Linked by Metin Amiroff on Thu 20th May 2004 20:00 UTC
Original OSNews Interviews Today we interview two of the most popular artists in Linux world of art. Everaldo Coelho from KDE and Jakub Steiner (Jimmac) from the GNOME camp. Currently Everaldo works for Lindows inc. and Jakub works for Novell inc. They were very kind to answer our questions related with the art in Linux, its future and much more.
Order by: Score:
Good stuff
by Mike Hearn on Thu 20th May 2004 20:27 UTC

Great interview! Thanks, I enjoyed reading it, and it was very illuminating.

v SM
by mo on Thu 20th May 2004 20:49 UTC
RE: SM
by Eugenia on Thu 20th May 2004 20:51 UTC

I passed the article through OOo for spelling mistakes just 2 minutes before you post that.

Great interviews.
by Dewd on Thu 20th May 2004 21:02 UTC

Thanks.

3 cheers for the artists
by Anonymous on Thu 20th May 2004 21:12 UTC

Cool interview! The work these guys do
makes a huge differnece - they deserve free beer!

On a related note, Garret LeSage (Bluecurve guy) left Red Hat recently: http://linuxart.com

Awesome interview
by Jared on Thu 20th May 2004 21:19 UTC

I see Everaldo's English skills haven't improved :-)

Both Everaldo and Jimmac seem like awesome guys, keep up the good work!

Everaldo is right about SVG/Vectors being bad for small sizes.. they tend to lose their visual complexity at such small sizes because the DPI becomes simply too little.

Vectors are always good in larger sizes however.

RE: Spelling mistakes typos and poor English
by Anonymous on Thu 20th May 2004 21:47 UTC

"I'm surprised that someone can do all that work with Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG) and still talk about "vectorial graphics". ""

Give him a break, the man barely knows English.

Hey!
by Buck on Thu 20th May 2004 22:01 UTC

Great interview. Like a breath of fresh air.

Nice
by Sahil on Thu 20th May 2004 22:22 UTC

Good job, guys.

Thanks Everaldo
by linux_baby on Thu 20th May 2004 23:00 UTC

Hey Everaldo! Thanks a billion for the crystal icons! Awesome!

Re: Thanks Everaldo
by Another matthew on Thu 20th May 2004 23:28 UTC

Ditto!

Regarding SVG not being good for small icons it seems to be a general enough problem (across all desktops) to neccesitate a new superset standard of SVG. I don't think SVG hinting would be enough at that level - probably easier to deal with pixels. As in,

<icon>
  <small>
    base64 encoded bitmap
  </small>
  <large>
    svg...
  </large>
</icon>

Re: myself
by Another matthew on Thu 20th May 2004 23:29 UTC

The preview worked fine, I guess it's not a preview ;)

Re: myself
by Eugenia on Thu 20th May 2004 23:55 UTC

The preview told you clearly that only 2 HTML tags are supported (B and I). All others will be converted to HTML, so all you have to do is write that HTML and it will show up fine.

gtkrc colors
by John Blink on Fri 21st May 2004 00:33 UTC

Jimmac: A perfect theme would encompass all the apps I can be running. Single place to change it, *plop* and my desktop looks consistent. The current situation is far away from that ideal. Eek, that reminds me we still don't have a GUI editor for gtkrc colors.

Jimmac please remind the GNOME people that they should get it done by next release ;)

Please. ;)

v Eugenia's Moderation in a Nutshell:
by rajbhat on Fri 21st May 2004 00:37 UTC
Re: Eugenia
by Another matthew on Fri 21st May 2004 00:41 UTC

Yeah but I wrote entities, not tags, and the preview was different to what was posted. It seems that ampersands are converted to "[ampersand]amp[semicolon]" which is a fair assumption when trying to clean up html but it's more correct to make the change only when the ampersand isn't followed by characters and a semi-colon.

I'm a long time reader of the site. It's no big deal, I just hope my svg icon code was readable.

