different?
> Taskbar, tray, "Start" button, panels, windows, min/max/close buttons,
> desktops, icons, drag/drop, etc.

It's non essential. It's pure frivolity.  But I always felt that KDE  
was much closer in look and feel (out of the box so to speak) to  
Windows 95 than Gnome was.  And you know, that was a good thing,  
according to people that set up low cost internet cafes and such.  
They could have computers that looked and felt like windows at a  
fraction of the cost. I just didn't think it was 'fun'.

>> I think both 'lean and mean' and 'ultra configureable' are both
>> important open source traits.
>> We chose Gnome...
> In my experience, installing Gnu/Linux on *very* old machines,  
> Gnome was just
> too slow. KDE was much better but Xubuntu was best of that breed.
>   Actually, (I can't recall the name, but) Afterstep (I think, or  
> one of
> the 'steps') was the best overall for speed and functionality.

Afterstep was good. Very good.  But then again anything seemed  
magnificent compare to the likes of twm. That default background was  
epilepsy inducing.



-- 
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art

Re: [ubuntu-art] What are we working towards?

[Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen]

On 12/11/2007, Kenneth Wimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> On Sunday 11 November 2007 00:10:26 Who wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Does sabdfl still read this list? Some of these questions here may
> > only be able to be answered by him (or kwwii - are you employed to
> > work on this at the moment?). After some deliberation I've copied him
> > in. Sorry Mark if you don't think you needed to be!
>
> Yes, I am employed to work on this.
>
> > It's really cool to see this list alive again with so many ideas and
> > discussions - some of the stuff  looks really sweet, I wish I had more
> > time to contribute (though I think the standard's getting well beyond
> > me!).
>
> Indeed, it is nice to see people stepping up and showing interest in the
> artwork community. Hopefully we can turn this positive energy into great
> contributions.
>
> > While there's still so much energy around I think we need to get some
> > more definition of what the goals of the artwork team are here so we
> > can channel it in the right direction. I hope I haven't missed
> > anything about what exactly is being worked towards...I haven't been
> > keeping up with ALL the list mail recently and couldn't make the
> > meetings, but I couldn't see a clear description of goals or process
> > (emails like 'how far for Hardy' have gone unanswered... and
> > https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ArtTeam which supposedly contains UDS
> > conclusions is not very detailed) The minutes of the latest meeting
> > say in response to a question about what we will be changing:
>
> The blueprint from UDS was a starting point. We discussed these issues
> (you'll
> find that discussion on the appropriate wiki page under BOF and
> Discussion).
> In the meantime several issues have come up which need clarification
> before
> we can finalize the blueprint for real use.
>
> > "Nov 01 18:47:53   install screen, usplash, gdm/face broswer,
> > Desktop Wallpaper, GTK theme, colors, metacity/emerald theme, icons,
> > splash screens"
> >
> > That sounds mighty exciting, and a lot of what I am asking below has
> > clearly been discussed (from the minutes again)
> >
> > "Nov 01 18:03:47   we had a meeting at UDS today
> > Nov 01 18:04:07and talked about the form of the art team
> and
> > how we lead the process"
> >
> > But I'm not sure enough info has made its way here yet. Maybe it has,
> > sorry if I've missed it.
>
> Until now the only information on the wiki is under:
>
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Artwork/Incoming/Hardy
>
> If you look at that link you will see that the official guidelines for
> contribution are forthcoming. Part of the guidelines will be the exact
> process for contributions. As this is the first occurrence of the process
> in
> this form I want to get it right - being hasty and posting something that
> is
> not well considered would only cause more problems than it would solve.


Any progress on official guidelines? That page states that the next meeting
is  1st of November... :-)

Cheers,
Mikkel
-- 
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art

Re: [ubuntu-art] What are we working towards?

[Kenneth Wimer]

On Thursday 22 November 2007 16:22:28 Kenneth Wimer wrote:
> On Thursday 22 November 2007 15:59:35 Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen wrote:
> 
>
> > Any progress on official guidelines? That page states that the next
> > meeting is  1st of November... :-)

Lol, reading back in my response to your original mail, I see "1) Have all the 
information ready and available by or around Alpha1". I knew I had tried to 
answer that already :-)

--
Ken

-- 
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art

Re: [ubuntu-art] What are we working towards?

[Kenneth Wimer]

On Thursday 22 November 2007 15:59:35 Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen wrote:

> Any progress on official guidelines? That page states that the next meeting
> is  1st of November... :-)

Sorry about that. I was trying to figure out how to add the new info to the 
included table at the top of the wiki page. Now it should be correct.

