Does it annoy anybody else that the Facepunch logo is just slightly low-res? - General

:siren:[highlight]slightly [i]blurred*[/i][/highlight]:siren: (jesus christ :byodood:) That, along with the ugly faint glow spoils the otherwise decent interface. It bugs me :( [b]Edit:[/b] Here's a comparison. Current: [img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/269.png[/img] Should look more like: [img]http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/3548/35073667.png[/img] I would center the X, but I made it as close as possible to the original for the sake of comparison.

I'm more annoyed that the 'X' isn't centred correctly.

That too

Do you have OCD?

Perhaps. And a very low tolerance for artistically inept web designers

crtl+mousewheeldown

Personally, I think it looks great.

I like the glow, and it isn't lowres. It's not upscaled.

[QUOTE=dgg;27783700]I like the glow, and it isn't lowres.[/QUOTE] It is low res. It's not a matter of opinion. And I dislike the glow, but that [i]is[/i] just an opinion. [QUOTE=dgg;27783700]It's not upscaled.[/QUOTE] Just because it isn't technically "upscaled" by the website, doesn't mean the image itself isn't low resolution.

Just use the scale down thing I posted earlier so the image is smaller and stop complaining. Either that or make a script that uses a better image that you made.

Here's a comparison. Current: [img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/269.png[/img] Should look more like: [img]http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/3548/35073667.png[/img] I would center the X, but I made it as close as possible to the original for the sake of comparison.

The low resolution becomes most apparent in the drop shadow.

[QUOTE=Matix;27783849]Here's a comparison. Current: [img_thumb]http://filesmelt.com/dl/269.png[/img_thumb] Should look more like: [img_thumb]http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/3548/35073667.png[/img_thumb] I would center the X, but I made it as close as possible to the original for the sake of comparison.[/QUOTE] all you did was remove the blur.

[QUOTE=Nohj;27783672]crtl+mousewheeldown[/QUOTE] [IMG]http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/3766/muchbetter.png[/IMG] It's beautiful.

[QUOTE=Nohj;27784020]all you did was remove the blur.[/QUOTE] Actually, I replaced it with a much sharper facepunch logo. And yes, good job. There is no blur on this version. You have bad eyes if you can't see the resolution difference.

[QUOTE=Chef salad;27784039][img_thumb]http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/3766/muchbetter.png[/img_thumb] It's beautiful.[/QUOTE] simply amazing.

[QUOTE=Matix;27783849]Here's a comparison. Current: [img_thumb]http://filesmelt.com/dl/269.png[/img_thumb] Should look more like: [img_thumb]http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/3548/35073667.png[/img_thumb] I would center the X, but I made it as close as possible to the original for the sake of comparison.[/QUOTE] Add inner glow to that and you have the same result. You think it looks slightly blurry, not lowres, that's because of the glow.

[QUOTE=dgg;27784250]Add inner glow to that and you have the same result. You think it looks slightly blurry, not lowres, that's because of the glow.[/QUOTE] Really?! Am I really the only one who sees this? Ugh, the problem with having 8 years of graphic design experience is that nobody understands what the fuck you're talking about.

[QUOTE=Matix;27784054]You have bad eyes if you can't see the resolution difference.[/QUOTE] You have bad eyes if you think blur = low resolution and sharpness = high resolution. Low resolutions that are upscaled to a higher resolution causes blurriness, but blurriness itself is not a sign of low resolution. [editline]1st February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Matix;27784284]Really?! Am I really the only one who sees this? Ugh, the problem with having 8 years of graphic design experience is that nobody understands what the fuck you're talking about.[/QUOTE] I'm studying graphic design and am a quality freak. I understand what you are talking about and you are confusing blurriness caused by the glow with lowres. The jagged edges in the current logo is simply because it's not a pure vector result, most likely a downscaled raster image.

Don't like it? Make a greasemonkey script to change it.

You're right. I should have referred to it as "low pixel-density" [editline]1st February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Mac2468;27784320]Don't like it? Make a greasemonkey script to change it.[/QUOTE] Or how about somebody takes 5 seconds to fix it.

[QUOTE=Matix;27784347] Or how about somebody takes 5 seconds to fix it.[/QUOTE] You could.

MAKE COLORS BRIGHTER! INSTANT HIGH RES! /c

[QUOTE=Matix;27784347]You're right. I should have referred to it as "low pixel-density" [editline]1st February 2011[/editline] Or how about somebody takes 5 seconds to fix it.[/QUOTE] Because nobody that runs the site cares about what you think about the logo. Do it yourself or quit complaining.

[QUOTE=mysteryman;27784427]MAKE COLORS BRIGHTER! INSTANT HIGH RES! /c[/QUOTE] I love how anything flawed with the site that is pointed out by a member is instantly flagged as nonsense. The rest of the site looks great, but I should be able to suggest a tweak without being told to "deal with it"

[QUOTE=Matix;27784491]:frog:[/QUOTE] :haw:

Well, even though I don't really agree with you, that is going to bug the fuck out of me for a while now.

You're retarded, it's anti-aliasing, but it looks pretty poor. The resolution on the horrid one made by you and it are the exact same.

[QUOTE=Shadaez;27784554]You're retarded, it's anti-aliasing, but it looks pretty poor. The resolution on the horrid one made by you and it are the exact same.[/QUOTE] Anti-aliasing? Hahahaha I'm pretty damn sure they both used the same anti-aliasing algorithm. It's just a poor quality image, whether it was upscaled, stretched, or blurred. Shit, people can argue about anything

[img]http://cdn3.knowyourmeme.com/i/000/064/126/original/tumblr_l6ouy08TEp1qz9muno1_r1_400.gif?1281103003[/img] Blur doesn't mean low res. :downs: