Version 1.1 of the definition has been released. Please help updating it, contribute translations, and help us with the design of logos and buttons to identify free cultural works and licenses!
Talk:Logo contest: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(doubts about two logos) |
No edit summary |
||
| (28 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I think, that before we start such a contest we should discuss future logo policy. I do not particularly like idea of having two logos instead of one. This seems to be diluting "brand recognition" without any special gains.[[User:JaroslawLipszyc|JaroslawLipszyc]] 01:17, 3 May 2006 (CEST) | I think, that before we start such a contest we should discuss future logo policy. I do not particularly like idea of having two logos instead of one. This seems to be diluting "brand recognition" without any special gains.[[User:JaroslawLipszyc|JaroslawLipszyc]] 01:17, 3 May 2006 (CEST) | ||
Who like my logos? :) I'm working on others. ;)--[[User:Bob4|Bob4]] 10:37, 21 May 2006 (CEST) | |||
: I like them, esp. [[Image:FC3.png|75px]] -- but I'd prefer them to be more visually distinct from the Debian logo: http://www.us.debian.org/logos/openlogo-nd-50.png --[[User:Erik Möller|Erik Möller]] 11:43, 21 May 2006 (CEST) | |||
:: Ok, I understand. I will modify that image. --[[User:Bob4|Bob4]] 12:18, 21 May 2006 (CEST) | |||
:::Erik, what about this? [[Image:FC10.png|75px]] --[[User:Bob4|Bob4]] 16:48, 21 May 2006 (CEST) | |||
:::: Interesting - nice pastel colors, but will that approach work in grayscale? I might prefer the "petals" to flow into each other, using transparency and perhaps turning off the gray border. I have to admit I don't like the bounding box very much in this version. The black lines on the lower left look like a barcode, making the whole picture look a bit like a package ready to be sold. Perhaps try some radical variations here (circles instead of rectangles etc.)? I think the logo still would need a certain whoomp, something to make it stand out -- perspective perhaps, or color (the fact that you use pastels would let some high saturaton color stand out).--[[User:Erik Möller|Erik Möller]] 00:55, 22 May 2006 (CEST) | |||
:::::A logo must be simple, because you see a little logo: I'll think to a more simple logo. --[[User:Bob4|Bob4]] 01:22, 22 May 2006 (CEST) | |||
You can see well this logo also when it's little. [[Image:Free.png|75px]]--[[User:Bob4|Bob4]] 22:06, 22 May 2006 (CEST) | |||
: Nice, just a tad sharp -- can it be made to look less aggressive?--[[User:Erik Möller|Erik Möller]] 22:54, 22 May 2006 (CEST) | |||
::[[Image:Free2.png|75px]] | |||
::: Hmm, interesting. Evokes toy/circus connotations for me. Would need to see a couple of variations to know if this is the right way to go. I think the colored blades should be a bit smaller, perhaps, and shades of the same color.--[[User:Erik Möller|Erik Möller]] 23:42, 22 May 2006 (CEST) | |||
:::: [[Image:Free3.png|75px]] [[Image:Freex.png|75px]]--[[User:Bob4|Bob4]] 10:31, 23 May 2006 (CEST) | |||
New type. [[Image:glob.png|75px]] --[[User:Bob4|Bob4]] 10:58, 23 May 2006 (CEST) | |||
Excuse me, but what exactly do you mean by "This logo is not original." ? --[[User:Mfalzon|Mfalzon]] 21:43, 26 July 2006 (CEST) | |||
:It was added by an unregistered user. I've asked them at [[User talk:87.3.20.163]] what they meant. [[User:Angela Beesley|Angela Beesley]] 19:45, 26 July 2006 (CEST) | |||
::I hate to seem assuming bad faith, but this smells like FUD on the part of 87.3.20.163. --[[User:Lemi4|Lemi4]] 15:54, 15 September 2006 (CEST) | |||
Any comments on variations in other languages? - perhaps avoid text in the logos/emblems, or allow alternative text within them? - e.g. in Chinese: 自由, Spanish, Italian, Arabic, French, Finnish, Swedish, German, kiSwahili, Zulu, Amaric, ... ? | |||
Latest revision as of 07:00, 22 January 2007
I think, that before we start such a contest we should discuss future logo policy. I do not particularly like idea of having two logos instead of one. This seems to be diluting "brand recognition" without any special gains.JaroslawLipszyc 01:17, 3 May 2006 (CEST)
Who like my logos? :) I'm working on others. ;)--Bob4 10:37, 21 May 2006 (CEST)
- I like them, esp.
-- but I'd prefer them to be more visually distinct from the Debian logo: 
--Erik Möller 11:43, 21 May 2006 (CEST)
- Ok, I understand. I will modify that image. --Bob4 12:18, 21 May 2006 (CEST)
- Erik, what about this?
--Bob4 16:48, 21 May 2006 (CEST)
- Erik, what about this?
- Interesting - nice pastel colors, but will that approach work in grayscale? I might prefer the "petals" to flow into each other, using transparency and perhaps turning off the gray border. I have to admit I don't like the bounding box very much in this version. The black lines on the lower left look like a barcode, making the whole picture look a bit like a package ready to be sold. Perhaps try some radical variations here (circles instead of rectangles etc.)? I think the logo still would need a certain whoomp, something to make it stand out -- perspective perhaps, or color (the fact that you use pastels would let some high saturaton color stand out).--Erik Möller 00:55, 22 May 2006 (CEST)
- A logo must be simple, because you see a little logo: I'll think to a more simple logo. --Bob4 01:22, 22 May 2006 (CEST)
- Interesting - nice pastel colors, but will that approach work in grayscale? I might prefer the "petals" to flow into each other, using transparency and perhaps turning off the gray border. I have to admit I don't like the bounding box very much in this version. The black lines on the lower left look like a barcode, making the whole picture look a bit like a package ready to be sold. Perhaps try some radical variations here (circles instead of rectangles etc.)? I think the logo still would need a certain whoomp, something to make it stand out -- perspective perhaps, or color (the fact that you use pastels would let some high saturaton color stand out).--Erik Möller 00:55, 22 May 2006 (CEST)
You can see well this logo also when it's little. 
--Bob4 22:06, 22 May 2006 (CEST)
- Nice, just a tad sharp -- can it be made to look less aggressive?--Erik Möller 22:54, 22 May 2006 (CEST)
- Hmm, interesting. Evokes toy/circus connotations for me. Would need to see a couple of variations to know if this is the right way to go. I think the colored blades should be a bit smaller, perhaps, and shades of the same color.--Erik Möller 23:42, 22 May 2006 (CEST)
--Bob4 10:31, 23 May 2006 (CEST)
New type. 
--Bob4 10:58, 23 May 2006 (CEST)
Excuse me, but what exactly do you mean by "This logo is not original." ? --Mfalzon 21:43, 26 July 2006 (CEST)
- It was added by an unregistered user. I've asked them at User talk:87.3.20.163 what they meant. Angela Beesley 19:45, 26 July 2006 (CEST)
- I hate to seem assuming bad faith, but this smells like FUD on the part of 87.3.20.163. --Lemi4 15:54, 15 September 2006 (CEST)
Any comments on variations in other languages? - perhaps avoid text in the logos/emblems, or allow alternative text within them? - e.g. in Chinese: 自由, Spanish, Italian, Arabic, French, Finnish, Swedish, German, kiSwahili, Zulu, Amaric, ... ?