We should have the official art direction ready in the beginning of december. 
I remeber posting an email to the list saying this but perhaps I am mistaken. 
In any case, now is the time to create different ideas and discuss them. Once 
the information on the art direction is done we can start the real work.

--
Ken


-- 
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art

Re: [ubuntu-art] Curiousity:)

[Donn]

> Afterstep was good. Very good.  But then again anything seemed  
> magnificent compare to the likes of twm. That default background was  
> epilepsy inducing.
Ha, you are right there!
\d

-- 
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art

[ubuntu-art] Minimal-perception

[Martino Ferrari]

Hello, my name is Martino. I'm the developper of the Minimal-perception icon
themes.
Following Cory's invite, I am willing to collaborate with the artwork team.
My work is still in progress and there have already been many  improvements
with respect to the online version (
http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Minimal-perception?content=68146).
I made also a flat variant. For any question and suggestion please contact
me.

Good day,

Martino
-- 
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art

Re: [ubuntu-art] Minimal-perception

[Who]

Those are really nice - do you have svgs of them, I'm interested in
adding colour to them :)

On Nov 22, 2007 7:55 PM, Martino Ferrari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello, my name is Martino. I'm the developper of the Minimal-perception icon
> themes.
> Following Cory's invite, I am willing to collaborate with the artwork team.
> My work is still in progress and there have already been many  improvements
> with respect to the online version (
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Minimal-perception?content=68146).
> I made also a flat variant. For any question and suggestion please contact
> me.
>
> Good day,
>
> Martino
>
> --
> ubuntu-art mailing list
> ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
>
>

-- 
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art

[ubuntu-art] Matte for the next release?

[Who]

Hi all,

Seeing as Kenneth says that this is the time to suggest ideas to be
taken in to account when the final artwork direction is decided I
would like to start some discussion of the merits of using a matte
theme (with small glossy elements/highlights) for the next release of
Ubuntu

I'd love anyone who has ideas on why this is a good or bad idea to
chime in. I'll list a few of my own to get discussion started

I'm suggesting it, so I'll list why I think it's a good idea to go mainly matte.

Problems with Glossyness:
1. It's been DONE (by Ubuntu and by everyone else)
--- Shiny themes have been done and are everywhere now. Ubuntu's
design wants to STAND OUT, and we want to make a new chapter in
Ubuntu's design! OsX used to be king of gloss, but in Leopard we see
Apple shifting away from it  (but admittedly not quite being able to
let go).

2. It's DISTRACTING
--- Shinnyness is _distracting_ from the what you are working on.
GNOME is designed not to get in your way while you do your work, but
shinny things that cry out for your attention minimise it's
effectiveness in doing this

3. It's not (very) TANGO Compliant
--- Tango guidelines ask only for things that are glossy in real life
to be glossy. Given that more and more applications are adopting Tango
icons we are giving ourselves a much larger job if we create a theme
that Tango doesn't fit in to, because for total consistency we have to
re-theme all the applications.

4. It feels LESS REALISTIC
--- As Tango guidelines point out, real surfaces are rarely glossy...
Using icons that represent real objects helps people intuitively use
applications and understand icons, adding gloss somewhat detracts from
this. It leads to 'cartoon' design in many cases.

Nice things about matte themes
1. They can be SOFTER
--- contrast in a matte theme can be lower, so the whole set of
widgets is easier to look at ('easier on the eyes'). It makes the
interface feel more human, to me...

2. BROWN and Matte > Brown and glossy
--- One of the contradictions in Ubuntu UI policy seems to be the
difficulty of brown vs orange. One of the reasons we have this is
becasue brown does not look good glossy, and orange does! If Ubuntu is
going to stay brown using a matte theme allows the designers more
scope and allows for greater colour consistency. Brown isn't a very
glossy colour

3. Textures are often matte
-- Elephants, for example ;)


There are some really original ones around (yes, so I'm sure there are
orignal glossy ones around too, please post them if you find them :)

After some trawling, here we go
Just the _buttons_ on this theme are beautiful:
http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Aurora+Sand?content=69773
Someone called 'Lyrae' has a whole host of similar (awesome and
original) matte/square themes:
http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Reuben?content=55876
http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Nova?content=57310
http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Fawn?content=58426
http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Calla?content=52297

This 'wooden' is kind cool
http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Muku+GTK?content=59034

So is the Clearlooks theme from Breezy
http://www.phoronix.net/image.php?id=218&image=ubuntu_breezyc2_14_lrg

Nodoka, is a nice theme engine to use
http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Nodoka+GTK%2B+Engine?content=64604

So, let's have a discussion about it - what do people think?

-- 
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art

Re: [ubuntu-art] Matte for the next release?

