I am in middle of developing a software and I couldn't get quality high pixel icons. Hope You guys will guide me with this.
I tried various sites and searched for them and couldn't accomplish the tasks.
Deviant Art, Tumblr, Twitter...I mean, there's an entire pixel art community out there that would probably jump at the chance to help you with custom icons! If you don't mind the extra work, MSPaint is always a quick way to set up something.
I'm including an article link here with a bunch of additional, more specific options. Good Luck!
https://www.engadget.com/2016-05-19-18-best-websites-to-download-free-icons-for-commercial-use.html
Related
I'm trying to develop an icon for my app, specifically the play store icon which is 512 x 512. I've Google for days now and only find Photoshop stuff, which is too expensive for me and the learning curve just for one icon is not worth it.
Do any of you know of cheaper software that I can buy and use, specifically something that just help you create high quality icons?
I am also open to courses for Gimp and Paint that can teach you, but not Photoshop please. I know they are the best but they don't think of guys like me that are starting out.
I'm not sure whether this is the proper place for this kind of question, but I think Gimp seems the most reasonable option. The web is full of tutorials for it, so I think it's worth searching there. For example: Creating Icons
This sound off topic but I honestly need a way forward, I have googled for 3 hours now but still no end product, although it might be I am using the wrong key term.
I have seen mobile apps with powerful designs like the foursquare apps etc I am used to using JQM default themes but I want to learn and be more creative with my themes. I have being looking for a crash course or any tutorials online but I have so far failed to spot one.
Please, does anyone have a link to one? Please if you do, provide it for me and you will be saving me hours of searching the net.
I am not really a professional on css but I am trying.
I think what you are looking for is just inspiration. You can check out my pinterest feed.
http://www.pinterest.com/uidesignguide/
I am using SimpleViewer to show images on a website. It's a nice and elegant tool. But, as it is using Flash not all devices (e.g. iPad?) will/can show the images. Does anybody know about a non-Flash alternative? Maybe totally CSS cased?
I know this is an old question, but I found something that looks quite a bit like SimplerViewer called Gallerific. https://github.com/iamvery/galleriffic
If you check out the example 2 you'll see a layout that looks a lot like SimpleView
Well, I have checked under every rock and I can't find a good non-flash alternative to SimpleViewer (i'm really curious now to if there's one!). There are rumours about it soon being changed to HTML5 (a wise decision), but I don't know if you can wait that long.
I would say the best option is jQuery and CSS, you can personalise and style your gallery as you wish, but you will have to be at least a bit comfortable with html editing. It's not complicated at all, you should give it a try.
You can find lots of jQuery galleries and sliders tutorials here for example: http://vandelaydesign.com/blog/web-development/jquery-image-galleries/
Do some search engine research to get the best options, there are tons of different galleries.
Good luck!
They have now, see: this comment at the SimpleViewer Forum. It's called Universal Playback.
This is a best-practice topic.
I saw it as a prefer method for some web developers. Instead of doing the CSS layout from scratch, they start a photoshop mockup first and then decode it into CSS.
What do you think about this approach?
Best to all,
Mockups are great, but I don't know if photoshop is the very first thing you'd want to try for the purpose -- at the very start, when you're just trying to get a logical layout for the various pages of the site (before refining it in terms of looks &c), a whiteboard with dry-erase markers and post-it notes affords for very fast, repeated mock-up rearrangements for the early brainstorming. Once there is some reasonable agreement on one (or a very few) possible arrangements of information, then visually more accurate tools enter into play.
BTW, just don't forget to photograph the whiteboard before changing it (any decent cellphone will do, you're not trying for high quality here;-) any time there are ideas or suggestions you may want to revisit or ponder in the future!
It is fast. This is why i always use this method. You don't want to spend the time building cross-browser CSS until you are actually set on a layout.
Most webdesign graphic artists work this way.
Many programmers simply find it a waste of time.
It has advantages, and disadvantages.
Advantages:
Many graphic artists grok photoshop/illustrator more than they do dreamweaver.
Customer gets a preview of the final product that works everywhere: mac, pc, firefox, ie, safari, whatever. Sending an html preview in early stages of production with developers using firefox and customer using MSIE always stirs up trouble.
