New Buttons

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Original image is fine but button is ferrets!

 

[climat]

The Archaeology Lab I disagree since the original looks more like the original "virtual man" and less like a clip art.

The Antelope Hunter I would rather keep as a painting as opposed to a photograph.

I try to make all the animal images a painting/illustration and not a photograph. As for the Hopscotch that is WAY too modern for the prehistoric era.

The Barley Farm maybe, but I think they look equally as good.

I like my beaver one better. Its hard to tell the new one. If its a muskrat or a beaver. Plus its a photograph too.

The Amber Gatherer looks too much like the Amber Mine. The one i have is more raw looking amber. Non-polished version. I made sure it and the jade gatherer have the unpolished forms for the gatherers so you could tell them apart.

His Bearberry Farm is distorted and squished.

Current Barley and Bearberry ones look like just some grass. Amber gatherer looks like a pile of rocks. Beaver one.. It looks like a ball of wool.
I like new ones because it is hard to tell what the buildings are with current buttons at the first sight and new ones are, even if they are also not that good, better on that point.

 

[Faustmouse]

The Antique Shop I think look equally good to each other. Note I grabbed the current one from one of those "ville" games.

Also which Anno ones do you dislike?

Basically all of them you wanted me to use. They are just a weird looking building on a field or a white background. Can't recall them from the top of my head, but there were a few. I will make a list sometime in the future.
Please Hydro, don't be too "stuborn". I can understand you get defensive about your icons, I feel the same when someone wants me to delete a building I just made. When a lot of people say that they can't see what's on an icon, then it has to be "fixed". Some icons look great in big but in small they are just blurred.

 

[Thunderbrd]

I don't see any ferrets. Here is the original image.

It's not about looking at the original image. You can clearly see here that it looks like corn. In the game... not so much.

The Antique Shop I think look equally good to each other. Note I grabbed the current one from one of those "ville" games.

You're kidding right? You didn't even DO the art on this one and you're unable to see a quality difference on that one? It's about a 5000% improvement. Most of these are not THIS much better but this one is incontestable. I mean, you complained on new ones about the flat white background so on the old one you LIKE it? And there's nothing about the old building that suggests anything more than 'building' to say 'antique shop'. Maybe if it's blown up to 500% its size there's something there that might... I dunno.

The Archaeology Lab I disagree since the original looks more like the original "virtual man" and less like a clip art.

I do see what you're saying here and made that point myself - it was just to reduce fuzz and make it a little easier on the eyes was the reason for that one but I figured THIS one would be received this way and I can't blame you for your take on this one.

The Antelope Hunter I would rather keep as a painting as opposed to a photograph.

At this resolution you can't tell the difference between a picture and a painting - I'd have guessed the original was a picture as well. What you CAN tell is that the background on the first doesn't have enough contrast to the foreground. I think I do like the framing on it a bit better on the first tbh but the lack of contrast lends it to behind a little harder on the eyes to sort out.

I try to make all the animal images a painting/illustration and not a photograph.

Again, you really cannot tell what is a pic and what is a painting at this resolution size. All are pixelized to the point its impossible to tell the difference. Pictures also generally have better contrasts making them more perceptible at this res.

As for the Hopscotch that is WAY too modern for the prehistoric era.

Ok, with this one I would agree so if the colors were starched out to white with the contrasting black background it would be more era-neutral right?

The Barley Farm maybe, but I think they look equally as good.

The originals look like colored textures, not objects. I don't dislike them as that but I can understand wanting to give the plants some definitions as plants and not a swatch of vaguely texturized color.

I like my beaver one better. Its hard to tell the new one. If its a muskrat or a beaver. Plus its a photograph too.

So's the original. I saw the original on the same search that found this new one. She wanted to replace it because the one we have looks like a T-Rex head at this size and resolution. I didn't see it at first though I certainly didn't see a beaver. But today, as I looked at this thread I saw it... it's VERY pronounced. To the point it looks MORE like a T-Rex head than it does a beaver with it's reflection.