[Cory K.]

Who wrote:
> Nodoka, is a nice theme engine to use
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Nodoka+GTK%2B+Engine?content=64604
>
> So, let's have a discussion about it - what do people think?
>   

Nodoka is a unnessary fork of Murrine and shouldnt be used. Everything
done in Nodoka can be done in Murrine or is just a couple of added lines
of code.

Just wanted to strike this one down ASAP. ;)

-Cory \m/

-- 
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art

Re: [ubuntu-art] Minimal-perception

[Cory K.]

I'll chime in here quickly as I invited Martino to join the list.

I ran across his set on GNOME-Look and thought they were really good.
Very early in development but shows alot of promise.

I showed them to kwwii and he liked the set as well. I agree that for
Ubuntu's purpose more color is needed along with a toning down slightly
of its gloss look. That can be a branch of Martino's set that we can
help him develop collectively.

So Ken and Mark will really decide whether we go with it but I figured
I'd help Martino put this out there as there hasn't been much talk about
a set to use as a base or any ideas from scratch.

-Cory \m/


Álvaro Medina Ballester wrote:
> I'm agree with Who. Nice icons, but we have to take advantage of
> colours. It's a powerful way to add usability, and Ubuntu icons should
> be coloured.
>
> 2007/11/22, Who < [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >:
>
> Those are really nice - do you have svgs of them, I'm interested in
> adding colour to them :)
>
> On Nov 22, 2007 7:55 PM, Martino Ferrari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > wrote:
> > Hello, my name is Martino. I'm the developper of the
> Minimal-perception icon
> > themes.
> > Following Cory's invite, I am willing to collaborate with the
> artwork team.
> > My work is still in progress and there have already been
> many  improvements
> > with respect to the online version (
> >
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Minimal-perception?content=68146).
> > I made also a flat variant. For any question and suggestion
> please contact
> > me.
> >
> > Good day,
> >
> > Martino
> >
> > --
> > ubuntu-art mailing list
> > ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com 
> > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
> >
> >
>
> --
> ubuntu-art mailing list
> ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com 
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Álvaro.

-- 
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art

Re: [ubuntu-art] Matte for the next release?

[Álvaro Medina Ballester]

I'm agree with Who again. Agree in all points, but I want to add one
more. Shinnyness should be on app icons. Why? Simple, apps should be easy to
recognize, should be distinct than the other kind of icons (mimetypes,
devices, etc.).
Mimetypes should be matte with some drawings inside, to recognize their
function. Folders, etc. should have the same matte colour with good designed
emblems to easily recognize their content. Notification area should have 2
or 3 colours, no more. Sometimes it seems that your notification area is
your icon area on the top panel. And those 2 or 3 colours should be matte,
of course.

And lyrae has the greatests themes I've ever seen on linux. Simple, clean,
great choice of colours, and great fonts. It would be amazing that he/she
could join ubuntu art team.

Cheers.


2007/11/22, Who <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Seeing as Kenneth says that this is the time to suggest ideas to be
> taken in to account when the final artwork direction is decided I
> would like to start some discussion of the merits of using a matte
> theme (with small glossy elements/highlights) for the next release of
> Ubuntu
>
> I'd love anyone who has ideas on why this is a good or bad idea to
> chime in. I'll list a few of my own to get discussion started
>
> I'm suggesting it, so I'll list why I think it's a good idea to go mainly
> matte.
>
> Problems with Glossyness:
> 1. It's been DONE (by Ubuntu and by everyone else)
> --- Shiny themes have been done and are everywhere now. Ubuntu's
> design wants to STAND OUT, and we want to make a new chapter in
> Ubuntu's design! OsX used to be king of gloss, but in Leopard we see
> Apple shifting away from it  (but admittedly not quite being able to
> let go).
>
> 2. It's DISTRACTING
> --- Shinnyness is _distracting_ from the what you are working on.
> GNOME is designed not to get in your way while you do your work, but
> shinny things that cry out for your attention minimise it's
> effectiveness in doing this
>
> 3. It's not (very) TANGO Compliant
> --- Tango guidelines ask only for things that are glossy in real life
> to be glossy. Given that more and more applications are adopting Tango
> icons we are giving ourselves a much larger job if we create a theme
> that Tango doesn't fit in to, because for total consistency we have to
> re-theme all the applications.
>
> 4. It feels LESS REALISTIC
> --- As Tango guidelines point out, real surfaces are rarely glossy...
> Using icons that represent real objects helps people intuitively use
> applications and understand icons, adding gloss somewhat detracts from
> this. It leads to 'cartoon' design in many cases.
>
> Nice things about matte themes
> 1. They can be SOFTER
> --- contrast in a matte theme can be lower, so the whole set of
> widgets is easier to look at ('easier on the eyes'). It makes the
> interface feel more human, to me...
>
> 2. BROWN and Matte > Brown and glossy
> --- One of the contradictions in Ubuntu UI policy seems to be the
> difficulty of brown vs orange. One of the reasons we have this is
> becasue brown does not look good glossy, and orange does! If Ubuntu is
> going to stay brown using a matte theme allows the designers more
> scope and allows for greater colour consistency. Brown isn't a very
> glossy colour
>
> 3. Textures are often matte
> -- Elephants, for example ;)
>
>
> There are some really original ones around (yes, so I'm sure there are
> orignal glossy ones around too, please post them if you find them :)
>
> After some trawling, here we go
> Just the _buttons_ on this theme are beautiful:
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Aurora+Sand?content=69773
> Someone called 'Lyrae' has a whole host of similar (awesome and
> original) matte/square themes:
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Reuben?content=55876
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Nova?content=57310
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Fawn?content=58426
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Calla?content=52297
>
> This 'wooden' is kind cool
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Muku+GTK?content=59034
>
> So is the Clearlooks theme from Breezy
> http://www.phoronix.net/image.php?id=218&image=ubuntu_breezyc2_14_lrg
>
> Nodoka, is a nice theme engine to use
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Nodoka+GTK%2B+Engine?content=64604
>
> So, let's have a discussion about it - what do people think?
>
> --
> ubuntu-art mailing list
> ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
>



-- 
Álvaro.
-- 
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art

Re: [ubuntu-art] Minimal-perception

[Álvaro Medina Ballester]

I'm agree with Who. Nice icons, but we have to take advantage of colours.
It's a powerful way to add usability, and Ubuntu icons should be coloured.
2007/11/22, Who <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Those are really nice - do you have svgs of them, I'm interested in
> adding colour to them :)
>
> On Nov 22, 2007 7:55 PM, Martino Ferrari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hello, my name is Martino. I'm the developper of the Minimal-perception
> icon
> > themes.
> > Following Cory's invite, I am willing to collaborate with the artwork
> team.
> > My work is still in progress and there have already been
> many  improvements
> > with respect to the online version (
> > http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Minimal-perception?content=68146
> ).
> > I made also a flat variant. For any question and suggestion please
> contact
> > me.
> >
> > Good day,
> >
> > Martino
> >
> > --
> > ubuntu-art mailing list
> > ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
> > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
> >
> >
>
> --
> ubuntu-art mailing list
> ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
>



-- 
Álvaro.
-- 
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art

Re: [ubuntu-art] Minimal-perception

[Lasse Havelund]

Looks nice. I don't like the MyBook-like external HDD icon, but other
than that, they're pretty cool. The question is, would it fit in?

- Lasse

On Thu, 2007-11-22 at 20:55 +0100, Martino Ferrari wrote:
> Hello, my name is Martino. I'm the developper of the
> Minimal-perception icon themes.
> Following Cory's invite, I am willing to collaborate with the artwork
> team.
> My work is still in progress and there have already been many
> improvements with respect to the online version
> ( http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Minimal-perception?content=68146).
> I made also a flat variant. For any question and suggestion please
> contact me. 
> 
> Good day,
> 
> Martino


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- 
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art

Re: [ubuntu-art] Matte for the next release?

[Jan Niklas Hasse]

IMHO brown is one of the ugliest colours. I'm sorry but it reminds me of
several bad things. Please don't decide to make a brown theme, orange is
ways better.

