Threw this together in blender to help things get moving here. Just some rough shapes. Looking forward to seeing what @sam08 can come up with for integrating the logo.

@mciahdenn ... Looks good! Any advice for recreating on blender? Not a tool I've used, but would like to start. Any good, basic guides for something like this?

@mciahdenn ... Looks good! Any advice for recreating on blender? Not a tool I've used, but would like to start. Any good, basic guides for something like this?

This is the general method I used https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtnJ4v0SZ44

Thanks for your input, @mciahdenn!
I've modelled the lens using a more realistic Fresnel profile [the spacing between the rings isn't even in a real lens] and tried different combinations of lenses/backgrounds/light sources.
This is what I've come up with; I'm still nowhere near satisfied with the results, but I guess it's the right moment to share it with you and see if this is going the right direction.
I'm very sorry about the render quality, I didn't have neither enough time nor computing power to get anything better :/
[wondering if a noise overlay could be there in the final version, though...]

Here's a package of all the render passes for each version, in case someone wants to tinker with layers.

sam08 I think your problem right now is to try to make it physical to accurate. There is a gap between the this accuracy and what we imagine to see. So make the lenses glass might not be the best idea (especially it will raise the rendering time)

I actually really like the abstractness of @mciahdenn 's render... @sam08 your renders are impressively realistic but i wonder if they are too realistic? can you attach a blend - i wonder if playing with the angle could help?

@duffy oops, I haven't noticed the second attachment didn't post; perhaps there's a size limit?
Anyway, here's the .blend. [there's a hidden hemisphere meant to add a large logo reflection, switch it on or off in the object browser]
I will try a less abstract approach tomorrow.

@sam08 but you are aware that we avoid the logo in the wallpaper itself to make it easier for derivatives to keep the background

@sam08 Love your lens model! You put a nice amount of detail into that. I agree with @duffy that we should lean more towards the abstract. The fresnel lens is a piece of inspiration to get things started but does not necessarily have to be a determinable part of the final image. The main goal is an aesthetically interesting image but keeping it simple enough to work at a wide array of aspect ratios and resolutions. For example with Gertrude B. Elion on the last wallpaper we started playing with hexagonal patterns because of the molecular structure of the medicines she developed but we avoided just outright modeling the molecules.

@sam08 but you are aware that we avoid the logo in the wallpaper itself to make it easier for derivatives to keep the background

I'm not a huge fan including any parts of the logo but was under the impression it can work if done in a subtle enough way eg, the 28 wallpaper.

Some more experiments

@mciahdenn i still really like that first one in the first comment. I think with the lighting the last one in this batch is a bit more dynamic / less flat.

@mciahdenn can you post your blender source, particularly for the first one? we need something to pkg in 2 weeks, im thinking thats in a good state for packaging as-is if we need something.

A few more-abstract versions by me:

TBH, I sorta like the first one; it wasn't supposed to come out like that, the lens rings are still somewhat visible but very subtle: Perhaps, it could be a little less blurred...
Nr. 10 looks good to me as well.

[5 and 10 have been liglthly processed in Gimp]

1

2

3

4

4b

5a

5b

5c

5d

5e

6

7

8

9

10a

10b

10c

11

@sam08 I like where 5a and 5b are going but they feel like they need more color. Is there a way to get more color in?

Hey @duffy, what do you think about these?

1

2
]

3

@sam08 the second of the latest batch is getting really close. Can you render high-res for packaging?

so... blender crashed while exporting and i couldn't recover the rendering, i'm trying to render it again but I'm not sure it won't crash again.
Is there anybody who could help out rendering this?

I'm uploading here the gimp composition I made with the low-res rendering as a reference.

I finally did it!
Here's the best candidate, imo (after a bit of processing in gimp, that is).

Normalish
[]
(/design/issue/raw/files/96f73f189709ed39730dd813d120f2cb90d968d6e7899245980743178c7e9137-f30_beta_normalish.png)

Standard

Tv-wide

Wide

I don't usually talk into design, as it is not my domain, but here I must say I don't like it very much and other people who've seen this expressed similar feelings.

The recent series of Fedora default backgrounds is awesome and and this is a significant drawback. I'm not good at constructive criticism about design, because this is mostly about feelings, yet I feel that this looks unpolished, image-noisy, anharmonic and generally distributing.

I've been reading blog post about the series from both @duffy and @gnokii (IIRC) and was following it, always impressed by both the ideas and the design. You've set the bar very high. Can we please try to keep it there?

The very first mockup looks so much better than the latest one.