The Amber Gatherer looks too much like the Amber Mine. The one i have is more raw looking amber. Non-polished version. I made sure it and the jade gatherer have the unpolished forms for the gatherers so you could tell them apart.

Problem with unpolished gemstones is that they look like indistinct rocks. This makes them unable to be told apart from each other and many other buttons frankly. You'll notice the gatherer has multiple distinct amber stones (even though they are polished) whereas the Mine has one very large amber stone.

His Bearberry Farm is distorted and squished.

Hmm... looking at the original I can see that it's been resized on the X measurement. That could be fixed of course since apparently you're saying the berries are classically spherical.

I hope you realize you're calling my wife 'Him' btw.

I understand that. Some icons I had no idea what they were until I saw a larger image of them for some I did not make, so I understand you. However most of these I just don't like.

Mentioning the why on these would be fair. An overall 'don't like them all' is not. Equally true that it should be stated by the artist why she felt they needed adjusting in the first place I think though .

Again please don't put them on the SVN.

No plan to but they should be up to discussion individually at least.

Again the shiny amber buttons is too close to looking like the Amber Mine.

The Amber mine is a single stone. No confusion between the two. Bland rocks are easily confused with many other buttons.

And the corn has all the types of corns rather than a single yellow corn. Much more representative of how original corn looked.

We don't have enough resolution for that button to work to be anything more than too busy as it is is all.

I agree with this but the new image doesn't look any better.

You're saying a silhouette of a person looking at a painting doesn't say an Art Shopper or Appreciator any more than a simple statue?

Its a handprint cave painting.

Of course it is. But the new one you can tell it is in the game as opposed to a reddish cloud appearance the old one takes on. Even here you can so clearly see that the twist in the original artist (the caveman)'s middle finger makes the image a little confusing as opposed to the very clearly outlined hand (with far more contrast) in the second.

It needed to look different from the Llama. With the Llama white its hard to tell in the picture provided if that's a llama or alpaca. At least with one brown and one white its easier to tell.

Who can tell the difference between a Llama and an Alpaca in the first place? Better not to look like a floating ... erm... in a pool at medium resolution.

its not just era appropriate its the fact these upgrade into similar buildings too. Such as the Soap Maker to the Soap Factory. The Soap Factory has soap that looks like modern soap, but the soap maker makes soap that looks more like tofu since that's what ancient soap looked like. Not the fancy bars we have now.

Ok, this point is quite valid BUT it just says neither pic is acceptable because the soap maker as we have it looks like roof shingles or a wall (I see a wall, a brick wall. NOTHING that suggests soap.)

I did not make that one so I don't know. But the one he gave looks too creepy to replace the parrot.

Ok, too creepy... I'll lean with you on that one. The fact that it's clockwork is very obvious and there's even gears in the background but you're right he's a little creepy.


When we address each one individually we get further in the discussion I think.

She wasn't going to present these to the forum for fear of harsh feedback so I might be a little too defensive for her but you're handing her her greatest fear right now. She didn't want to step on anyone's toes... it was at my insistence that since these are clearly improvements (you'll have to see some of them in the game to see this as clearly as I have) that she'd be denying the community a helpful upgrade. But she was almost not going to for fear of being barked at by a defensive originator of the original buttons. At this point she's just upset she caused such conflict. It was her idea to start learning the process of putting buttons together but it was inspired by the fuzzy blobs she was getting frustrated with trying to make out. I told her that if she feels this way, surely others do as well and that it would only be fair that if she goes forward to fix them for herself that she shares those fixes for the benefits of others.

And Hydro... putting a button together is NOT laborious art. Nothing to be taking personally considering we aren't actually the artist, just the framer (and of course zero consideration was given as to WHO may have put the buttons together - they were judged as replacement worthy or not on their own merit.) This is NOT to be perceived as a personal attack considering your role in putting them together was about 2% that of the original artist who's not even getting any credit for it in the game anyhow. I don't think you can say they're your 'babies' in the same way as you can defend the buildings' stats or existence. And it's not a criticism of your work in any way.


So to more specifics:
How can anyone say the new proposed Diamond not look better than the original? This is an example of many of the gems we have that lack sheen and thus attractiveness.

And you've GOT to see the difference in the Almshouse. On screen here the original looks like a building (only a little fuzzy) but in the game it looks like a really bad red splat. The new one is so clear you'd think Firaxis did it as one of their originals.

The Abalone is pretty simply a matter of the background not having enough contrast.

Maybe we should put these together as a modular file since now I know a file outside the FPK can override one inside the FPK, just so y'all can download it and see the differences in the game since here it's VERY deceiving how necessary the original needs adjustment. At this size they all look fine. In the game... most of them do not.

In many cases its the METHOD of putting the art together into the final button that makes the difference here. We researched some blur problems on the forum and found some other ways to go about it that do not utilize DXTbmp at all and the difference in clarity is profound. It's fine enough to use DXTbmp for promo and other iconic buttons (the slight blurring actually helps a little as it comes across as additional anti-aliasing there) but on the image buttons not so much. This is what cannot be seen here in this post's comparison. Perhaps, on some of these, if the original art were composed with this method it would be entirely sufficient.


@DH: I think we've sorted out some things that can be done with your button and it's not sized correctly which would be the first problem you were having there.

 

[Dancing Hoskuld]

Maybe we should put these together as a modular file since now I know a file outside the FPK can override one inside the FPK, just so y'all can download it and see the differences in the game since here it's VERY deceiving how necessary the original needs adjustment. At this size they all look fine. In the game... most of them do not.

Good idea. I had to do that with the terrains because the default ones make me ill.

@DH: I think we've sorted out some things that can be done with your button and it's not sized correctly which would be the first problem you were having there.

I thought I had them the correct size. :sigh: Anyway anything Whisperr can do would be appreciated as it should stop people asking why they can't build x with the wrong type of sea critter ie subdued or tales of.

 

[Faustmouse]

Hydro and TB: I can understand you both get defensive. These Buttons are Hydro's babies and TB's wife wants to replace some of them.
Hydro, give her at least a chance. She was doing an amazing job here and her icons look indeed more then Firaxis original buttons - IMO a goal we should achieve. Right now, our buttons are a mix of selfmade internet pictures, paintings, cartoons and other gameslike AoE 3 or Anno. I for myself would prefer a unified style.
Hydro, you replaced some icons I made without even asking me and this seemed totally ok for you. So I think if we ask nicely to replace some of yours that are really not very good looking in game, this should be at least open for discussion instead of a harsh "no!!!"

It is hard if not impossible to discuss every building/unit/tech etc icon we have. But i think a lot of them don't need a replacement anyways.
Maybe we started wrong. Some of the buildings that Whisper made replacements for aren't bad looking (I don't know how they look in the game and I'm so used to recognize different blobs that I can tell which building is which anyways). We should start with those that are really bad looking and unrecognizable.

Whisper: Don't take Hydro's feedback personally. You sure understand him. You will always step on someones toes, but that's just normal...
I really liked your work and I'd really like to see more Firaxis style icons in the game. So if you want to, feel free to come up with new icons for my buildings and resources. I consider buttons as the least interesting thing when making buildings, so I know mine are sometimes just pretty bad I'm sure TB can show you how to identify my buildings/resources from looking at my Module (or the resources/faustmouse modul).


I also think that TB made a good suggesting with having a module for new graphics. You have to compare them ingame to really see if they are a big improvement or not. I'd like to test them

 

[Hydromancerx]

@TB

I do not have the time or motivation t defend all these but I do want to address some things I found in your post.

1. I did not realize it was your wife. Sorry for calling her a "him". However like everyone on here, him or her, wife or not I do not feel I should give her special treatment. No offense.

2. When I first started my post yesterday responding I was making a list of what to keep, however the list grew and grew until what I wanted to keep was most everything. I still only think one or two of them are better than the originals and only a hand full are equal to. The rest I prefer much more. I hate to be stuborn on this but I really want to hold my ground on this.