On Nov 22, 2007 10:27 PM, Who <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Seeing as Kenneth says that this is the time to suggest ideas to be
> taken in to account when the final artwork direction is decided I
> would like to start some discussion of the merits of using a matte
> theme (with small glossy elements/highlights) for the next release of
> Ubuntu
>
> I'd love anyone who has ideas on why this is a good or bad idea to
> chime in. I'll list a few of my own to get discussion started
>
> I'm suggesting it, so I'll list why I think it's a good idea to go mainly
> matte.
>
> Problems with Glossyness:
> 1. It's been DONE (by Ubuntu and by everyone else)
> --- Shiny themes have been done and are everywhere now. Ubuntu's
> design wants to STAND OUT, and we want to make a new chapter in
> Ubuntu's design! OsX used to be king of gloss, but in Leopard we see
> Apple shifting away from it  (but admittedly not quite being able to
> let go).
>
> 2. It's DISTRACTING
> --- Shinnyness is _distracting_ from the what you are working on.
> GNOME is designed not to get in your way while you do your work, but
> shinny things that cry out for your attention minimise it's
> effectiveness in doing this
>
> 3. It's not (very) TANGO Compliant
> --- Tango guidelines ask only for things that are glossy in real life
> to be glossy. Given that more and more applications are adopting Tango
> icons we are giving ourselves a much larger job if we create a theme
> that Tango doesn't fit in to, because for total consistency we have to
> re-theme all the applications.
>
> 4. It feels LESS REALISTIC
> --- As Tango guidelines point out, real surfaces are rarely glossy...
> Using icons that represent real objects helps people intuitively use
> applications and understand icons, adding gloss somewhat detracts from
> this. It leads to 'cartoon' design in many cases.
>
> Nice things about matte themes
> 1. They can be SOFTER
> --- contrast in a matte theme can be lower, so the whole set of
> widgets is easier to look at ('easier on the eyes'). It makes the
> interface feel more human, to me...
>
> 2. BROWN and Matte > Brown and glossy
> --- One of the contradictions in Ubuntu UI policy seems to be the
> difficulty of brown vs orange. One of the reasons we have this is
> becasue brown does not look good glossy, and orange does! If Ubuntu is
> going to stay brown using a matte theme allows the designers more
> scope and allows for greater colour consistency. Brown isn't a very
> glossy colour
>
> 3. Textures are often matte
> -- Elephants, for example ;)
>
>
> There are some really original ones around (yes, so I'm sure there are
> orignal glossy ones around too, please post them if you find them :)
>
> After some trawling, here we go
> Just the _buttons_ on this theme are beautiful:
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Aurora+Sand?content=69773
> Someone called 'Lyrae' has a whole host of similar (awesome and
> original) matte/square themes:
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Reuben?content=55876
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Nova?content=57310
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Fawn?content=58426
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Calla?content=52297
>
> This 'wooden' is kind cool
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Muku+GTK?content=59034
>
> So is the Clearlooks theme from Breezy
> http://www.phoronix.net/image.php?id=218&image=ubuntu_breezyc2_14_lrg
>
> Nodoka, is a nice theme engine to use
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Nodoka+GTK%2B+Engine?content=64604
>
> So, let's have a discussion about it - what do people think?
>
> --
> ubuntu-art mailing list
> ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
>
-- 
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art

Re: [ubuntu-art] Minimal-perception

[Álvaro Medina Ballester]

Pc and Trash icon are hard to identify with their function. I like the idea
of the folders, matte colour with easy to recognize emblems.

2007/11/22, Lasse Havelund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Looks nice. I don't like the MyBook-like external HDD icon, but other
> than that, they're pretty cool. The question is, would it fit in?
>
> - Lasse
>
> On Thu, 2007-11-22 at 20:55 +0100, Martino Ferrari wrote:
> > Hello, my name is Martino. I'm the developper of the
> > Minimal-perception icon themes.
> > Following Cory's invite, I am willing to collaborate with the artwork
> > team.
> > My work is still in progress and there have already been many
> > improvements with respect to the online version
> > (
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Minimal-perception?content=68146).
> > I made also a flat variant. For any question and suggestion please
> > contact me.
> >
> > Good day,
> >
> > Martino
>
> --
> ubuntu-art mailing list
> ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
>
>
>


-- 
Álvaro.
-- 
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art

Re: [ubuntu-art] Matte for the next release?

[Who]

On Nov 22, 2007 9:35 PM, Cory K. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Nodoka is a unnessary fork of Murrine and shouldnt be used. Everything
> done in Nodoka can be done in Murrine or is just a couple of added lines
> of code.

You might well be right, but it seems the Fedora guys thought a fork
was necessary:
>From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Interviews/MartinSourada
The question asked why they forked Murrine
"At first I thought we'd use Clearlooks as an engine, but as time went
on, I got a completely different idea of how it should look and
Murrine engine was the closest. There were however too much
differences, like glossy style, that needed tweaking in the engine
itself. We decided that the changes are too much for us to expect that
they'd be accepted to Murrine. So, now I think I know that the
differences are too significant to merge with Murrine, we removed a
lot of original code and added a lot of ours, the engines went
different ways, if we'd try to merge, it would lead to losses in
rendering speed."

Cimi (who wrote Murrine) used to read this list - Are you there Cimi -
do you have a comment on this?

Who

-- 
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art

Re: [ubuntu-art] Matte for the next release?

[Cory K.]

