New Vista/3DMP like looking skin (1 Viewer)

[Ralph]

I'm still for the second screen. Looks nice!
I like this dark blue. Maybe a bit of this dark blue in the upper part of the screen could be take place even in the lower part of the screen?

I like the welcome screen, I don't think there is a need to replace it.
A MP logo could be done in addition, of course.
But instead of talking about this fine tuning things, I would love to see you keep on going, to see more of this skin.

Regards
Ralph

 

[NLS]

so freshmint, you are ok with PSD (me too, now that I think of it... maybe I should do something eh?)

how good are you in actually making the skin work?
(the same question went to Vanessa a few months back)

 

[freshmint]

at the moment i'm concentrating on doing the grafics,
i'll try to figure out the xml part later.

(my Psd can be downloaded here:
http://rapidshare.de/files/31171577/new_skin_bright2.psd.html
)

 

[infinite.loop]

at the moment i'm concentrating on doing the grafics,
i'll try to figure out the xml part later.

(my Psd can be downloaded here:
http://rapidshare.de/files/31171577/new_skin_bright2.psd.html
)

would be easier to share with zip'ing and attching to forum post directly

 

[NorthernJohn]

...
but i'll remove the welcome, and replace it with just a "mediaportal" text or maybe a media portal logo.

There was a discussion quite recently about the importance of the mediaportal logo with regards to product recognition.

https://forum.team-mediaportal.com/showthread.php?t=9673

With that in mind, wouldn't it be a good idea for skins to contain the logo somewhere, no matter how subtle? Esp if one wants the skin to become default.

 

[fetzbraun]

Let's continue the work on 3DMP

Wy can't we finish the work on 3DMP? Do we need the initiator to continue work on a opensource project?

Best Regards,

Christian

 

[infinite.loop]

Wy can't we finish the work on 3DMP? Do we need the initiator to continue work on a opensource project?

https://forum.team-mediaportal.com/showthread.php?t=10332

because the artist is copyright holder of all gfx (images).
and if the author permits the use of his gfx, noone can release them to the public without violation of the copyright.

 

[burdell1]

I love the first one too.....can't wait for the beta!

 

[bigj]

https://forum.team-mediaportal.com/showthread.php?t=10332

because the artist is copyright holder of all gfx (images).
and if the author permits the use of his gfx, noone can release them to the public without violation of the copyright.

I don't see why the GPL - or some equivalent - can't apply to artwork.
Then derivatives would be just fine.

If there isn't an existing suitable liscence then all artwork in the core should be put in the public domain - or at least made unencumbered for use with current and future versions of MediaPortal.

 

[~ok|]

I don't see why the GPL - or some equivalent - can't apply to artwork.

this is a great idea. In fact I find that it is more than a necessity.
If only skin authors could clearly state the license they use from the early start of their project then maybe there will be less orphan skins (and usually great ones, sadly). people will be able to easily take over a new development process from what's been left by the original creator, within the limits of the license chosen. IMHO, copyright protection granted to individuals is not really appropriate in a GPL project.

To go even further, it is maybe the MP team responsibility to enforce the use of a specific license for skins that are/will be part of the MP bundle (maybe it is already made this way?). A one that does not interfere with the GPL used for the MP core. Plugin developers need to put their code into the GPL, why not the skin artists.
Of course, independant skin developers will still have the final word about the license they want to use ,but, at least, it will make things clear from the early start.

Perhaps something like the OSI Artistic License. Maybe not.

Any lawyer advice here?