Linked by Metin Amiroff on Thu 20th May 2004 20:00 UTC
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



"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?