[Clipart] clipart Digest, Vol 46, Issue 9
johnny_automatic at mac.com
Tue Jan 8 06:31:09 PST 2008
> Well, such a guideline for a consistent set is something very complex,
> it should define at least: color palette, perspective, stroke, light
> source, shadow type (have a look at the guidelines for something like
> the Tango icons). In practice, the images should be created from the
> start according to the guideline, not just apply the tags after the
> nicu :: http://nicubunu.ro :: http://nicubunu.blogspot.com
> Open Clip Art Library: http://www.openclipart.org
> my cool Fedora wallpapers: http://fedora.nicubunu.ro/wallpapers/
> my clipart collection: http://clipart.nicubunu.ro/
Very true Nicu. The variables that make one piece of clip art to have
a similar and compatible look to another are too many to pigeon hole.
That's why I suggest broad categories. I think that is the best we
can do to narrow the choices. Then the viewer has to use their own eye
to find the right one. And things like bw, color, silhouette certainly
are more clear cut than some terms. Other ways are grouping sets
like Gerald does, browsing a single author's work on the logic that
they will have a number of items in a similar style, or having the
author use a unique tag for a set like Tango.
And I think if these basic terms were set up as suggested tags they
would be used by a lot of people. One person suggested having bw and
color be an either/or toggle. it sounds good, but it means someone
like Gerald could not correctly use both terms when he has a full
color and outline version of the same image.
And having a preview browser would certainly be a quick way to
visually see if an image fits the look one is searching for. Any
word on this?
More information about the clipart