@Another matthew
by John Blink on Fri 21st May 2004 01:44 UTC

I'm a long time reader of the site. It's no big deal, I just hope my svg icon code was readable

It was for me, I copied and pasted it, then previewed it. ;)

RE: @Another matthew
by Eugenia on Fri 21st May 2004 01:50 UTC

The preview is done with JS while the rendering is done with PHP. Their functions are 99% identical for text-izing HTML, but not the same. But it's good enough for most cases.

Now, the whole thing is off topic. I asked you to re-submit the comment using the proper < and > and report an abuse for the first comment, so we can delete it (no reason for the first one if the second one is fixed)

lack of editing
by nick on Fri 21st May 2004 02:27 UTC

It's not just a matter of spelling. For example, the interviewer asked this:

"What users can expect from their favorite desktops .... How do you see the future Linux desktop art?"

v Everaldo & Microsoft
by Eduardo on Fri 21st May 2004 06:01 UTC
@Eduardo
by Conny on Fri 21st May 2004 10:17 UTC

As long as he keeps creating nice iconsets for KDE, I couldn't care less...

@Eduardo
by Rod on Fri 21st May 2004 11:05 UTC

I have a friend that is very close to Everaldo. And he claims Everaldo has been hired by Microsoft to develop new Apple-like icons for longhorn.

How will this affect Everaldo's credibility with the FOSS community?


It won't, unless you buy this "Microsoft is the evil Empire" thing. If I had Everaldo's skills I certainly would ask Bill big bucks though.

What Everaldo has done for KDE gives him permanent credibility. Usually when a newcomer takes a look at a modern Linux desktop and says "wow, that looks beautiful and professional", the striking thing is Everaldo's Crystal icons.

I like the MacOS X icons.
The mix between computer photograph and computer created pictures.
Would be nice, if everaldo do something similar in the future with an photographer.

At the moment the only "real" things are the background. You can choose a photographic backgroud but you can - under Linux - only use computer-created icons, because no other icons existis (or they looks very bad).

But I prefer an plain background without any motive.
And so, my computer looks very artificial. But this can be changed, if the icons are based on real photographs.

Re: photographer
by Don Cox on Fri 21st May 2004 19:22 UTC

"And so, my computer looks very artificial. But this can be changed, if the icons are based on real photographs."

Any competent illustrator should be able to make something look "photographic" without using an actual photograph.

But is that a good aim? The main requirement for a set of icons is that they should be instantly recognisable - that means they must be as different from each other as possible. They should be clear and simple so that you can remember them.

IMO photographic images are too complicated and have too many colours to be functional. Have you thought why road signs are as they are?


Surely your computer _should_ look artificial? It _is_ artificial. What could be more artificial than a computer?

re: Re: photographer
by foo on Sat 29th May 2004 13:00 UTC

"IMO photographic images are too complicated and have too many colours to be functional. Have you thought why road signs are as they are?

Surely your computer _should_ look artificial? It _is_ artificial. What could be more artificial than a computer?"

LOL

This wasn't the most well thought out statement. Road signs are meant to be processed in a split second while moving at highspeeds, even when keeping attention focused on other drivers and the road itself.

Computer icons are generally stationary. If they are app shortcuts on the desktops then the icons are some of the first things you see when you log into your GUI desktop. Icons associated with mime types are repeated, sometimes hundredfold, so they must remain appealling when displayed in large numbers. Road signs are not even close to being a good example why one shouldn't use photo realistic icons on computers.

Photographs, landscapes, portraits...these are all artificial too, but one would want them to look as "real as possible" if the situation needed it. There's only one thing I can think of off the top of my head that's more artificial than a computer: velveeta cheese. The sad part is I'd still eat it if I had the munchies ;)

My personal feeling toward photo realistic icons is they'll be still as disposable as any other icon set. I'm not trying to sound sophisticated but I've found I tend to gravitate to more abstract art anyway. I think it's because photo realism can be as depressing as the real thing ;-)

peace
foo