Check us out for all your skiining needs. www.skinartistry.com
Skinartistry Wallpaper Contest.

http://www.skinartistry.com

Starting 12:00 pm US EST on May 30th, 2005 (US Memorial Day) Skinartistry will be holding a wallpaper contest for the most original wallpaper.

1. All wallpapers must be original and unreleased to the public
2. Only 2 entries per person.
3. All wallpapers must be in submitted in the following 5 sizes.
800 x 600, 1024x768, 1280x 960, 1280 x 1024, 1600 x 1200. Different colors versions are ok but they must be in the above sizes. Multiple colored entries will count as one submission.
4. The contest ends at 12:00 pm US EST on June 21st, 2005 (First day of summer).
5. Voting will be done by Skinartistry site administrators and moderators.



There will only be one prize for first place. $ 100.00 US.


* Orbs are not original..hint hint.
** Any submission will be counted as one of your entries. Altering , updating, or changing submissions will not be allowed.
***Admin and moderators of SA are not allowed to enter.


Let the Summer begin!


Comments (Page 1)
2 Pages1 2 
on May 29, 2005
thread title says "wallpaper" while in the post, "windowblinds" is mentioned. you may want to ask a mod/admin to edit the post

i take it nobody other than myself uses 1280 X 1024
on May 29, 2005
Thanks Snidely. Windowblinds of the brain over here.

I use 1280 x 1024 also.
on May 29, 2005
ditto
on May 30, 2005
1280x 960


80-90% of the people I know and work with, including myself, use 1280x1024 and I think more than 50% of the more recent wallpepers here at WC are in that size.
on May 30, 2005
Ok, then we will add 1280 x 1024 to the list. More work for you guys.
on May 30, 2005
You guys need to get a real resolution with square pixels.

Posted via WinCustomize Browser/Stardock Central
on May 30, 2005
Tarkus, could you explain that please? How do you calculate/implement what you are referring to?
on May 30, 2005
Werewolf, on a normal 4:3 screen, the resolution is evenly divisible by 640x480 (and 320x240 before it). 800x600, 1024x768, 1280x960 and 1600x1200 all maintain the same aspect ratio, with no adjustments. However, to fit 1280x1024 on that same screen, you have to elongate the pixels.

Or to put it another way, go into any image program and tell it to resize an image while keeping the same aspect ratio. You'll see if you try to resize any of the other common screen sizes, it won't fit into 1280x1024. You have to change the aspect ratio to make it fit.

So unless you have a monitor specifically built for 1280x1024, it's probably elongating the pixels to make it fit. It would be difficult for it to change the actual dimensions of your monitor.

That's why I held out for 1600x1200.


Posted via WinCustomize Browser/Stardock Central
on May 30, 2005
Well..i learn somthing new every day 'round here. Thanks tarkus
on May 31, 2005
Strange...but true!!!!
on May 31, 2005
Strange but true that you learn something new here every day?

Posted via WinCustomize Browser/Stardock Central
on May 31, 2005
It's surprising how many LCD flat panels ARE designed to work with 1280x1024. In which case, using 1600x1200 or 800x600 etc etc yadda blah would be the distorting resolutions. 1280x1024 is pretty close to looking square, and with square'ish monitors 1280x1024 is like the only resolution you will hardly sit fit right. A lot of Mac's I've looked at had some really strange resolutions, but aspect wise, I like 4:3 ok but love 16:9.
on May 31, 2005
horiz0n, I know what you mean. When I was looking at LCDs, all the best affordable ones are 1280x1024. I would have actually went smaller for 1024x768 before I would have bought a 1280x1024 monitor. I hate that resolution.

Fortunately, I was blessed with a sweet deal for a brand new Planar 20" 1600x1200 LCD, and I couldn't be happier.

Okay, maybe I'd be happier with a 16:9 monitor.



Posted via WinCustomize Browser/Stardock Central
on Jun 02, 2005
Any of you nit pickers intend to submit an entry?
on Jun 02, 2005
I think that 800 x 600 and 1280x 960 could be out
2 Pages1 2