GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 660291
gnome 3.2's default wallpaper is ugly
Last modified: 2011-09-29 18:09:52 UTC
I just updated to gnome 3.2 in archlinux, and to my horror, the wallpaper became shockingly bad. Too much contrast. As an evidence, gnome3.org, asserts in the first section that gnome is: Simply beautiful GNOME's new desktop takes elegance to a new level. We've swept away the clutter and made a simple and easy-to-use desktop,and ***we've made this the ***most beautiful*** GNOME desktop ever***, with a new visual theme, a refined new font and carefully crafted animations. with 3.0 wallpaper gnome is simply beautiful. http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-themes-standard/plain/themes/Adwaita/backgrounds/stripes.jpg?h=gnome-3-0http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-themes-standard/plain/themes/Adwaita/backgrounds/stripes.jpg?h=gnome-3-0 but with 3.2 wallpaper gnome looks horrible, and it makes gnome 3.2 look bad. http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-themes-standard/plain/themes/Adwaita/backgrounds/stripes.jpg?h=gnome-3-0http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-themes-standard/plain/themes/Adwaita/backgrounds/stripes.jpg?h=gnome-3-2 When the defaults are not nicer, it is not nicer. Ok, you may not be using the default wallpaper, but supposing that you have to choose 1 wallpaper out of the above 2 wallpapers only. Which one will you choose for your day to day use? For me gnome 3.0's wallpaper is more professional, calm, beautiful, and distractionless. whereas 3.2 wallpaper looks flashy, attention-needy, childish, distracting and unsightly. Please consider. Thanks.
and last minute *change* to an important component of the *default* gnome desktop, which was not part of 3.1.92 (testing), and no discussion was possible after 3.2 is released, is real hideous. Isn't this unethical? http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-themes-standard/commit/?h=gnome-3-2&id=fdf43a62d27624486e4b3065bb8314c4fc41f91b&ss=1 Shouldn't there be a 'freeze' on 'changing' the defaults artwork without testing/discussion?
Created attachment 197613 [details] My shiny new gnome 3.2 default desktop - simply beautiful with new wallpaper
I'm sorry you feel the new wallpaper's 15% boost in saturation is a change you disagree with. It is not correct, however, that the wallpaper received no testing. It has been tested among the design team members. If I filter out the subjective adjectives out of your comments I'm left with the correct statement that the change came crazy late. I admit the timing was extremely poor, for which I apologize. The web team who has been affected was aware of the change and worked on updating relevant screenshots, and so was the gnome-doc-team. Despite what you believe, many people won't even notice the change though.
Release team decided to revert the choice due to timing, updating the status.
This is a clear example of what not to do when opening an art related bug. I'm not the author of that wallpaper, but I would feel offended by such a statement if I was. Please next time try to be more careful choosing the words to use, because whatever you like an artwork or not (and in this case is just personal taste, since nothing can be said about the execution) it's hours and hours of work. Also in this particular case the change was accuratelly tested and discussed for weeks, the commit time was just too late, full stop.
(In reply to comment #5) > This is a clear example of what not to do when opening an art related bug. > I'm not the author of that wallpaper, but I would feel offended by such a > statement if I was. Please next time try to be more careful choosing the words > to use, because whatever you like an artwork or not (and in this case is just > personal taste, since nothing can be said about the execution) it's hours and > hours of work. Also in this particular case the change was accuratelly tested > and discussed for weeks, the commit time was just too late, full stop. And this is also a clear example of how not slip in 'personal favorite artwork' without letting it through beta, pre-release, testing by everyone, especially the default artwork. I'm offended by this 'sudden' change, because, it does make the default gnome 3.2 look bad. Just ask your friends and family whether they like the 3.2 version (the attachment) or 3.0 version of wallpaper. Personally, would you use 3.2 version or 3.0 version wallpaer, yourself? When I upgraded to 3.2 with that wallpaper, and when I saw it in gdm I thought, what my monitor has gone bad? too much contrast, it hurts the eyes. And I was like, "oh, my god, this is gonna make gnome 3.2 look terrible!" Increasing 15% saturation is not hours and hours of work. Well, the change was not there in 3.1.91 or 3.1.92 either, so, just a few people testing it, does not make it the best case scenario, for gnome. And artwork needed to be seen not tested. That 'commit' was unethical. That commit, put the web-team, doc-team, in trouble. I'm glad that the release team did the right thing. Honestly, a poll for these 2 wallpapers, would let us know, the real peoples' 'personal taste' in percentage! My concern is for Gnome. I am not attached to that wallpaper, but I want the defaults to be aesthetically pleasant, not jarring. I'm not crying to make the wallpaper stay there forever, but the new wallpaper, if I say euphemistically, is "unpleasant"; and If a last minute commit 'spoils' the default pleasantness, I have every right to complain. Again, Please ask a few different people by showing the attachment (below), before assserting that it's my personal taste only. I am pretty sure that nobody would like to use that 15% saturated wallpaper ever. Please understand, it's not for my personal gain, it's for gnome. I've been trying to promote gnome 3. I installed it on my friends and sister's computers. They are happy with gnome-shell. And honestly gnome 3 and gnome-shell is very easy for new users. I see Linux desktop coming into reality with gnome-shell, not with unity, not with kde. I even made a live cd/usb/dvd for gnome-shell so that people could see gnome-shell and get interested in Linux and Gnome 3. http://www.ahashare.com/torrents-details.php?id=180044 Thanks for reading this far :)
In Short: no harm intentioned. Bit offtopic, but Asif: Are you willing to help with making live cd images for GNOME? We currently have someone working on openSUSE ones, but the more the merrier :-) If interested, could you send an email to me (olav@vitters.nl) or the release team (release-team@gnome.org). I'll then introduce you to the other people who are making live cds.