[Qgis-developer] Cast your vote: Default icon theme for QGIS 2.0

[Robert Szczepanek]

Hi,

On 29.07.2012 00:06, Larry Shaffer wrote:
> In my own experimentation with Qt icon scaling, I have found scripting
> ImageMagick or Photoshop to do the up/down-scaling, with or without a
> bit of sharpening applied afterword, to produce better quality icons
> than the Qt scaling. It may be good enough quality to preclude
> re-creating your icons for the other sizes.

If the results are better, it can be simple solution.

> Another option is to design icons with fewer details and higher
> contrast so that they still look OK when scaled (see MSSQL icon in
> Giovanni's QGIS example). I believe this would also address the issue
> of some icon groups looking too busy due to too much detail, example:
> the 'Add * Layer' icons of your set.

This is only matter of decision and use of simpler version, without 
"layer" sign. With bigger raster/vector/WMS/etc.

> Having multiple size sets for icons means some naming conventions and
> coding to switch between the sets; whereas now, the code simply asks
> Qt to handle the scaling by setting a toolbar's icon size in one call
> (as an example). Another good reason to go with icons that can cope
> with Qt's scaling: no code changes.

Different folders could be solution if Qt's scaling won't work?

> Switching between size sets also means any third party icons (e.g.
> plugins), that don't provide multiple icon versions, will have their
> icons scaled. This would end up with users seeing different quality
> between core and plugin toolbars, though I don't know how much this
> can be avoided regardless of scaling issues.

This is very important argument in favour of one SVG file.

> So, my vote here for your icon set would be to go with only the 24x24
> size, reduce the complexity of the most complex icons, increase
> overall contrast where needed, and add any 2.5 effects to make them
> pop a bit more (but not if such an effect causes the blurry scaling
> problem or poor quality to occur).

Agree.
Robert