3. Now we can't replace the corn if it looks like ferrets. ;P

putting a button together is NOT laborious art.

4. For me is was. I am a perfectionist when it comes to these and it always takes me longer to pick out the art then it takes me to code the buildings. Making the button is easy though. You got to know I have a whole set of standards I try to follow, rnaging from existing buttons such as do they look similar to another button, is it era, do they look in the same style as others like it, etc. Also I try to avoid colors like pink because it just makes it hard to find the pink buttons when there is a missing button.

I know standing up for these is not making you happy, but having to share an FPK with you did not make me too happy either.

Maybe we should put these together as a modular file since now I know a file outside the FPK can override one inside the FPK, just so y'all can download it and see the differences in the game since here it's VERY deceiving how necessary the original needs adjustment. At this size they all look fine. In the game... most of them do not.

If you want it as a modular file that is by default turned off then that's fine. I can live with that. However I would much rather it be in the modmod section.

 

[Thunderbrd]

@Hydro: first off I just want to say I probably sound angry... I'm not - I don't blame you for your feelings on the matter. I just hope you can see the purposes behind these before just looking at the images and saying, "Well, since I made that I like it better."

The rest I prefer much more. I hate to be stuborn on this but I really want to hold my ground on this.

I realize its easy to be blinded to what an image may come across as if you've seen the image in a larger state. Once you have you can't see how it looks to someone who hasn't. In many cases, this is the issue - the image doesn't come across at that size (and particularly on Medium graphics where the resolution fuzzes a bit (more if DXTbmp was used)) as what it looks like at a larger size at all and instead looks more like something else entirely or is otherwise completely unrecognizable. We have far too many buttons that are unrecognizable for what they depict when you look at them in the game and this effect of the designer having seen the larger image making it more possible for them to see it at the smaller size and resolution and incapable of seeing what it looks like to someone who hasn't seen that larger clearer image is what I consider the culprit. At larger size, 95% of the buttons you've got in there are perfect selections. It's at the smaller size and res that they fall apart and that's tough for any designer to accept - I know. I blame CivIV limitations to some extent. It would be nice if we had a LOT more resolution limit to work with! It unavoidably pixelates even at this microscopic button size we have! This means that a LOT of images that would otherwise work may very well not due to the degradation.

4. For me is was. I am a perfectionist when it comes to these and it always takes me longer to pick out the art then it takes me to code the buildings. Making the button is easy though. You got to know I have a whole set of standards I try to follow, rnaging from existing buttons such as do they look similar to another button, is it era, do they look in the same style as others like it, etc. Also I try to avoid colors like pink because it just makes it hard to find the pink buttons when there is a missing button.

I'm not trying to say you don't put a lot of thought and time into these efforts... just saying such a search effort doesn't compare to what the original artist must've done and isn't anywhere near as impressive as many of the other modding skills you possess. The amount of time we take on something isn't half as valuable or judgement-worthy as the amount of skill it takes to do so.

And I'd like to challenge the 'don't use pictures' concept. Pics are MUCH more crisp and clear in most cases. This has to be commonly more valuable considering this size and pixelation will make any picture look like an artwork and any artwork look like it could be a picture if its clear enough. Clarity is of higher value. And for that matter I consider pictures to be less proprietary than art... if I'd done the original art and it was included in a game somewhere I'd be a little irked if I'd not gotten a mention - whereas if I took a picture and found it included in a game somewhere I'd just be happy they found it useful. Maybe some photographers feel it takes as much effort but having taken pictures and drawn pictures I can say from my perspective there's no comparison in the effort.

I know standing up for these is not making you happy, but having to share an FPK with you did not make me too happy either.

As I said I didn't like it either but I respected the reason it was asked of us. And it's not about happy or not. In many cases here I can't understand your reasoning for not seeing the quality difference except that perhaps you can't see them in-game yet. What's perhaps a little disturbing is not that you're standing up for your work but that you're patently stating that there's no improvements in here when I think its quite clear there are. So in a sense it's just coming across as "this is my territory - butt out!" rather than an honest evaluation of the differences with cause for preferences given. Only a few were given the benefit of rationale for opinion.