And don't think to be on the smart side, scribbling MSIE driven html. Starting with non-standard html and converting to standard is more painful than doing it the other way.
There's one more catch: many web site customers tend to have a Mac and use Safari. Web committents tend to have a stronger taste for graphics than the average, so the chance to bump into Mac maniacs is higher in this sector than in others.
More design alternatives can be prepared spending less time on each one. This could be a dramatic advantage while dealing with murky clouds of executives with no designated decision-makers on the customer side. Alternative mockups will be passing hand-to-hand until general consensus is reached on one design or the other.
Disadvantages:
"Cutting" the graphic design into html becomes an additional work and it's not clear who's gonna pay for that extra time.
It favours graphic-centric, and rigid, design workflows. Customers agree pre-emptively on a given preview and that's what they get by contract. Every graphic modification means money, behaviour and programming instead tend not to be well defined, or worst, ill defined by the mockup.
The quest for pixel perfect cross-browser adherence to the mockup may drive you insane. If you agreed on a given rigid design with the customer, that could become a dire issue to pursue.
Dirty CSS tricks shoe in into your design. Using an HTML mockup, the customer would have approved a design driven by code with less tricks in place.
Anyway, I wouldn't suggest photoshop for a mockup, but inkscape. (or illustrator, if you worship adobe by burning piles of money into magic circles at midnight)
A scribbling stage is good too, while discussing the contract live with the customer.
I prefer pencil and paper to felt-tips, and I webcam shoot ideas for archiving and email forwarding. When it comes to scribbling, anyone does what feels more natural.
Not doing any and rely onto sample site examples and screenshots for graphical reference is always an option.
If you're productive that way, why not? Not everybody manages to envision their Web site perfectly as they're typing in a bunch of angle brackets.
More seriously put: It's your job, so it's your responsibility to do it in a way that allows you to do it effectively.
When prototyping, it's important to choose the right fidelity. This article from BoxesAndArrows provides a nice introduction to the various options and their uses.
I particularly like this line by Bill Buxton which the article quotes:
There is no such thing as high or low fidelity, only appropriate fidelity.
In this TechTalk by the Facebook Design Team, they mention how they use Photoshop in their design process (IIRC it's somewhere midway through, but I can't seem to forward through the video).
I am a web programmer who knows html and css fairly well. I can use a graphic program for it's basic functionality, but desinging a complete graphical web site is not my thing.
I let a graphic designer use his or hers graphic program to create a nice looking layout, and than code the website by hand in html and css.
It works for me, and gives my customers a design they like (cause a graphical designer will always make a much more nice looking design than most web programmers).
Agile methodology would suggest something easily modified in consultation with the customer. Dave Thomas in Agile Web Development with Rails suggests scribbling on paper. But anything has got to be better than chipping away directly at handmade CSS unless you really know what you want.
I was thinking about saying "scribbling might not cut it for a formal presentation" but the awesome SO crowd beat me to it in the comments...
Personally, and at every webdev firm I've worked at, I've always mocked-up in photoshop first. Jumping straight into CSS and markup is more of a bottom-up approach and makes sense to a lot of programmers but in web development you have to keep in mind that there are aesthetics to consider and a creative direction to follow. It's not enough that your product is functional, it needs the input of a professional creative-director/graphic-designer in order to make the product pleasant to look at and use.
In my experience, the problem has always been wrestling with inflexibility of team-members. Graphic designers who are aesthetics focussed and refuse to compromise their design integrity; which sometimes results in impossible or extremely difficult and un-semantic layouts. Developers who flatly refuse to compromise the integrity of their code where there is a workable solution - which might be a little less elegant. The key is to have a creative team who is intimately familiar with CSS and what is and isn't possible and an engineering team who have an appreciation of the importance of design and aesthetics.
In my freelance life (having had the benefit of working in both camps) I find it much easier to mock-up in photoshop first because I know what I can and can't do. And photoshop mockups are a lot easier to change on client feedback than are CSS and markup. Also, if you can show your client a mock-up, they feel more secure because they know that their money is going into a well planned project with a definate direction.
Hope this helps!