Who wrote:
> On Nov 22, 2007 9:35 PM, Cory K. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>   
>> Nodoka is a unnessary fork of Murrine and shouldnt be used. Everything
>> done in Nodoka can be done in Murrine or is just a couple of added lines
>> of code.
>> 
>
> You might well be right, but it seems the Fedora guys thought a fork
> was necessary:
> >From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Interviews/MartinSourada
> The question asked why they forked Murrine
> "At first I thought we'd use Clearlooks as an engine, but as time went
> on, I got a completely different idea of how it should look and
> Murrine engine was the closest. There were however too much
> differences, like glossy style, that needed tweaking in the engine
> itself. We decided that the changes are too much for us to expect that
> they'd be accepted to Murrine. So, now I think I know that the
> differences are too significant to merge with Murrine, we removed a
> lot of original code and added a lot of ours, the engines went
> different ways, if we'd try to merge, it would lead to losses in
> rendering speed."
>
> Cimi (who wrote Murrine) used to read this list - Are you there Cimi -
> do you have a comment on this?
>
> Who
>   

Cimi and I had a chat about it the other night on IRC. He asked me to
help him with a letter to those guys about it because his English
sometimes isn't so good. :)

But I don't want to derail this topic I just wanted to throw out a FYI. :D

-Cory \m/

-- 
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art

Re: [ubuntu-art] Minimal-perception

[sylvain marc]

VERRY GOOD ICONES
CAN YOU GIVE ME IT IN "*.tar.bz2"
THANK YOU

2007/11/22, Martino Ferrari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Hello, my name is Martino. I'm the developper of the Minimal-perception
> icon themes.
> Following Cory's invite, I am willing to collaborate with the artwork
> team.
> My work is still in progress and there have already been many
> improvements with respect to the online version (
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Minimal-perception?content=68146).
> I made also a flat variant. For any question and suggestion please contact
> me.
>
> Good day,
>
> Martino
>
> --
> ubuntu-art mailing list
> ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
>
>
-- 
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art

Re: [ubuntu-art] Curiousity:)

[sylvain marc]

I PREFERE THE SIMPLICITY AND THE LOOK OF GNOME...
BUT SOME FUNCTIONS OF KDE ARE GOOD.

2007/11/22, Donn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Afterstep was good. Very good. But then again anything seemed
> > magnificent compare to the likes of twm. That default background was
> > epilepsy inducing.
> Ha, you are right there!
> \d
>
> --
> ubuntu-art mailing list
> ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
>
-- 
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art

Re: [ubuntu-art] Matte for the next release?

[sylvain marc]

SORRY IF MY FIRTS POST IS TOO BIG - I TRY TO CANCEL IT LIKE IT WAS EXPLAIN
HERE :
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/confirm/ubuntu-art/937276445103c0ebf02ae929dedb62b826c82c69
..
I LIKE http://mandarancio.deviantart.com/art/Minimal-perception-67892707
AND http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Muku+GTK?content=59034
AND I THINK IT WILL BE INTERESTING TO MAKE A MIX OF THE THEMES LIKE I
EXPLAIN IT IN MY DOCUMENT I POST YESTERDAY) : ORANGE-LINSTABLACKPLASIC /
CRUX / MINT / GLOSSY-GLASS /

Sam7 (Sylvain)

