more natural colors
development at wilburwebdesign.net
development at wilburwebdesign.net
Wed Dec 13 07:04:50 UTC 2006
fedora-art-list-request at redhat.com wrote:
> Send Fedora-art-list mailing list submissions to
> fedora-art-list at redhat.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-art-list
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> fedora-art-list-request at redhat.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> fedora-art-list-owner at redhat.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Fedora-art-list digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: more natural colors (David Zeuthen)
> 2. Re: more natural colors (Mike Chalmers)
> 3. Re: more natural colors (Paul W. Frields)
> 4. Re: [FC7 theme proposal] Flying High with Fedora 7 - Round 2
> (M?ir?n Duffy)
> 5. GTK2 Roundabout (Andrea Cimitan)
> 6. GTK2 Roundabout (Andrea Cimitan)
> 7. Re: [FC7 theme proposal] Flying High with Fedora 7 - Round 2
> (John Baer)
> 8. Re: [FC7 theme proposal] Flying High with Fedora 7 - Round 2
> (John Baer)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 16:40:10 -0500
> From: David Zeuthen <david at fubar.dk>
> Subject: Re: more natural colors
> To: "Discussions about the artwork included with Fedora, including
> icons, themes, and wallpapers." <fedora-art-list at redhat.com>
> Message-ID: <457F21BA.10404 at fubar.dk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Mike Chalmers wrote:
>
>> There is no way you can say the Red Hat's colors are natural if you
>> think about it. You can't just name any color and say it is natural
>> because it looks like red on trees. There is a big difference.
>>
>
> I really agree here. The Fedora artwork is nice sure, but it really
> don't remind me of e.g. a peaceful natural forest or other things that I
> associate with nature; it has this certain sense of synthetic quality
> that is hard to pin point. It's also a bit too dark and detailed for my
> personal taste. To each their own I guess.
>
> +1 for back to nature. Thanks.
>
> David
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 17:39:29 -0500
> From: "Mike Chalmers" <mikechalmers70 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: more natural colors
> To: "Discussions about the artwork included with Fedora, including
> icons, themes, and wallpapers." <fedora-art-list at redhat.com>
> Message-ID:
> <148c52290612121439g33c3013fx54b83b2331661abd at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 12/12/06, Máirín Duffy <duffy at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Mike,
>>
>>
>>> On 12/12/06, Máirín Duffy <duffy at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think a lot of the themes we've got proposed have natural-looking
>>>> palettes - a lot are focused on the night sky, with various shades of
>>>> light and deep blue.
>>>>
>> Mike Chalmers wrote:
>>
>>> The colors I speak of, are natural colors of pure life, trees and
>>> grass and earth. Not fire, metallic water, futuristic technological
>>> designs, lustful colors, metallic trees, stuff like that. Red Hat is
>>> definitely unnatural colors as is Fedora. I think if we think about it
>>> we can realize that, especially as artist.
>>>
>>> Things like blue metallic water, for example, compared to regular blue
>>> water is incomparable. Or metallic silver trees compared to green leaf
>>> trees or leaves in the fall.
>>>
>> How about the blue night skies in some of our FC7 mockups?
>>
>>
>>> There is no way you can say the Red Hat's colors are natural if you
>>> think about it. You can't just name any color and say it is natural
>>> because it looks like red on trees. There is a big difference.
>>>
>> I'm not really following. I don't think it's fair to say the color red
>> is unnatural in all cases so hopefully I am misunderstanding you there?
>>
>> Certainly you can talk about a color's treatment in the context of a
>> color palette or its usage in a piece of artwork as being unnatural or
>> not. Even if you restate it in that way, however, I would still argue
>> Red Hat's treatment of the color red is certainly not predominantly
>> 'unnatural'. Other words come to mind ('bold' since it's bright and
>> attention-grabbing, 'different' as most tech companies go silver or
>> blue) but I really can't say 'unnatural' comes to mind. Not that RH's
>> graphic design is something we really have any say over in the Fedora
>> art team :)
>>
>> I think you may be on to some helpful critique here that we could apply
>> to our FC7 artwork. To make an effective case here, however, and provide
>> us with more useful feedback you really need to cite specific examples
>> and qualify some of the statements you are making as they come across as
>> somewhat vague to me. E.g., *which* Fedora artwork looks 'unnatural' to
>> you? (provide links to screenshots or mockups) Why exactly? What parts
>> of each piece communicate 'unnatural' to you?
