ver 1.9 branch Icons

vector · Post by **vector** » Wed May 04, 2005 4:09 am

I have moved the twiki around a bit. Segmented it more so its easier to pick thru.
added a few icons.
http://mec-symonds.eng.monash.edu.au/cg ... nsBranch19

vector · Post by **vector** » Tue May 10, 2005 2:18 am

aghghghghh 10 pixels, why did I let him talk me into this. First 20 which was impossible to convey any form of intelligence to start with. But no he dosent stop there, in an effort to send me completely off the ball he makes me do it in 10 pixel

im not sure how this looks
but I think 20x20 is too big for the table type icons so i guess ill just have to keep trying.

Post by **gyboth** » Tue May 10, 2005 5:59 am

vector wrote:

is this for the user history, fired because of finances, event?

im not sure how this looks

it looks great! just paste three of them together ($$$) and we have our icon!

gyözö

vector · Post by **vector** » Tue May 10, 2005 6:09 am

but isnt the table column (where the icon goes) only 10pixel wide?
not enough space to put three side by side. and if you make them so they are you cant tell they are $ signs

Post by **gyboth** » Tue May 10, 2005 8:18 am

oops. wait a second. did you look at this image

and you thought the column width in the image is the place you have for your icons? this is not so. the width of the icons can be variable, the column width just adapts to the width of the widest icon. so three of the $'s above would look very good, i think.
in the picture, the column looks so narrow because there's nothing in it, so its width is adapted to 'nothing', which makes it so narrow.

i'd suggest you get a latest cvs version and simply try your icons out, 20x20 or whatever you like. anything that looks good is fine with me

(the icon files can be specified in the bygfoot_app file in the support dir.) this applies to all other icons, too, e.g. the season history icons.

sorry for not making this clear earlier

gyözö

vector · Post by **vector** » Tue May 10, 2005 9:47 am

ok yes i understand.
I guess i was trying to ensure that no matter what text you put in it wont wrap or at least if you know you have lost 10 or 15 or whatever pixels to an icon then you know how much space you have left for text

yes, that was the plan. yet i believe that a lot of icons from 1.8 will be too big, because they are designed as button icons, and since things are mostly managed with menus in 1.9, we'd need smaller ones. maybe we could simply shrink them?

from http://bygfoot.sourceforge.net/forum/vi ... c&start=30

ok cross post quoteing, not good i know but in other areas i do have to make them small.?
those cups are 12pixels high about right for the text your using. The blue ribbon is 20 however (oops) but still seems to fit into the row height?
have all the other rows auto spaced out to accomodate the blue ribbon?

ok so maybe only the tables.jpg needed the small 10x10? (the dots and arrows) and the others can handle 20x20? or do we try and keep the row height down at the sacrifice of column width.. ie keep em 10pixel high and say up to 20 wide (landscape format;)

Post by **gyboth** » Tue May 10, 2005 12:05 pm

vector wrote:I guess i was trying to ensure that no matter what text you put in it wont wrap or at least if you know you have lost 10 or 15 or whatever pixels to an icon then you know how much space you have left for text

in gtk treeviews column and row spacing is done automatically, in both dimensions. so each column is a wide as the widest entry in the column (or the column header if that's even wider) and each row is as high as the highest entry in the row. this means that your icons won't make look a treeview REALLY bad, only a bit bad if they are too big. i think 20x20 is ok (as far as i can judge by that blue ribbon), the cups seem too small.

i think the best way for you to do them is by trying them out and deciding yourself whether they make the treeview look bad or not.

ok cross post quoteing, not good i know but in other areas i do have to make them small.?
those cups are 12pixels high about right for the text your using. The blue ribbon is 20 however (oops) but still seems to fit into the row height?
have all the other rows auto spaced out to accomodate the blue ribbon?

see above. i opt for 20x20 in the user and season history (but you may decide against this if you find other dimensions better looking).

ok so maybe only the tables.jpg needed the small 10x10? (the dots and arrows) and the others can handle 20x20? or do we try and keep the row height down at the sacrifice of column width.. ie keep em 10pixel high and say up to 20 wide (landscape format;)

yes, i think the tables should have small icons (they look just right with those 10x10), and the others can have 20x20, or at least 15x15. and, if it's easier for you to make icons that are wider than high (bad english?

) that's no problem because it's rather too high icons that make a treeview look bad (because there's too much white space between the text parts vertically) than wide ones; wide icons are ok (eg. the flags).

gyözö

vector · Post by **vector** » Tue May 10, 2005 10:12 pm

yep got it...cheesh im slow lately

must be winter coming on...time to hibernate

ill rework the cups and breath a sigh of relief that I can make things a little bigger

somit like this ?

Post by **gyboth** » Wed May 11, 2005 6:05 am

vector wrote:yep got it...cheesh im slow lately must be winter coming on...time to hibernate

winter? summer!

somit like this ?

er... what's that in the middle?

the width is perfect, i'd say. can also be higher, if it's easier/nicer.

gyözö

atd · Post by **atd** » Wed May 11, 2005 10:42 am

gyboth wrote:
vector wrote:yep got it...cheesh im slow lately must be winter coming on...time to hibernate
winter? summer!

In Australia is becoms winter when we have summer!

vector · Post by **vector** » Wed May 11, 2005 10:21 pm

er... what's that in the middle?

supposed to have an accountants X thru it but it didnt come out well. I was more interested in the size. ok
Ill go to 12 high and 16 wide and see what i can come up with.

BTW I took a step back and tried to work out why the icons look that bad that small. and after talks with the corel forum it seems corel just dont like shrinking to that level.

So as a newly appointed professional "looking " graphics designer....

Im blaming my tools

vector · Post by **vector** » Wed May 11, 2005 11:22 pm

ok here is a 12x16.
ignoring the concept but you can see that under this size I can get "some" detail across. what i think i need is to be able to adjust the anti aliasing...which is only a tick box in corels export.

Post by **gyboth** » Thu May 12, 2005 6:57 am

vector wrote:

very nice, this size is ok, too. i guess you can't take an easy look at what you've created, since you draw in windows?

maybe with cygwin?

gyözö

Post by **gyboth** » Thu May 12, 2005 8:45 am

in fact you can make them even bigger, e.g. the blue ribbon is higher (as far as i can see) and still looks good.

gyözö

vector · Post by **vector** » Thu May 12, 2005 10:22 pm

since you draw in windows? maybe with cygwin?

yeah , seee other posts today re laptop.
I forget now wether i got cygwin to run with 1.9 possibly I did at my brothers but to be honest the whole cygwin thing is very intricate and I didnt want to waste too much time on it..ha as if linux on a laptop was a better idea ;(

It really comes down to wasting time on "tools" rather than work.