On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Robin Fowler <robin.fow...@outlook.com>wrote:
> Due to the opinions I've seen so far I've decided to make a new design: > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/27846912/OO_4_final_design_Robin-Fowler.jpg?version=1&modificationDate=1364582663662 > > Overall it has a flat look and yet still some depth to make it stand out > from the microsoft brand. I think it is also important to think about the > form itself, the silhouette should ideally be recognisable on its own, > which is one reason using the apache feather is a good idea. > > I like this one too in addition to the other "flat" designs. My tendency would be give "APACHE" a bit more emphasis maybe with a more blocky/heavier font. Size-wize it seems about right. I know this is not a good explanation. And, I like the feather but think maybe it needs to be a bit smaller from top to bottom in relation to the orb, and perhaps a slightly different color unless that causes clashes/concerns. Really I like this one quite a bit! And I have enjoyed your other work also. Really I amazed at the amount of creativity and quality in these designs! Some other thoughts: > > One of the problems i see with a lot of the proposals is the lack of > thought given to typography. It seems the text is just slapped on as an > afterthought, in many cases the 'apache' is floating somewhere randomly > above 'openoffice'. Think of what you want the logo to imply, it should not > look disorganised. Another thing worth pointing out is the kerning (spacing > between letters) which could be optimised on some of the proposals. > > This is an extremely important aspect of the whole logo design and should > be considered when choosing a design. After all, many logos consist of > nothing other than text. > > I also want to say i really like Vasilis Xenofontos design. It might be > too different from the current, but it's a very good logo imo. > > Robin > > On 28 Mar 2013, at 12:38, Samer Mansour <samer...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Robin brought up a good point that we should pick a logo before we start > > work on the application artifacts or the website as it will influence > those. > > > > I initially was excited that we could have a new logo, an opportunity to > > change the face of OpenOffice. > > > > But after I saw Chris R. proposal I convinced myself refreshing rather > than > > re-branding was the better path. > > > > So I would like to start a conversation that will hopefully give us > strong > > arguments to picking a logo. > > > > I already mentioned I liked the flat logo. > > Here are reasons: > > > > - It is very similar to the current logo and that logo has a history of > > being recognized. > > - Flat is 'in', easily recognizable on and works well on social > platforms, > > screens and print media. (Think corporate and product logos of today, > > recently Pepsi, Domino's, Microsoft, Skype, Twitter) > > - This logo can be severed from the word mark to make it fit in a square > > and still carry the branding image. Icons, site, etc. > > - A middle ground for community members who like the current logo. Who > want > > to achieve a new image of 4.0 without tossing history. > > > > Looking back, we had lots of ideas but it only took me a moment when i > saw > > Chris r.'s proposal to realize the logo didn't need to be complex and > > completely new. That simple was actually beautiful. > > > > Thoughts? Agree? Disagree (and your solution is)? > > > > Samer Mansour > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > > -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MzK "Achieving happiness requires the right combination of Zen and Zin."