I don't usually talk into design, as it is not my domain, but here I must say I don't like it very much
....
The very first mockup looks so much better than the latest one.

+1

I would like to ask ... in the assignment above, there was a requirement for a subtle Fedora logo being projected by the lens. I cannot see the logo anywhere. It seems to me that the requirement has not been met?
Besides, I do not like rendered images. I much more treasure a children drawing with all its imperfections to a perfectly machine rendered image. I expected these rendered previews to be just a study and I hoped that the wallpaper would be finally created as a piece of human art. I guess I was wrong.

I would like to ask ... in the assignment above, there was a requirement for a subtle Fedora logo being projected by the lens. I cannot see the logo anywhere. It seems to me that the requirement has not been met?

there never been such a requirement nor will there ever be. We have a rule not to show Fedora logos on the background to make it possible for using it seamlessly on derivatives.

Besides, I do not like rendered images. I much more treasure a children drawing with all its imperfections to a perfectly machine rendered image. I expected these rendered previews to be just a study and I hoped that the wallpaper would be finally created as a piece of human art. I guess I was wrong.

besides the logo thing, I find this comment childish and not helpful at all

I read about this requirement in the very first post to this issue. So, maybe I am not only childish but also blind?

An idea for an initial design is to create a fresnel lens in Blender and have it reflect / refract a Fedora logo. It should be very, very subtle that there's a Fedora logo and the logo shouldn't be whole in any way.

As far as the rest of the comment is mentioned, does it mean I cannot express my opinions? If expressing opinions and personal likings is childish, then I am proud of it. Especially when talking about things that cannot be measured or unified, personal likings is what is left to discuss.

So ... your harsh reply suggests that you like the wallpaper. So, now it is 1:1.

As a side note: Fedora 28 background also had a Fedora logo.

I read about this requirement in the very first post to this issue. So, maybe I am not only childish but also blind?
An idea for an initial design is to create a fresnel lens in Blender and have it reflect / refract a Fedora logo. It should be very, very subtle that there's a Fedora logo and the logo shouldn't be whole in any way.
As far as the rest of the comment is mentioned, does it mean I cannot express my opinions? If expressing opinions and personal likings is childish, then I am proud of it. Especially when talking about things that cannot be measured or unified, personal likings is what is left to discuss.
So ... your harsh reply suggests that you like the wallpaper. So, now it is 1:1.

there is a difference between an opinion or compare our work here, you might like it or not with the drawing of children and even say then thats higher in value.

there is a difference between an opinion or compare our work here, you might like it or not with the drawing of children and even say then thats higher in value.

I think that you have misinterpreted what I meant by what I said. I was saying that I prefer work created by humans (i.e. handcrafted) even if it is not perfect, like what a child might produce, to anything generated by a computer. There was nothing personal in it and I am totally aware of those long hours that the production of this wallpaper must have taken in Blender. Yet, you can recognize that it is generated (and not a real photo) and everybody who decides to spend that much time working in Blender can probably develop a similar image, which means that we are losing personality and uniqueness which any non-generated image would have had. I also said that I would be happier with different approach to wallpapers.

This is what I meant by my previous post. Maybe I should have been more careful about the formulation, and I promise that next time I will pay more attention to it.

hey

1) this is the beta wallpaper, refinements are possible so thanks for the feedback

2) f28 and f29 were blender generated so i dont understand how blender / cgi is the issue?

1) thanks, let me know how to make the feedback more constructive
2) I think this was mostly a personal preference presented by @lruzicka, please let's not make it the primary point of the feedback please

If we're going to create another iteration on this design we need it ready for packaging by around April 9.

@duffy sorry I've been absent from this for a bit.
Here's the file for the first image.

Here's another angle from that scene with a little DOF

Here's another angle from that scene with a little DOF

your first ones had more

your first ones had more

First one looks nice in a browser but I really don't like it with it actually set as the wallpaper on my 16:9 monitor. It only works if you have an aspect ratio that sits that round center part of the lens perfectly on the intersection of the thirds. Otherwise the composition just looks off.

@duffy @mciahdenn @gnokii
Any plan for animated background version for this release?

Is this a new proposal for the Fedora 30 wallpaper? I like this one much more.

Here's another angle from that scene with a little DOF

@luya given time constraints with doing another iteration for final i'm thinking probably not :(

@lruzicka yes, we're looking at moving in that direction. :)

OK I played around with your blend @mciahdenn and I think what came out of it is very nice, here is a preview - i did the animations since @luya mentioned it :)

(it goes top left => bottom left => top right => bottom right)

i haven't run optipng on them yet i have to run for the train so no time. i'm running it now so hopefully it'll finish overnight and maybe i can post tomm as a tarball

@lruzicka @churchyard ^^ lemme know what you think about the preview

@duffy Hello, it seems to me that the last preview takes a lot from the very first suggestions but adds more depth-of-field. To be sincere, I liked the last suggestion of @mciahdenn better than this one, because it was more abstract and the fresnel lens could only be felt rather than seen. That would continue the previous Fedora wallpapers where it was difficult to say what it really is. Here, with the last preview, the abstractness has weakened. But, that is a matter of personal likings. Both last previews are very clear, clean and crisp. Although they are generated in Blender, you cannot tell on the first sight.

As far as animations are concerned, have you thought that the fresnel reflector could actually shine (be switched on) in the evening and at night?

@lruzicka please read @mciahdenn comment where the problem with it is and why he skipped it

Here's the animated variants shown above after overnight optipng optimizing at level 7:

@gnokii those comments were about comment #1

@mciahdenn do you have a higher res version of the other angle? I can bundle that up for packaging too if you have the larger version. I won't have access to a machine with a reasonable blender set up until tues otherwise.

@gnokii those comments were about comment #1

of course these are the ones @lruzicka loves to much

@mciahdenn do you have a higher res version of the other angle? I can bundle that up for packaging too if you have the larger version. I won't have access to a machine with a reasonable blender set up until tues otherwise.

I finished doing the sizing and time-of-day for Micah's latest render, here is a preview. I'm running optipng on them now, will have optimized versions ready tomorrow.

Thanks all. I like where this is going and will crawl back under my rock.

(Please mention me directly if anything is actually needed from me.)

Here are the optipng -o7 optimized versions.

@sam08 @mciahdenn what do you think about these latest ones? should we go ahead and package? ^^

@duffy your colour variations look great. Not sure there is much else we
have time to do. Package if there's no more feedback from elsewhere.

On Wed 27 Mar 2019, 18:05 M=C3=A1ir=C3=ADn Duffy, pagure@pagure.io wrote:

duffy added a new comment to an issue you are following:
@sam08 @mciahdenn what do you think about these latest ones? should we go ahead and package? ^^

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/design/issue/625

so far all of the feedback ive gotten is positive, im using it for my laptop and showing it around asking for opinions.

The night version should be sightly darker on the bottom left. Overall, the animated version looks impressive.

From the engineering POV: do we have a blocker or freeze exception bugzilla for this?

@churchyard have the dates changed? i thought the freeze was in a week or so?

The freeze is actually at 2019-04-16 which leaves +-12 days - if the plan is to make the final wallpaper before that, all is good. I've just seen the beta release announcement and it reminded me this ticket as it was illustrated with the current wallpaper. I thought a pre approved blocker would give more room if needed - but I guess a blocker bug can be opened after the freeze if needed.

@churchyard I think the intention now is to go with the latest set of renders, but im going to adjust the night ones per @luya 's feedback. So, definitely nothing that would take 12 days.

@luya these have the darkened nighttime images. can you package these so we make the freeze deadline?

@duffy
Done. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/f30-backgrounds-30.1.0-1.fc30

Superb,
I am happy for these latest wallpapers. Thank you.

thank you very much @luya :)

@lruzicka thanks for your feedback that helped get us here!

Can someone complete this page: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/F30_Artwork ? See the bug report

Just got a feedback https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1697270

Thanks for passing it on - unfortunately he's not terribly descriptive of w=
hat the issue is=2E :-/

~m

On April 8, 2019 11:37:06 AM EDT, Luya Tshimbalanga pagure@pagure=2Eio w=
rote:

luya added a new comment to an issue you are following:
Just got a feedback https://bugzilla=2Eredhat=2Ecom/show_bug=2Ecgi?id=3D1= 697270

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure=2Eio/design/issue/625

--=20
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail=2E Please excuse my brevity=2E

From my understanding, the reporter prefers this version.

Perhaps suggesting to keep it without updating to the new version?

@luya yeh, but here in this ticket we have more reports saying they prefer the new version to that one, so i think without an actual rationale it doesn't make sense to revert based on one report. does that make sense?

I think that we could ship the original version in Fedora Additional
Wallpapers, so that he could easily revert to that on his computer, but I
believe we prefer the latest version.

@duffy Understood.
@lruzicka The original version is still hosted on Design Team github repository in tarball format and the packaged version is currently on COPR repository. Based on the comments, I closed the report and suggested the reporter the method to obtain the original version of the default wallpaper.

i'm going to close this since f30 is out and the wallpaper's done. thanks everyone!