Fraang, I cannot be sure, because the background may have changed in the process of converting, so I am just asking:
Are you using a black background on the grapics (like fish), before you set it to transparent?
I am experiencing a little problem here in continuing with that "cheap online help".
Icons like fish and meat (barb) show a black background in programs that do not support png transp (alpha) like my Wordprocessor.
Now, this may not be important since the .lua files that Venatrix makes, and we need in the end, don't show this behavior.
I just realized it this way. My stuff uses white, which has the advantage of being invisible on white paper
Just wondering, if we should not make even such details uniformly. Any pros or cons?
Chuck, what's your opinion?

With the GIMP, I work with transparent backgrounds right at the start so I can't answer your question off the top of my head. I would guess an underlying white, but that is just a guess. Sorry, but I'll have to get back to you on this one.

Astuur: I figured to best way to answer your question re: how transparencies in pngs from GIMP are handled is to give you a sample to test.

Try this in your word processor

I created it new in GIMP with an transparent background (one of the options: background color, foreground color, white, or transparency).

The top third I painted black and the bottom third white leaving the middle transparent.

Try it and let me know the results.

It is as I thought: Black is black, white is white, and transparent is white, too.
I realized that WordPerfect (my Word processor) always converts .png to .wpg (Wordperfect graphic format) - and that won't support alpha transparancy.
I've tried to circumvent that behavior but the bestI can manage is to include the png as OLE object.
The display is still white instead of transparent then.
So I guess it's no good, no matter how.
I've PMmed Sirver about the format question.

Thanks for your feedback.

I use the 'Edge' feature when rendering the icons in Blender. The edges are then outlined in black. I guess the 'background color' is then also black which leads to the results you have described.

I will look into this to 'fix' this in GIMP.

The problem is really on my side, Fraang -
but if you can easily change this, it sure would help!
thank you.

Here in the forum, the icons lokks really nice - but I tested a pre-build of build 17 and I think, that they are too bad visible in the game.

There is the question: should it be "realistic" or "good for gameplay"? I think, the last is in Widelands more important and a visble blue fish is better as a bad visible realistic fish.

Its the same with the ores, you dont see so fast as before (in build 16), as your mining economy works. Widelands has really many items, and i dont like, that more and more beome "dark obejcts", so you need a magnifying glass or something like that.

It might sound hard and I like the new icons here in the forum too, but ingame, its impractical -sorry, thats my opinion.

Sadchant wrote: Here in the forum, the icons lokks really nice - but I tested a pre-build of build 17 and I think, that they are too bad visible in the game. There is the question: should it be "realistic" or "good for gameplay"? I think, the last is in Widelands more important and a visble blue fish is better as a bad visible realistic fish.

You make a very valid argument, Sadchant. Realism is fine and has a place in artistic endeavors, but the purpose of the ware graphics should be first and foremost to give the player the ability to easily identify what they are on the map. THAT is more important to a player who is eager to get a needed ware to its desired destination. To be effective, a player wants to be able to quickly and easily identify each and every ware on the map whether it looks exactly like the real thing or not.

Sometimes we artists lose sight of this fact in our endeavors to make the "eye-candy" nicer. You are absolutely right when you say the priority should be enhancing the gameplay. Eye-candy may be sweet and nice to look at, but if it hurts a player's effectiveness, more practical fare should be pursued. People play Widelands for the challenge of creating a successful economy, not for the challenge of identifying the gray blobs on the map.

Thank you for reminding us (well, me anyway ) of where our priorities as graphicians should really be, improving gameplay FIRST and making the view prettier SECOND.

Cheers!

Does that mean you want the old icons back?