2007/11/22, Who <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Seeing as Kenneth says that this is the time to suggest ideas to be
> taken in to account when the final artwork direction is decided I
> would like to start some discussion of the merits of using a matte
> theme (with small glossy elements/highlights) for the next release of
> Ubuntu
>
> I'd love anyone who has ideas on why this is a good or bad idea to
> chime in. I'll list a few of my own to get discussion started
>
> I'm suggesting it, so I'll list why I think it's a good idea to go mainly
> matte.
>
> Problems with Glossyness:
> 1. It's been DONE (by Ubuntu and by everyone else)
> --- Shiny themes have been done and are everywhere now. Ubuntu's
> design wants to STAND OUT, and we want to make a new chapter in
> Ubuntu's design! OsX used to be king of gloss, but in Leopard we see
> Apple shifting away from it  (but admittedly not quite being able to
> let go).
>
> 2. It's DISTRACTING
> --- Shinnyness is _distracting_ from the what you are working on.
> GNOME is designed not to get in your way while you do your work, but
> shinny things that cry out for your attention minimise it's
> effectiveness in doing this
>
> 3. It's not (very) TANGO Compliant
> --- Tango guidelines ask only for things that are glossy in real life
> to be glossy. Given that more and more applications are adopting Tango
> icons we are giving ourselves a much larger job if we create a theme
> that Tango doesn't fit in to, because for total consistency we have to
> re-theme all the applications.
>
> 4. It feels LESS REALISTIC
> --- As Tango guidelines point out, real surfaces are rarely glossy...
> Using icons that represent real objects helps people intuitively use
> applications and understand icons, adding gloss somewhat detracts from
> this. It leads to 'cartoon' design in many cases.
>
> Nice things about matte themes
> 1. They can be SOFTER
> --- contrast in a matte theme can be lower, so the whole set of
> widgets is easier to look at ('easier on the eyes'). It makes the
> interface feel more human, to me...
>
> 2. BROWN and Matte > Brown and glossy
> --- One of the contradictions in Ubuntu UI policy seems to be the
> difficulty of brown vs orange. One of the reasons we have this is
> becasue brown does not look good glossy, and orange does! If Ubuntu is
> going to stay brown using a matte theme allows the designers more
> scope and allows for greater colour consistency. Brown isn't a very
> glossy colour
>
> 3. Textures are often matte
> -- Elephants, for example ;)
>
>
> There are some really original ones around (yes, so I'm sure there are
> orignal glossy ones around too, please post them if you find them :)
>
> After some trawling, here we go
> Just the _buttons_ on this theme are beautiful:
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Aurora+Sand?content=69773
> Someone called 'Lyrae' has a whole host of similar (awesome and
> original) matte/square themes:
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Reuben?content=55876
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Nova?content=57310
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Fawn?content=58426
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Calla?content=52297
>
> This 'wooden' is kind cool
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Muku+GTK?content=59034
>
> So is the Clearlooks theme from Breezy
> http://www.phoronix.net/image.php?id=218&image=ubuntu_breezyc2_14_lrg
>
> Nodoka, is a nice theme engine to use
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Nodoka+GTK%2B+Engine?content=64604
>
> So, let's have a discussion about it - what do people think?
>
> --
> ubuntu-art mailing list
> ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
>
-- 
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art

Re: [ubuntu-art] What are we working towards?

[Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen]

On 22/11/2007, Kenneth Wimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Thursday 22 November 2007 16:22:28 Kenneth Wimer wrote:
> > On Thursday 22 November 2007 15:59:35 Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen wrote:
> > 
> >
> > > Any progress on official guidelines? That page states that the next
> > > meeting is  1st of November... :-)
>
> Lol, reading back in my response to your original mail, I see "1) Have all
> the
> information ready and available by or around Alpha1". I knew I had tried
> to
> answer that already :-)


Ah, ok, I had not made the connection to the roadmap :-)

Thanks,
Cheers
-- 
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art

Re: [ubuntu-art] Matte for the next release?

[Andreas Nilsson]

Hi Sylvain!
Can you turn off the caps-button please?
Your e-mails are making me nervous. :)
- Andreas


sylvain marc skrev:
> SORRY IF MY FIRTS POST IS TOO BIG - I TRY TO CANCEL IT LIKE IT WAS 
> EXPLAIN HERE :  
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/confirm/ubuntu-art/937276445103c0ebf02ae929dedb62b826c82c69
> ..
> I LIKE http://mandarancio.deviantart.com/art/Minimal-perception-67892707
> AND http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Muku+GTK?content=59034
> AND I THINK IT WILL BE INTERESTING TO MAKE A MIX OF THE THEMES LIKE I 
> EXPLAIN IT IN MY DOCUMENT I POST YESTERDAY) : ORANGE-LINSTABLACKPLASIC 
> / CRUX / MINT / GLOSSY-GLASS /
>
> Sam7 (Sylvain)
>
> 2007/11/22, Who <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> >:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Seeing as Kenneth says that this is the time to suggest ideas to be
> taken in to account when the final artwork direction is decided I
> would like to start some discussion of the merits of using a matte
> theme (with small glossy elements/highlights) for the next release of
> Ubuntu
>
> I'd love anyone who has ideas on why this is a good or bad idea to
> chime in. I'll list a few of my own to get discussion started
>
> I'm suggesting it, so I'll list why I think it's a good idea to go
> mainly matte.
>
> Problems with Glossyness:
> 1. It's been DONE (by Ubuntu and by everyone else)
> --- Shiny themes have been done and are everywhere now. Ubuntu's
> design wants to STAND OUT, and we want to make a new chapter in
> Ubuntu's design! OsX used to be king of gloss, but in Leopard we see
> Apple shifting away from it  (but admittedly not quite being able to
> let go).
>
> 2. It's DISTRACTING
> --- Shinnyness is _distracting_ from the what you are working on.
> GNOME is designed not to get in your way while you do your work, but
> shinny things that cry out for your attention minimise it's
> effectiveness in doing this
>
> 3. It's not (very) TANGO Compliant
> --- Tango guidelines ask only for things that are glossy in real life
> to be glossy. Given that more and more applications are adopting
> Tango
> icons we are giving ourselves a much larger job if we create a theme
> that Tango doesn't fit in to, because for total consistency we have to
> re-theme all the applications.
>
> 4. It feels LESS REALISTIC
> --- As Tango guidelines point out, real surfaces are rarely glossy...
> Using icons that represent real objects helps people intuitively use
> applications and understand icons, adding gloss somewhat detracts from
> this. It leads to 'cartoon' design in many cases.
>
> Nice things about matte themes
> 1. They can be SOFTER
> --- contrast in a matte theme can be lower, so the whole set of
> widgets is easier to look at ('easier on the eyes'). It makes the
> interface feel more human, to me...
>
> 2. BROWN and Matte > Brown and glossy
> --- One of the contradictions in Ubuntu UI policy seems to be the
> difficulty of brown vs orange. One of the reasons we have this is
> becasue brown does not look good glossy, and orange does! If
> Ubuntu is
> going to stay brown using a matte theme allows the designers more
> scope and allows for greater colour consistency. Brown isn't a very
> glossy colour
>
> 3. Textures are often matte
> -- Elephants, for example ;)
>
>
> There are some really original ones around (yes, so I'm sure there are
> orignal glossy ones around too, please post them if you find them :)
>
> After some trawling, here we go
> Just the _buttons_ on this theme are beautiful:
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Aurora+Sand?content=69773
> Someone called 'Lyrae' has a whole host of similar (awesome and
> original) matte/square themes:
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Reuben?content=55876
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Nova?content=57310
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Fawn?content=58426
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Calla?content=52297
>
> This 'wooden' is kind cool
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Muku+GTK?content=59034
> 
>
> So is the Clearlooks theme from Breezy
> http://www.phoronix.net/image.php?id=218&image=ubuntu_breezyc2_14_lrg
> 
>
> Nodoka, is a nice theme engine to use
> http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/Nodoka+GTK%2B+Engine?content=64604
>
> So, let's have a discussion about it - what do people think?
>
> --
> ubuntu-art mailing list
> ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com 
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
> 
>
>