I'm not asking you to defend your priorities but explaining what makes a given pic not live up to those can help for future generation of buttons that do live up to those expectations you put on your own work. It's not just about these but about many more that could be done. I realize you probably have a laundry list of important points made on your selection processes and perhaps if those are shared they can more easily be respected with new proposals. And I find I can often find more agreement with you than disagreement when it's put this way.

I'm pretty sure she's less attached to the product of her work finding inclusion than I'm making it sound. I'm simply trying to say that this has simply been an honest effort to help and done so in some fear that it would offend someone and its disappointing to see that it has when one art to the next is rather subjective as to what is better or worse in most cases.

In all of this what's really being pointed out is that for all the many things you seek in the art you're doing, there's some factors being overlooked on some of them that are making the buttons more difficult for players to interact with. That's not an attack - it's feedback. These factors are:

- Blurry resolutions, particularly at Medium Graphics settings, making the image unrecognizable.
- Pictures that are too busy to lend themselves to visual recognition of the subject matter.
- Pictures that appear to be something other than what's depicted when glanced at.
- Pictures that could more clearly designate the intention of the label.
- Pictures that don't have enough contrast to easily distinguish the shapes depicted from their backgrounds.

In short, if a player can't give clear recognition of the button to the object it's labeling enough to recognize it at a glance after one or two hoverovers when first encountered, then it fails the playtest (unless the player just lacks this ability which I've found some people do). There's nothing meant to be a personal attack in this. I'm sorry that this whole thread must come across as that.

For those buttons that are causing trouble in these areas, I don't believe it's asking a lot to try to find some workable alternatives. And at least it hasn't been the kind of feedback some give where it's "hey these buttons here suck so go fix it!" There's been an honest effort made to propose an alternative so that the original button composers don't have to be burdened with endless requests to perfect their work.

You're working with someone who's willing to listen to feedback so perhaps see what comes of giving some. There's no assumption that the new proposals are perfect of course and I'm sure a willingness to make adjustments or try a new approach based on what is found lacking would be more than welcome.

If you want it as a modular file that is by default turned off then that's fine. I can live with that. However I would much rather it be in the modmod section.

Well I CAN have a modular file and MLF control file be ignored for the SVN and not have a major problem in my settings with that so a modmod would be fine. But if included in this manner, I'd beg you to consider them from a perspective of in-game comparisons. (Particularly on Medium graphics settings.)

 

[Hydromancerx]

I don't have much time so I will do a little bit at a time. If you want me to bend then you have to compromise too.




1. Approved.
2. I think they are equal. So I will give in if you have to have this one. Approved.
3. Approved (I already mentioned I liked this one)
4. I think both suck and we need to find a 3rd option.
5. I like mine a lot better since you can see the flower better. I actually rejected your image when picking out the original. So no to this one.
6. These are basically an image of the same thing so Approved.

So can you agree to these? Where not every one of them gets approved?

I will do more later when I have some time.

 

[Yudishtira]

How's this for Art Patronage?

 

[Thunderbrd]

Sounds very fair.

Just want to ask for a little more of your opinion on a few:
2) I agree that both seem quite nice and I'm on the fence as well. I would like her to comment as to the reason for replacement on this one and hear from others as to what they think. I like the sky better on the first but she says its too busy I think... I may not have seen it ingame. You said, if you have to have this one, so I'm wondering if there are qualities in the first you prefer over the second that you'd like to point out.

4) I really like the second so I'm curious to know what you feel makes the second one suck? Is it an Era consideration? The way the pic is framed? The high contrast sure makes it stand out from other buttons as its own thing.

5) Doesn't the second have better contrast and look more like an Artichoke - recognizable for it's features as you might see it in the store as food - rather than being confusable with a general flower? Isn't the body of the artichoke what makes it more identifiable than it's flower? (I don't think I've ever actually seen a blooming artichoke outside of in pictures come to think of it...) Having a flower does make it not be all monocolor so I think that's cool but we should be focused on it's very distinct body I feel. On this matter though its a minor point either way imo.