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
As a little side project, I am starting to build a new website for a certain organization I am affiliated to, which current site is simply outdated.
I am regularly a Java developer, and last time I really did some web development was back in the late 90s, when <p> was still more popular than <div> and Javascript was cutting-edge technology (JQuery is for lazy bums these days :) ).
Anyway, I feel really outdated. The website basically is going to be:
Django based
mostly serve static information pages
it will have a dynamic news and updates page (based on Django admin capabilites)
and some basic apps I'll develop myself (polls, small registration app, etc...)
My problem is designing the whole thing. I found some nice web-based CSS layout generators that got me going, but I still feel I'm wasting my time smoothing out the CSS files and aligning <div>s.
Are there any tools - the simpler and faster, the better - that you recommend I can use to speed up the design part of the site so I can concentrate on the real work?
I don't need anything fancy, just a nice looking layout and design that I can tweak a bit so the site will look presentable.
I second Brandon's suggestion to use a CSS framework. It won't give you 100% freedom to design anything you like, but it can speed up your design process greatly and free up your hands to do the coding you really want.
Suggestions Updated July 2013:
Twitter Bootstrap http://twitter.github.io/bootstrap/ - complete grid, typo, UI widget prototyping framework
ZURB Foundation http://foundation.zurb.com/ - responsive grid, type, UI widget prototyping framework (similar in scope to Twitter Bootstrap, but feels 'cleaner' in some ways)
960 http://960.gs/ - grid layout system
Tripoli http://devkick.com/lab/tripoli/ - really good typography, but no grid system
YUI Grids http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/grids/ - very customizable (to the point of overkill) grid system
Blueprint http://www.blueprintcss.org/ - grid system and basic typography
BlueTrip http://www.bluetrip.org - a hybrid system, mixing the best of the Blueprint grid with the best of the Tripoli typography
I won't lie to you. This website isn't the best place to go if you're looking for reliable Web Design advice. Stack Overflow is a programming community and programmers rarely know anything about design. If you want to get some real advice then I would strongly recommend the main Web Design/Development forums on the Internet, especially SitePoint.
That being said, as a former freelance Web Designer/Developer I'll offer my input on the issue. Not that you should value it, of course. After all, this is a programming website.
NEVER EVER SAY CSS LAYOUT GENERATOR EVER AGAIN! If you're going to seriously get into designing web pages then you need to learn semantic XHTML and CSS first. Whilst many people tout W3Schools as the definitive resource I see it as a programmers answer (i.e. not very good) and would prefer that you read up on the subject using...Google. There are countless examples of great websites to pick up the basics of Web Design/Development that Google is probably the best website for the job. Also, with a plethora of new websites offering this information you know it's going to be more improved than W3Schools. You'll seriously want to get clued-up on writing your design because it'll be much harder to fix things later on in the project.
If you're going to be designing web pages it would be a good idea to learn what actually makes a good design. Check out CSS Vault for a fantastic resource of some of the best-designed web pages around, of course with all the source code intact so you can have a play around with their code and see how they've managed some of the wonderful effects they've produced. I've learnt more than a thing or two from websites that have been featured on CSS Vault. On top of that you should read up on Web Design from the big Web Design/Development sites. Two of my favourites are SitePoint and A List Apart, two names that you'll near time and time again when you hear people talk about resources. Browse those websites, check their forums, see what REAL Web Designers/Developers are using, not what programmers are using.
On the subject of CSS Frameworks; they do help! The problem with using them is that you'll often spend so much time looking for a worthwhile framework that you could have finished most of the CSS for your website yourself. You'll either love them or hate them, but many people will say that they're not necessary.
Once you've got your mind set on what a good design looks like and you've got the resources you need to make something of value I suggest that you get to work! In reality when you're designing a web page all you really need is a text editor with a save function, an image manipulation program, a browser window and FireBug. An IDE helps a lot of people, but if you do use one then you'll definitely want to work in its text mode. I use NotePad++ or Emacs exclusively but a lot of people like to use Aptana Studio, so it may be worth a look.
When you're getting to actually building the code behind your website you can't really go much worse than your favourite IDE/Text Editor and a source control tool. As a Java programmer you're better suited to talk about programming so I won't lecture you on a subject you already know.
