3 ms·

The Y shape is visibly different to me, even at 18 px. In the new version, the "leg" is longer and the "arms" shorter and at a more obtuse angle to each other.

The Y shape is visibly different to me, even at 18 px. In the new version, the "leg" is longer and the "arms" shorter and at a more obtuse angle to each other. Compare vs. the favicon: https://news.ycombinator.com/favicon.ico https://news.ycombinator.com/favicon.ico Manually tracing the favicon in Inkscape (and correcting what I believe to be an unintentional asymmetry) gives me this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35894797 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35894797 The vote buttons look great. I noticed-but-didn't-notice after seeing this post. EDIT: vs. the favicon, on my screen, the new version is "bolder" as well.

entrepy123 3y ago
Correct. Also, at 1x (which is what matters the most on desktop & mobile for me, I think) the bottom-most extent of the "leg" is not far enough down. There is too much orange under the leg. There should be more white at the bottom. The Y is getting crunched or fuzzed out at 1x. The Y is not prominent enough. The whole point is the Y. It used to not look floating like this. It should be crisp and clear and that trademark shape. "A" for effort and constant improvement and all that, but iteration required, I think. A weird observation: At first, I didn't know how the "the Y is too fuzzy" problem (that I never had) could have been solved with a visibly much fuzzier replacement (shouldn't even say fuzzier, since the original was unfuzzy for me). Then I realized, I think it might have to do with solving the "fuzzy when zoomed" problem, without sufficiently regression testing the "do not degrade the non-zoomed look" checkbox. And, maybe SVG is good for large images, but not great for tiny ones (like this "Y" at 1x). Or something like that. I never zoom HN, so the fix does nothing for me, but I do notice the regression. I hope the feedback can be integrated somehow.
gregsadetsky 3y ago
Thanks for the feedback! Ah and I also see you generated svg output that would be a bit shorter and more accurate. I’ll try to collect all notes and follow up on them. Thanks for this!
- mustacheemperor 3y ago
  I did a quick comparison at 1x and 10x in photoshop, using guides to compare the geometry: https://imgur.com/a/jWjtmtZ https://imgur.com/a/jWjtmtZ The top of the "Y", at least optically, doesn't seem to extend as far in the PNG, and the intersection of the top legs seems to start higher in the SVG - it looks much higher in the 1x, IMO. I'm sure part of this is just the challenge/inherent mismatch of using a vector to "match" a lossy-compressed raster depiction of text. That said I did this for fun and I don't imagine it will ever bother me - the sharpness is nice! Thank you!
  - colanderman 3y ago
    Compare also vs. the favicon, which is much higher resolution, and still visible in the browser on the same screen as the SVG version: https://news.ycombinator.com/favicon.ico https://news.ycombinator.com/favicon.ico
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
rcme 3y ago
Does the new icon need to match the old icon exactly? Was there something special about the arm length and angle?
- whitemary 3y ago
  I think the technical term is pixel f*cking. Personally, I could care less about a venture capital firm's brand identity, but I absolutely sympathize with wanting to make a technical improvement as seamless as possible, and respectful of its less technical content. Furthermore, there is a valuable art in doing so. Even something like the separation of view and model is beautiful in itself.
  - parker_mountain 3y ago
    sorry im not a native english speaker, what does "f*cking" stand for
    - colanderman 3y ago
      "Fucking", which in this context means, "messing about with".
- colanderman 3y ago
  Personally, one of the things I like best about this site is that in the ~15 years I've been here, its UI basically hasn't changed. It's refreshing in a digital world where most companies change their UIs and brand identity for seemingly no reason every few quarters. Keeping the appearance of "Y" identical is comforting.

entrepy123 3y ago

Correct. Also, at 1x (which is what matters the most on desktop & mobile for me, I think) the bottom-most extent of the "leg" is not far enough down. There is too much orange under the leg. There should be more white at the bottom. The Y is getting crunched or fuzzed out at 1x. The Y is not prominent enough. The whole point is the Y. It used to not look floating like this. It should be crisp and clear and that trademark shape. "A" for effort and constant improvement and all that, but iteration required, I think. A weird observation: At first, I didn't know how the "the Y is too fuzzy" problem (that I never had) could have been solved with a visibly much fuzzier replacement (shouldn't even say fuzzier, since the original was unfuzzy for me). Then I realized, I think it might have to do with solving the "fuzzy when zoomed" problem, without sufficiently regression testing the "do not degrade the non-zoomed look" checkbox. And, maybe SVG is good for large images, but not great for tiny ones (like this "Y" at 1x). Or something like that. I never zoom HN, so the fix does nothing for me, but I do notice the regression. I hope the feedback can be integrated somehow.

gregsadetsky 3y ago

Thanks for the feedback! Ah and I also see you generated svg output that would be a bit shorter and more accurate. I’ll try to collect all notes and follow up on them. Thanks for this!

mustacheemperor 3y ago
I did a quick comparison at 1x and 10x in photoshop, using guides to compare the geometry: https://imgur.com/a/jWjtmtZ https://imgur.com/a/jWjtmtZ The top of the "Y", at least optically, doesn't seem to extend as far in the PNG, and the intersection of the top legs seems to start higher in the SVG - it looks much higher in the 1x, IMO. I'm sure part of this is just the challenge/inherent mismatch of using a vector to "match" a lossy-compressed raster depiction of text. That said I did this for fun and I don't imagine it will ever bother me - the sharpness is nice! Thank you!
- colanderman 3y ago
  Compare also vs. the favicon, which is much higher resolution, and still visible in the browser on the same screen as the SVG version: https://news.ycombinator.com/favicon.ico https://news.ycombinator.com/favicon.ico

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

rcme 3y ago

Does the new icon need to match the old icon exactly? Was there something special about the arm length and angle?

whitemary 3y ago
I think the technical term is pixel f*cking. Personally, I could care less about a venture capital firm's brand identity, but I absolutely sympathize with wanting to make a technical improvement as seamless as possible, and respectful of its less technical content. Furthermore, there is a valuable art in doing so. Even something like the separation of view and model is beautiful in itself.
- parker_mountain 3y ago
  sorry im not a native english speaker, what does "f*cking" stand for
  - colanderman 3y ago
    "Fucking", which in this context means, "messing about with".
colanderman 3y ago
Personally, one of the things I like best about this site is that in the ~15 years I've been here, its UI basically hasn't changed. It's refreshing in a digital world where most companies change their UIs and brand identity for seemingly no reason every few quarters. Keeping the appearance of "Y" identical is comforting.