I'm totally cool with not all of them being accepted - please try to offer the feedback of a teacher when rejecting is all I'm asking.

And keeping the evaluations to 6 at a time makes a lot of sense and makes it easier to discuss them both for you and everyone else I'm sure.

Thanks for finding some patience on this issue btw.

 

[Thunderbrd]

How's this for Art Patronage?

How is this representing someone appreciating or about to purchase art? (patronage) I mean, its certainly a piece of art. (and a nice one at that - a good pic for something I'm sure but I'm missing the message imo)

 

[Yudishtira]

How is this representing someone appreciating or about to purchase art? (patronage) I mean, its certainly a piece of art. (and a nice one at that - a good pic for something I'm sure but I'm missing the message imo)

Patronage is the commissioning (ie. funding) of someone artistic by someone wealthy. That is exactly what the picture shows.

I agree that on a button you will not be able to tell that patronage is being represented. I don't see why that's important. The quality of the image is more important in my opinion. The mouseover tells you what the button represents, and it's silly to effectively attempt to make the image render the mouseover redundant. Even Chinese or hieroglyphics couldn't represent Art Patronage in a 55-pixel-square box!

If you can find an image that conveys more information, without losing quality (or era-appropriateness), then go for it. But more "informative" images tend to be of lower quality, and images that replaced the mouseover (not that it's possible) would be very poor quality indeed.

 

[Hydromancerx]

7. I seem to remember you image before. I think it was used for the botanical garden. So i think not to be too confusing from a previous button replacement. Otherwise I think they are equal.

8. I think the new picture is too shady. I know you probably say mine is too bobby, but at least the apricots look bright. A compromise would be a bright looking single apricot. IF you can find an image of one.

9. Approved.

10. I still think the original looks better since it resembles the original Di Venci image and less like a clip art. So no.

11. About equal. I think mine has more of a contrast though.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Patronage is the commissioning (ie. funding) of someone artistic by someone wealthy. That is exactly what the picture shows.

I agree that on a button you will not be able to tell that patronage is being represented. I don't see why that's important. The quality of the image is more important in my opinion. The mouseover tells you what the button represents, and it's silly to effectively attempt to make the image render the mouseover redundant. Even Chinese or hieroglyphics couldn't represent Art Patronage in a 55-pixel-square box!

If you can find an image that conveys more information, without losing quality (or era-appropriateness), then go for it. But more "informative" images tend to be of lower quality, and images that replaced the mouseover (not that it's possible) would be very poor quality indeed.

I'd not considered that meaning of patronage. That's why I was asking of course. To Patron - to Fund or support. Ok so that pic might say THAT a bit more.

I know what you're saying here... but a pic says a thousand words right? The more they can communicate the label the better. With the meaning you just stated (which is not at all what I was thinking it meant) it has some bearing.

@H: now that is good feeback. I'd not noticed the darkness on the peach myself.

 

[Yudishtira]

I'd not considered that meaning of patronage. That's why I was asking of course. To Patron - to Fund or support. Ok so that pic might say THAT a bit more.

I know what you're saying here... but a pic says a thousand words right? The more they can communicate the label the better. With the meaning you just stated (which is not at all what I was thinking it meant) it has some bearing.

A pic that says 1000 words is at least A4 size - usually much bigger, and certainly more than 55x55 pixels!

 

[Hydromancerx]

12. The one you give is much too cartoony. So mine I want to keep.

13. Its actually hard to tell yours is a mouse. So I would like to keep mine.

14. With the dark background its hard to see its a chimp at all. So I want to keep mine.

15. While not as much contrast Mine is at least the ancient breed of the angora sheep that I wanted to make sure was shown. There were not many pictures of this breed and thus was the best I could find. Thus I really, REALLY want to stick with this one.

16. I considered your image with picking the Ancent Embalmer but chose against it for mine due to the white back ground and its actually hard to see yours. So I highly advise against using yours.