In the end, Web Design is going to take time and many of the tools that we choose to use that we claim will "save time" save very little in reality. If you're not a design guru then it will take you a substantial amount of time to create a great-looking website. It's a fact of life. Call me old-fashioned (a funny word coming from a 21 year old) but I still think that the quickest way is to sketch a design out on a piece of paper (a image program if really necessary) and to just get out there and make the damn thing! Again, I'll have to take this hunting for the silver bullet mentality as a programmers trait, one that really won't help that much when designing, because designing a web page is vastly different to writing a Java program.
In short, ignore everything you read here, read what REAL designers are doing and just make the damn thing!
There's one piece of advice that saves more time than any other when it comes to rapid development of CSS styled sites and that's KEEP IT SIMPLE
Use an attractive simple layout that doesn't require pixel perfection and that can 'gracefully' degrade in less compliant browsers (IE6). Minimise the amount of CSS and fix the basic bugs mentioned by meouw above. Then get on an concentrate on content and functionality...the real work
In my previous employment I created dozens of templates for websites.
The most useful too I ever discovered is the Firefox Web Developer Toolbar.
It has a wealth of small useful tools. My favorite feature is the ability to edit the CSS and see the results in real-time. This saves on the whole edit - upload - refresh cycle. Watch out for ie CSS inconsistencies though!
Off the top of my head, these are the most important gotchas.
double margin bug [google: double margin bug]
incorrect (but more intuitive) box model [google: box model]
incorrect (but more intuitive) float clearing [google: clearfix]
FireBug is another really usefull Firefox plugin for more in depth analysis.
I've always found Open Source Web Design to be a good resource when looking to get started trying to design something.
- http://patterntap.com/
- http://www.dotemplate.com/ (interesting concept of customizing template)
- http://www.templatemonster.com/
- http://www.freelayouts.com/websites/html-templates
- http://www.templateyes.com/
No idea what the site is going to be, but have you thought of using a pre-build CMS like Drupal, Joomla etc etc.? You can then tweak templates etc, rather than worrying about making it from scratch.
This question is pretty old, but since we're in 2012, it's only proper that I answer my own question with the exact thing I was looking for, back in 2009.
Twitter Bootstrap
Have you looked into any CSS frameworks? If you are competent enough with CSS something like a framework could help speed things up.
Don't forget firebug :) if you're worried about tweaking the design it's really great. With the inspect feature allowing you to real-time edit the CSS of your page.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1843
I second Jens Roland's list of CSS frameworks.
But I would also suggest you have a look at websites such as Smashing Magazine. You might find this article of interest, amongst a lot of others. They tend to do a lot of nice and long mash-ups for the web developers that will at least give you inspiration if not a direct solution.
A colleague of mine has been trying to convince me all week that Dreamweaver, 5 years after I was last forced to use it at gunpoint, is actually now worthwhile for knocking up a design quickly and painlessly, and is also now competent at producing the HTML for that design.
I refuse to invest the 10 minutes it would take to find out based on my previous experiences of it, but you might like to give the demo a quick run around the block :)
I'd recommend finding a CMS package, since you're using Django, look into django-cms. It has TinyMCE and Markdown Support so updating your pages should be easy. Also django-cms integrates well with the Django admin interface.
A piece of paper to sketch your design
A text editor (preferably set up to save directly to a development server local or otherwise) to write up the initial HTML/CSS
FireBug/IEDeveloperToolbar to inspect each element that looks wrong and edit its CSS directly in the browser until it looks fine, followed by commits with the text editor
If you're doing any JavaScript development, use an advanced editor that highlights errors and warnings as you type. This kind of functionality has until recently been the province of static language editors only, but the free NetBeans 6 achieves this amazing feat. Traditionally, you first discovered JavaScript typos and simple bugs when first loading the parent page into a browser. The speed-up you get from being able to short-cut these iterations is profound.
NetBeans 6 also highlights CSS errors and is a more than capable editor for most all languages a web developer is likely to use these days.
You can also use www.zbugs.com - it will help you speed up a process of compressing and gzipping your CSS and Javascript files