Request :frystare: emoji
-
Continuing the discussion from Request:
emoji:Related request: Frystare emoji. Looks like someone would have to Photoshop one though.
this one
?
EDIT: oh, emoji in the topic title
-
Too much pixelation.
-
-
Add
class="emoji"to the<img src="..." >to see how it'll turn up on here:
Neither look particularly pretty...
-
Should probably try converting to vector before downsizing. Seems like it's hard to get clarity on the eyes. The second one looks a little better than the first. Try removing a little of that excess whitespace at the top of the image @RaceProUK
-
I'd request a "that's the joke" emoji, but I'm afraid it would look even worse:
Hmm, sort of recognisable.
-
The real solution is that emojis shouldn't be confined to 20x20. How else could you use giant emote packs like TEST and CONDI do on their jabbers
-
There has to be a limit of sorts; after all, this is a bit big to be an emoji:
Compare to:
See? Much better
-
I think that one looks best like this
-
-
-
-
Except it loaded giant in the first place anyway :discourse:
I think 50x<line width> is reasonable. Let's see with
Edited because sometimes you'd want to use :masterstroke: which is near line height but very wide.
-
-
-
SVG or nothing!
-
-
I'd edit this to say "I agree with whatever Morbs just said" but I can't upload images at work.
-
just for you
-
Back on topic (I know, I know):
How's this:
-
How about a close-up version?
-
How about just the eyes/one eye?
-
ITT: Software developers try their hand at graphic design. The results are what you'd expect.
-
:emojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemojiemoji:
-
Scaled down in browser:
Scaled down image:
-
I have a couple icons you'd love.
-
Define "love." Because I think my definition might be a bit different.
-
...can we replace the entire emoji set with red-circle-dude?
-
Nice try, but I'm not falling for that again
-
My attempts by manually painting in the pixels:
The "blurriness" of scaling algorithms just makes things look like shit at very small sizes so you have to remove it.
Bonus:
-
-
-
If we do, can we get a real frown for goddamned's sake!?
I'm so sick of this bullshit:
-
The "blurriness" of scaling algorithms just makes things look like shit at very small sizes so you have to remove it.
Or you work with a vector based set and scale it before importing.
-
vector based
But how would you properly embed it in Word then to send it to your website designer?
Filed under: Personal traumas
-
I can never figure out whether that's a sad face or a guy with a 70s cop show moustache…
-
I'm so sick of this bullshit:
If you squint your eyes and assume it's a moustache, it kinda makes sense.
Filed under: cannot unsee
-
moustache
No that's this guy:
And 
-
now i can only see the moustache.
thanks ¬¬
-
And
-
moustache
A mustache on a mouse?
moustache
It's spreading! Kill the mutant mice!
-
A mustache on a mouse?
http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0/1/8/8/7/6/0/9/Maus-9418790347.jpegI like GIS
-
i blame blind copypasting.
-
-
but...
me spiks inglish real good
-
-
If we do, can we get a real frown for goddamned's sake!?
You know you have 4 different emoji families to pick from, if Emoji One is not cutting it there is Twitter/Google/Apple all available in site settings.
-
You know you have 4 different emoji families to pick from, if Emoji One is not cutting it there is Twitter/Google/Apple all available in site settings.
And why shouldn't we have fun making our own?
-
I went to meta.discourse to complain about emoji but then saw that the emoji there are (slightly) better.
Why do we use these? @PJH pls
-
You know you have 4 different emoji families to pick from, if Emoji One is not cutting it there is Twitter/Google/Apple all available in site settings.
I hate to break this to you, Your Excellency, but I don't have access to see site settings.
Why do you even ship a icon set that doesn't have a frowny face? Is this a concerted effort to make people hate your shitty product, or are you guys actually so incompetent you don't know what "frown" looks like? Has Discourse ever made a decision that can unilaterally be called "good"?