As you can see this batch was "no, no no". But its just the order it fell in.

 

[Hydromancerx]

17. Both are hard to tell its an anchovies. I recommend we find a 3rd image.

18. I think these are about equal however I think with the light background that mine has more contrast due to yours shine.

19. Again I want to stand by the amber gatherer to look different from the amber mine. I would rather it have opaque amber than shinny amber.

20. I think we need a 3rd image of a brown alpaca that looks less like poop.

21. Approved.

 

[Thunderbrd]

12. The one you give is much too cartoony. So mine I want to keep.

13. Its actually hard to tell yours is a mouse. So I would like to keep mine.

14. With the dark background its hard to see its a chimp at all. So I want to keep mine.

15. While not as much contrast Mine is at least the ancient breed of the angora sheep that I wanted to make sure was shown. There were not many pictures of this breed and thus was the best I could find. Thus I really, REALLY want to stick with this one.

16. I considered your image with picking the Ancent Embalmer but chose against it for mine due to the white back ground and its actually hard to see yours. So I highly advise against using yours.

As you can see this batch was "no, no no". But its just the order it fell in.

This batch is a very good sample of those that are VERY blurry in the game. Is there any way that we could get the original pics from you and maybe rework them so they aren't so blurry? Looking at them here the originals do look nice but they are fuzzed out to unrecognizability ingame.

 

[Faustmouse]

I don't have much time so I will do a little bit at a time. If you want me to bend then you have to compromise too.




2. I think they are equal. So I will give in if you have to have this one. Approved. I actually like Hydro's more since the street on Whisperr's looks to modern witht he white stripes and the short cut grass.
4. I think both suck and we need to find a 3rd option. I like whisperr's.
5. I like mine a lot better since you can see the flower better. I actually rejected your image when picking out the original. So no to this one. ALso Think Hydro's looks better and is more recognizable as an artichoke, but maybe it's different in the game. So a rework of this would be good.

7. I seem to remember you image before. I think it was used for the botanical garden. So i think not to be too confusing from a previous button replacement. Otherwise I think they are equal. I like the red leaved tree a lot more then the pink leaved.

8. I think the new picture is too shady. I know you probably say mine is too bobby, but at least the apricots look bright. A compromise would be a bright looking single apricot. IF you can find an image of one. Yes, what hydro said.

9. Approved.

10. I still think the original looks better since it resembles the original Di Venci image and less like a clip art. So no. I'm with Hydro here. It looks very good (at least here). So if necessary, we could rework it to make it less blurry in game.

11. About equal. I think mine has more of a contrast though.

I think Whisperr's has more contrast. Slighly...

12. The one you give is much too cartoony. So mine I want to keep. Hydro's is so dark and hard to recognize, while I think Whisperr's is too cartoony as well.

13. Its actually hard to tell yours is a mouse. So I would like to keep mine. I can see the mouse easily but I think Hydro's looks better. When it is to blurry in game, I'd think a rework would be best.

14. With the dark background its hard to see its a chimp at all. So I want to keep mine. Shouldn't be to hard to change the background to a lighter blue. BUt beside the dark background i like Whisperr's more.

15. While not as much contrast Mine is at least the ancient breed of the angora sheep that I wanted to make sure was shown. There were not many pictures of this breed and thus was the best I could find. Thus I really, REALLY want to stick with this one.
A good reason. and only the upper park of the sheep looks a bit weird, the rest is ok. But I remember that this one was really bad ingame.


16. I considered your image with picking the Ancent Embalmer but chose against it for mine due to the white back ground and its actually hard to see yours. So I highly advise against using yours. They both are a bit "too full". But I can imagine it's hard to get the whole embalmer on one small pic :/

As you can see this batch was "no, no no". But its just the order it fell in.

19. Again I want to stand by the amber gatherer to look different from the amber mine. I would rather it have opaque amber than shinny amber. Agreed. But Hydro's original picture is a lttle bit too stuffed IMO.

20. I think we need a 3rd image of a brown alpaca that looks less like poop.
I like both


21. Approved.