-- 
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://list

Re: [ubuntu-art] WAS Matte for the next release?

[Troy James Sobotka]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Jan Niklas Hasse wrote:
> IMHO brown is one of the ugliest colours. I'm sorry but it reminds me of
> several bad things. Please don't decide to make a brown theme, orange is
> ways better.


I'm sorry to bother the list responding to this, but I feel
that I must.

This is the absolute most rubbish opinion ever offered up.

It is a poorly researched, poorly understood, and knee jerk
reaction.  Your understanding is not only misguided, it is
riddled with flaws that anyone with any ounce of design sense
would understand.


Ubuntu's brown is pitiful _only_ because of poor execution.  Arguably,
brown is having a bit of a second life in many other areas of design.

Notably, as has been said a 10 times before:

1) Ubuntu's use of brown is monochromatic and extremely underwhelming.
A compliment or split compliment would fix this along with the
permission to use contrast from lights to darks.  Brown could easily
remain the base if fleshed out with some supporting cast members.

2) Brown has been used many times by many different designers
extremely effectively.  Of notable worth you may wish to research
some contemporary designs utilizing crests, grunge, etc.  Common
pairings are brown with the compliment blue.  Starbucks recently
launched a new campaign using brown as a base with white and a
petal blue.  And yes, many design awards have been won with brown
as a base.

3) "Orange is always better".  Superlatives are an immediate sign
that the statement is probably riddled with flaws.  Make no mistake,
monochromatic orange is no better than monochromatic brown.  For further
reflection on this, compare the weak Fedora 8 work to the extremely
strong Fedora 7 work.  The horribly monotonous work in SUSE is also
a byproduct of monotony.

There is a line between consistency and monotony, and no matter what
colour or psycho-semantic-tripey rubbish that someone is trying to
peddle about color psychology, in the end, it is the monochromatic
lack of contrast that is killing Ubuntu's use of brown.

Sincerely,
TJS
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHRiX9ar0EasPEHjQRArGaAKDGxK1DOvkM9QkcrM04gKe+13bOhACgmu0Z
WYgOUoU2ikHTX3ot6Ledc/0=
=Rebz
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art

Re: [ubuntu-art] Curiousity:)

[Donn]

> I PREFERE THE SIMPLICITY AND THE LOOK OF GNOME...
> BUT SOME FUNCTIONS OF KDE ARE GOOD.
THANKS, MESSAGE RECEIVED LOUD AND CLEAR :|


THIS EMAIL WILL SELF-DESTRUCT IN 5 ... 4 ... 3 ...


;)
\d

-- 
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art