Thorsten Wilms wrote: > On Wed, 2008-08-13 at 07:36 -0700, AA Boy wrote: > >> Thats very good, but I use a 1680x1050 monitor, and that won't fit on >> it (not wide enoguh). If you could make it so it is that big, then it >> will fit most standard monitor sizes (there is still the matter of >> 1920x1200, which you could do instead, since that is the height of >> standard screen size, but it is still pretty rare). I like it a lot, >> though. Well done. :) >> > > I chose 1600 x 1200 because that's what the Hardy wallpaper is in. It > fits the very common 4:3 ratio. But I work in double size (3200 x 2400 > px) to have an easier time with details and to have headroom :) > > I have layers with black bars to simulate 5:4, 16:9 and 16:10. With 16:9 > the ends of the horns get rather close to the edge, but it still seems > to be an acceptable composition in all these cases. > > Thank you! :) > > Thanks also to Marc Schroth! >
For me I think the best rule if your creating wallpapers for the public and don't want to go with multiple resolutions is to create at 2560x1600 (16:10). Now, composition can suffer somewhat but I feel a happy compromise can be achieved. Users would then use the "Zoom" setting for backgrounds so as to maintain aspect. This is what Ubuntu Studio has done in the past. -Cory -- ubuntu-art mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