>>
>>
>>> Fedora's colors remind me of the movies The Matrix.
>>>
>>> I am not knocking Fedora, I love it. It just hurts me that the colors
>>> aren't used to a more natural earthy approach.
>>>
>> Mike, I think I'm understanding you a bit more but I wish you could
>> provide more specific feedback. :)
>>
>> What about the theme mockups I cited doesn't come across as natural to
>> you? I'm really confused:
>>
>> [1]
>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fc7ThemeProposalFlyingHighPOC?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=wallpaper-moonlight2.png
>>
>> [2]
>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fc7ThemeProposalFlyingHighPOC?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=flyinghigh-moonlight.png
>>
>> [3]
>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fc7ThemeProposalFedoraBorealis?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=fc7themeproposal-fedoraborealis-night2.png
>>
>> Do you think any of these appears unnatural? Why, specifically? It can't
>> just be the colors - there's a lot more that gives a piece of artwork
>> its feel than the specific colors in it, you know? What does each one
>> remind you of that isn't unnatural? Why?
>>
>> Blue is a color that appears quite often in nature. If you would like to
>> see themes that use a particular palette you like (you mention grass and
>> earth a lot - green and brown - rather than the sky which is in fact
>> blue when we are lucky :) ) then there's certainly nothing stopping you
>> from taking some of the proposals we have on the table right now and
>> experimenting with different color palettes in them. But I don't really
>> think it's quite accurate to sweepingly judge all Fedora (and Red Hat
>> for that matter) artwork as 'unnatural' based on the names of the colors
>> involved rather than the treatment of the colors in them. Like I said
>> above, it would be more fair to cite specific examples.
>>
>> While the Fedora logo's colors won't be changing anytime soon, we can
>> most certainly investigate non-blue options as far as the color palette
>> for the theme artwork goes.
>>
>> ~m
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fedora-art-list mailing list
>> Fedora-art-list at redhat.com
>> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-art-list
>>
>>
>
>
> Thanks, Máirín. I mean no harm to Fedora, believe me. I will do my
> best to answer your questions later. I am not the best artist though,
> actually I would call me a drawer with dreams, lol. :-)
>
> Kind Regards,
> Mike
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 20:57:18 -0500
> From: "Paul W. Frields" <stickster at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: more natural colors
> To: Discussions about the artwork "included with Fedora, including
> icons, themes, and wallpapers." <fedora-art-list at redhat.com>
> Message-ID: <1165975038.31082.5.camel at localhost.localdomain>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> On Tue, 2006-12-12 at 16:40 -0500, David Zeuthen wrote:
>
>> Mike Chalmers wrote:
>>
>>> There is no way you can say the Red Hat's colors are natural if you
>>> think about it. You can't just name any color and say it is natural
>>> because it looks like red on trees. There is a big difference.
>>>
>> I really agree here. The Fedora artwork is nice sure, but it really
>> don't remind me of e.g. a peaceful natural forest or other things that I
>> associate with nature; it has this certain sense of synthetic quality
>> that is hard to pin point. It's also a bit too dark and detailed for my
>> personal taste. To each their own I guess.
>>
>> +1 for back to nature. Thanks.
>>
>
> I think by "unnatural" the OP means a color that is highly saturated
> (i.e. high in the "S" field with regard to HSV) beyond what one finds in
> the majority of natural settings. Our art tends toward cobalt and
> cerulean, which are maybe a bit more harsh to his eye. I have no beef
> with it myself -- just hoping to elucidate.
>
>
Where do I post bootsplash images for the Fedora Borealis theme?
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fc7ThemeProposalFedoraBorealis says
"Immutable".
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fc7ThemeProposalFedoraBorealis?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=fc7themeproposal-fedoraborealis-night2.png
is awesome. It is bright in the middle of this dark-type image; that
gives a warm feeling. Many people replace default background images with
Digital Blasphemy backgrounds or gnome-look.org(,etc.) backgrounds. This
background would not be replaced by a lot of people.
Thank you.
More information about the Fedora-art-list
mailing list