In my previous post I shared my thoughts on the new Vista guidelines for toolbar icons. Now it’s time for application icons.

In case you did not read the previous blog post, Microsoft have finally published the long-awaited Windows Vista Icon Development Guidelines. Of course, we all knew that Vista introduced a large 256×256 32-bit png image format to the icon file, and it was evident that Vista icons had a more realistic, but less-saturated appearance, but what else can we learn?

Well, firstly, it might seem that Microsoft is placing impossible demands on the poor designer: “…icons should look better than photorealistic” (my emphasis). Don’t panic - what they mean is icons should go beyond the illustrative (some might say “cartoonish”) look of XP - they should be realistic representations of objects. The implication is that a photorealistic icon might not have the clarity of one where all the relevant details have been considered carefully.

Perspective is slightly more relaxed compared to XP - there is still the above-right viewpoint, but it is not as strict as the isometric grid that was defined for XP (and which most of us ignored!). Natural perspective with vanishing points is used and it is permissible to show real-world 2-D objects such as documents, pictures, clocks, and calendars face-on. Shadows are now cast naturally as if the object was in its own environment - the old XP drop-shadows are only used for flat objects.

It is suggested that the 16×16 versions of 3-D icons should be drawn in 2-D, which I definitely approve of.

Gone is the XP palette; we are free to choose whatever colours we like as long as they are not too saturated. 4-bit (16 colour VGA) is part of the icon specification - I thought that might have been dropped by now.

All-in-all, not many surprises. Just as well - I’ve been making Vista app icons for long enough!

Finally, Microsoft has released the guidelines for Vista toolbar and application icons. Most of what they say could have be inferred from looking at the new icons in the Vista operating system, but the article introduces some concepts and suggestions that I approve of. “Hire an experienced icon designer” is one of them. Here’s what else I like.

The Guidelines are here: Windows Vista Icon Development Guidelines

Let’s start with toolbar icons. (I’ll cover application icons in a separate article.) Microsoft have adopted a policy that I have been pushing for for a long time: “toolbar icons have no perspective to optimize for smaller size and visual distinctiveness”. Is this the end for documents and folders at jaunty angles and fuzzy 3-D printers? Later the article says that toolbar icons above 24×24 can have perspective, “if it makes sense for the object“. The way I interpret this (and the approach I have always tried to take) is a 3-D object on a toolbar only needs perspective if it makes it clearer what the object is, or the perspective is relevant to the function. For example, you can make a perfectly clear representation of a monitor using a 2-D view - there’s nothing gained by viewing it at an angle (you don’t view your monitor at an angle anyway).

Compared to the XP design guidelines there is a welcome emphasis on clarity. It is stressed that that 16×16 size is still one of the most used and important sizes. The defining details of smaller sized icons need to be exaggerated.

More wise words from Microsoft: “Round up all existing details and requirements, such as: the complete set of icons needed, the main function and meaning for each, ‘families’ or clusters in the set you want to be apparent, brand requirements, the exact file names, image formats used in your code, sizes requirements, etc. Ensure up front you can make the most of your time with the designer! … Remember the designer may not be familiar with your product, so provide functional information, screen shots and spec sections can be very helpful.”

They also say: “Think ahead… icon creation can be expensive!” Careful, Microsoft - not that expensive.

In addition to the graphical aspect of toolbar design there are new guidelines on toolbar layout and organization. Lots of useful information here, but it’s somewhat at odds with the new ribbon toolbars of Office 2007 of which it makes no mention.

Something puzzles me: Microsoft have introduced the concept of “optical balance”, and of course, this makes sense - a set of icons should sit comfortably together on a toolbar, and no particular icon should dominate or appear swamped. This, however is their example of a toolbar where “optical balance has not yet been achieved”:

I don’t see anything wrong with this, and I can’t think that Microsoft did either - it’s the toolbar from the released version of Windows Photo Gallery. Perhaps I am missing something - anyone?