Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Improve favicon #165

Open
kelson42 opened this issue Jan 25, 2023 · 12 comments
Open

Improve favicon #165

kelson42 opened this issue Jan 25, 2023 · 12 comments

Comments

@kelson42
Copy link
Contributor

We have only a minimal favicon but we should have a full favicon support for all possible devices. See https://realfavicongenerator.net/favicon_checker?protocol=https&site=library.kiwix.org%2Fcontent%2Fgutenberg_fr_all%2FA%2FHome.html

@benoit74
Copy link
Collaborator

@eshellman, is it still appropriate to use this logo : https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Project_Gutenberg_logo.svg converted in the various formats needed ?

@kelson42 @rgaudin could you point a scrapper already adding appropriate sizes / companion files (manifest, ...) so we could reuse the code?

@kelson42
Copy link
Contributor Author

openzim/phets has it implemented but this is in Typescript. AFAIK, no Python scraper has implemented this so far.

@eshellman
Copy link
Collaborator

pg-logo-144x144-original
pg-logo

@rgaudin
Copy link
Member

rgaudin commented Jan 26, 2023

@eshellman could you share the source of those images? Or at least higher resolution images. We'd need 512x512 for the large one and 48x48 for the simplified version (according to that website).

Is it only somewhere? Who's the author/license?

Finally, should the light color on the edges be removed (ie. have a rounded square on top of transparent background) ?

@eshellman
Copy link
Collaborator

I'll track that down. I have a transparent edge version of the png too.
pg-logo-144x144-transparent

@kelson42
Copy link
Contributor Author

@eshellman Thx, I guess we have now the data material to move forward!?

@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented May 26, 2023

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be now be reviewed manually. Thank you for your contributions.

@stale stale bot added the stale label May 26, 2023
@benoit74
Copy link
Collaborator

Nope, as mentioned and detailed here gutenbergtools/gutenbergsite#24 (comment) we would benefit from an online file + a file in higher resolution.

@stale stale bot removed the stale label Aug 18, 2023
@benoit74
Copy link
Collaborator

Good online resources to understand files / resolutions needed / recommended / expected:

Should we :

  1. use RealFaviconGenerator API at https://realfavicongenerator.net/api/non_interactive_api everytime the scraper runs in order to generate proper data with explicit settings
  2. generate HTML / files with RealFaviconGenerator once and embed it in the scraper code (meaning we will have to run it again at a regular interval)

I prefer option 2 because it reduces greatly our dependency on an online service which might disappear + allow us to easily switch to another one / tweak the result if needed + it allows more easily to upscale the source image used to generate other ones manually with AI or other tools manually before starting the process

@benoit74
Copy link
Collaborator

I upscaled the image with https://imgupscaler.com/ (randomly chosen, no strong experience on those tools) and it gave very decent result even if some zones are a bit blurry. Resulting image is 516x516 ... sic

gutenberg_favicon_upscaled

@benoit74 benoit74 added this to the 2.2.0 milestone Aug 18, 2023
@mrcook
Copy link

mrcook commented Aug 18, 2023

By the looks of things this is an Albion Hand Press:
image

I'm sure the font would be easy to reproduce. Your favourite search engine would likely produce an un-watermarked image.

@eshellman
Copy link
Collaborator

wow, that's pretty good!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants