Re: Re: anyone wanna help with gnome-backgrounds

[Erik Grinaker <erikg wired-networks net>]

On Thu, 2003-08-28 at 17:49, Jakub Steiner wrote:
> I think a gnome wallpaper should be
>       * simple. low contrast image is a must. anything gaining too much
>         attention fails as a wallpaper. You have to perfectly see the
>         items on your desktop.
>       * gnome branded. a gnome2 fancy button or the simple foot shape
>         should be part of the wallpaper

I agree, the backgrounds included should be subtle without too many
distracting elements. And in addition to being gnome-branded, they also
need to fit well in with the rest of the environment. Stock icons and
other graphics all have this "cute", cartooney feel to them - and I
think this should somehow be reflected in a few of the backgrounds. But
we should also have room for some variation - people are different, and
we should try to include backgrounds which will appeal to a large range
of people.


> A nice compromise would be the stuff that garrett does with his macro
> photography. The field of depth makes most of the shot blurry, there are
> large single colored areas.

Absolutely, these kinds of photos are excellent, and I think we
definitely should include a couple. I would also like to propose
FlowerScanBlue by Star, based on a tigert photo - I've been using this
as my background for a year or so:

http://art.gnome.org/backgrounds/gnome/27.php

Although it may be a bit intrusive, it is clean and beautiful - and it
gives my desktop this really cozy feel ;)


-- 
Erik Grinaker <erikg wired-networks net>