Just testing Rhino8, considering upgrading from 7. One strange thing that I was not able to fix is that actuall toolbar button images appear as using thicker, bluerier lines.
I think I have all the button sizing set the same in both and actual size is the same, just the images apear thicker and lower rez; tried looking everywhere how to adjust that but was not able to find an answer.
Here is the screenshot of same toolbars in Rhino7 (left) and Rhiono 8 (right).
I am using 3840x2160 resolution, scaled in windoes at 125%.
Toolbars size set to 24 in Rhino8 and to Large in Rhino7; actual size of the button this way apears about the same.
1 Like
Similar thing happened to a colleague of mine back when he upgraded from V4 to V5, or maybe it was V5 to V6. All of the images for his custom pallets were messed up, and he gave up and stopped using Rhino completely, due to the frustration. 
I moved forward by relying less on custom buttons, and pallets, but instead just using the default stuff.
Even the new container thing was hard to wrap my head around, but I think I got the hang of it.
I mostly use command line inputs and dropdown menus with occasional button pallet clicks, and I’m all good.
The custom button icons is just too unstable between new versions. You basically have to start over every time Rhino upgrades
This is the culmination of the extent of my custom setup as of late:
You’ll see one custom button I made the other day that solved a problem I’ve ignored forever, but finally made a solution for cause of an issue I stumbled upon in a thread here somewhere. 
And I didn’t even bother making an image for the button yet 
, I might wait till R9 lol.
My philosophy behind this setup, is basically there isn’t anything I can find or access from the pallets seen.
Anything more custom than that will just lead to too many dependencies of custom stuff that will potentially get messed up when R9 comes out and R10 etc. 
Honestly I’m not even sure how I have that “main” pallet showing without the checkbox on the container:
I was going to try saving my current setup, but I’m still confused by the new GUI. I’ll just recreate it later if necessary
To try and remain on the subject of the original post question…
@miha1 - on the right side, are these the “native” vector-based V8 icons and not toolbars imported from V7?
There were some discussions during the WIP/Beta about the new icons being fuzzy under certain combinations of screen resolution and display scaling. Some work was done, but I’m not sure all the cases can be covered, because in the end, the vector-based icons still need to be translated into screen pixels. Some combinations may be fuzzier than others.
Have you tried changing the V8 button size a bit and seeing if it gets better? A long time ago I found that changing the size and then changing it back helped, but that may no longer be the case.
In my case the V8 icons do look “bolder” than my V7 ones but I do not see them as fuzzy. This is a 4K laptop with 225% display scaling though.
1 Like
@miha1 the issue with blurry icons @125% was fixed quite a while ago. Pls run _SystemInfo in Rhino and post back the results.
1 Like
Hi, yes, those are the native V8 icons; you are probably right; they are maybe just bolder; not necessary fuzzier. Is there a way to get the thinner V7 look trough some settings or this is just the change that one has to get used to?
Here is the SystemInfo report:
Here is another image showing V7 on left right next to V8 on the right.
Thanks a lot for help with this!
1 Like
Are we just wanting to have control over the bitmap composition accents etc.? Or are we trying to figure out how to make V7 look like V8 or vice versa?
Clearly we’re seeing the same (similar) toolbars demonstrated side by side, so it’s not clear? or is it clear that the sufficient tool setup has been achieved?
V8 will of course have new tools V7 doesn’t, so maybe it’s more about modifying all the bitmaps fast or something.
Not a big deal, was just was wondering if there might be a setting/adjustment that I do not know about that would make V8 toolbar buttons look like V7 (thinner, sharper lines).
If not, no a problem, will need to get used to the thicker, fuzzier look of V8 toolbars…
well maybe lets compare the actual bitmaps
V7:
V8:
mystery solved? hopefully it’s not “off subject”
basically v8’s bitmaps are way better lol
V8 icons are not bitmaps, they are now vector based (svg).
What you see in the V8 editor is the “ideal”, but those vector images will get interpolated into screen pixels in the end. The result is likely to be different for everyone, depending on the icon size chosen in Rhino, the computer’s screen resolution and display scaling. I assume Mac/PC will also look different because Mac deals with display stuff completely differently than Windows does.
The only way to compare is to do a screencap of each at real size.
1 Like
I was wondering how the lines are so sharp and straight
dang it I was still way off subject then
ok I get it now. them new V8 map things look good though 
125% is a bit of an unfortunate scale. This is what it looks like on my end @150% (24 pixel icons)
This is not perfect either, since this ends up in 36 pixel icons. Ideally you find a setting that ends up in 16, 32, 48, 64 24 or 48 logical pixels, but at 125% this is not possible.
this is 32@150% (48 logical pixels)
and 16@150% (24 logical)
I must add that the above images look fuzzier pasted here than what I actually see, they seem to be scaled up (< scaled them to 75% seems to fix it)
1 Like
So to be clear, you are basically taking the icon size defined in Rhino and multiplying it by the (Windows) display scaling and trying to hit an even multiple of 16? Why 16 actually?
1 Like
I think I did not have this correct in memory. Ideal size is 48 pixels. Most icons have things aligned on multiples of 2 pixels. Control points for example are all 2 units wide and start at multiples of 2 units. This means they should look crisp at 48 and at 24 pixels.
I edited the above text.
1 Like
OK, still trying to figure out the mathematical formula for arriving at that number progression. My brain’s too small.
16
16+(42)=24
16+(44)=32
16+(48)=48
16+(412)=64
1 Like
@Helvetosaur looks like something goes wrong with formatting
anyhow, I mentioned the 16, 32, 48, 64 sequence was a mistake
This images clearly shows that icons in Rhino 8 are 48 units, and that it will also align well to 24 units
1 Like
Yes, I have been editing a lot of the original SVG’s lately and when I import them in Rhino they fit correctly in a square 48 x 48 units with the upper left corner at 0. At that scale the lines are about 2 units wide… actually 1.987. I guess this is because SVG’s are measured in points or something like PDF’s?
So 24 is half of 48, therefore the line width would be a nice even 1px, but 32? 1.5px. Then there’s display scaling to be added… Again, my brain is too small for this.
I don’t really care actually, the icons look okay to me at 24 on both my installs with 150% and 225% display scaling. On my laptop I much prefer the “bolder” V8 look.
1 Like
Thanks, understand logic; will try changing to 150% scaling and use 24 size.
Menwhile, adjusting the size to 29 @ 125% scaling does also improve the look, although the actual size is a bit big for what I am used to on 32" 4K monitor.
This is 29@125%:
Thsi is 24@150%
And this is 26@125%; finally best compromise for me…
1 Like
This only works if the svg source is aligned to the grid exactly.
The left line of the rectangle is slightly off, and that can be seen in the rendering.
Not very visible in THIS case, but very well in other cases:
@marika_almgren is at that:
1 Like
Yes, it is not perfectly aligned to the grid, but even if it was, there is the fact that the line isn’t exactly 2 units thick, but slightly less… So it won’t line up everywhere in any case.
For stuff with straight XY oriented lines, I guess this could matter, but as most of the icons are based on slanted, curved lines etc. I don’t think that aligning to the grid is going to play much of a role.
And, I think some of the icons might be the original bitmaps vectorized “automatically” by some algorithm and there might be some inaccuracy coming from there… The ones that contain type for example have had the original pixels from the bitmaps translated directly over…
1 Like
It does.
This one is curved, and it looks good:
I made it unprecise:
I think precise is better, and it makes less work.
AFAIK the original bitmaps come from original vectors:
https://wiki.mcneel.com/de/rhino/rhinoicons
Not so long ago you could download the sources.
The were all precise.
1 Like