Yeah, yeah, the plight of the creator, nobody cares.SSX-MS wrote:I wouldn't call it pussying out, i spent most of my free time yesterday afternoon working on icons, it wasn't like i was trying to do something quick and easy. I'd like to think that at least one of the sets i did yesterday (preferably set2) will be given the time of day and not just dismissed for something more flashy and animated, not just because otherwise it will have been a waste of my time but i think we already have a suitable one to use.
Just seems a bit off as well that we're going to lengths to come up with something that's animated when we have a perfectly good static set ready to use, or at least try.
I may still have a go this weekend at doing an animated set like the one i posted above, i won't write that off. To note though all the animations posted so far will freeze and look like either or for anyone that has them disabled. Neither of them are as clear as of set2. If the first 2 were already easy to spot for everyone we wouldn't still be doing this i don't think.
It's going to come down to opinion at the end of the day like animated avatars would, but putting aside my comments in the other post i don't honestly think the set needs to be animated to look good and do it's job either, as set2 has shown (at least to me as i still prefer the latter).
I could have bitched to you all day how it took me X amount of DAYS to make the star, learn macromedia, and then busted out the; "Hey, I don't want you to do anything more with it, because I did it, and it took me so much time" and we'd all still be stuck at it looking normal if you didn't come to pick it up and improve on it. All I would've had to do was withhold the source files.
You have no sympathies from me for spending time on the thing, and then having it go to waste when something else is used. We spend the time because we want it shinier, flashier, nicer, and generally just better. When I do get around to doing the 3D star, after god knows how many countless hours I'll be wasting on it, should I just take one frame render and say "that's it, you have to use that now and forever, because I made it and if you don't use it, my time is wasted"? That would just be a dick move.
No, of course, I'll give the source files and then someone (probably you) with a better eye than me will find a better way to render it, maybe even improve it, and take a different frame render, and generally just make the whole thing better.
So quit the BAWWWWWWWWWWWWW fest, and let's do something cool that, yes, will waste even more time.
Sure, Set 2 works fine, it works as fine as any static image is ever going to work, we'll live if we use it, but an animation works finer, and there really are no downsides to it. "OMGZ 4 KILOBYTES" and "OMGZ BROWSER BLOCKS ANIMATIONS" is dopey, cop-out talk and not conductive to the point, and you know it.
Point being;
Or something better that you can come up with. I never said we needed to stick to set 1, 2, or 5675.
And it's not like you and I don't know the basics of how things work style wise. Flash sites with animated parts kick the shit out of any static regular site that exists, when done tastefully and right.
This is just a push in that direction. Once we're done, then we can talk about voting, and all that crap.