Ged wrote:
I think we all knew kjk was going to rudely disapprove, most other people seem to like it though.
I could find it poor and amateurish in a nicer way, if you like. Would that change anything?
It's certainly a nice change from lake.bmp, even if it is a blatant copy of Vista.
It's not a blatant copy of Vista. It is, at best, a Vista wannabe, but I just don't see the similarity. You mean the "digital reproduction of works of art" Vista backgrounds? the "professional-quality nature and landscapes photos" backgrounds? or the "abstract designs with more than one color and without the product logo awkwardly crammed somewhere" backgrounds? I just don't see it
Maybe someone should tell the Vista graphics team they're 'photoshop filter amateurs' ;)
I'll get you some taste for your next birthday
