On 10/13/07, Travis Willard <travis@archlinux.org> wrote:

On Sat, 13 Oct 2007 00:06:48 -0400 Travis Willard <travis@archlinux.org> wrote:

...

Hey all!

A few threads have started up in the last little while on the forums with "new" logo concepts for Arch - having read them, the most recent[1] made me start thinking that maybe we should put some thought into updating the logo and making it look a bit more professional. I personally would like to see a bit of an update there, something a bit snappier than our current logo[2] which, to me, is looking a bit dated and unprofessional.

Holy crap, I must be tired... I repeated "a bit" 4 times in one paragraph and sound like a passive-aggressive monotonous drone. Blargh.

-- Travis

_______________________________________________ arch-dev-public mailing list arch-dev-public@archlinux.org http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-dev-public

I think the current logo needs an update for sure, so +1 for me. The first logo in the thread is nice (the one with the sharp A made by thayer), but somehow doesn't sit right with me because its an A and not an 'arch' as iphitus mentioned in the thread.

2007/10/13, Roman Kyrylych <roman.kyrylych@gmail.com>:

2007/10/13, Travis Willard <travis@archlinux.org>:

...

Hey all!

A few threads have started up in the last little while on the forums with "new" logo concepts for Arch - having read them, the most recent[1] made me start thinking that maybe we should put some thought into updating the logo and making it look a bit more professional. I personally would like to see a bit of an update there, something a bit snappier than our current logo[2] which, to me, is looking a bit dated and unprofessional.

Suggestions have been made to allow the community to participate, in both the creation of logos for the purpose of being the "new official front-page Arch logo" and also for voting which of the submissions should be used. I like the idea of a community-designed logo, and the activity in the thread linked below would indicate that the community is also pretty enthused at the thought, but we could always just do a Dev-vote to decide which of the submissions we'd prefer if we didn't want to make it a community vote.

In any case, I think this is worth investing time in, and I'm prepared to spearhead any initiative on this front. What I'm looking for now is your opinions - do you agree or disagree that maybe it's time to give the logo a sprucing-up? Any comments from the dev team? What's your opinion, Aaron, o benevolant overlord who is currently away on a great trip of sorts but will shortly return?

Looking forward to your responses. :)

[1] http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=38051 [2] http://bbs.archlinux.org/img/header.png

There were some other proposals as well. http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=28444 http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=264087#p264087 http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=288223#p288223 http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=288239#p288239

I like thayer.w's new logo, but I still think we should not change our Arch shape logo to new one. You can find my thoughts about logo change in the thread above.

Nevertheless I don't like Tango-style variant of our logo much. My favourite is this: http://www.elfenbeinturm.cc/downloads/archlogo/archlinux-wp-original_logo_12... (taken from here: http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=28457)

Oh, and this looks like a nice improvement to our Tango-style logo: http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=288163#p288163 -- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)

Monday 15 October 2007, Aaron Griffin wrote: | This is a great idea. I think refreshing our logo can do a lot. | | What would you all think about having a big old competition for | this? Community wide, get some submissions in, open a vote, etc? sure - D -- .·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´ ° ° ° ° ° ° ><((((º> ° ° ° ° ° <º)))>< <º)))><

On Sun, Oct 14, 2007 at 07:43:40PM -0700, eliott wrote:

I am all for a competition, but I don't know about community vote.

How about community submissions, and voted on by the Arch devs, and TUs?

I don't want to be represented by a piece of talking poop or anything.. though..i might vote for that.

I mean...hey... talking poop.

Did this post of mine even make sense? *head scratching*

I'd like to hear what the community thought, but not necessarily go with what they choose. Jason

2007/10/15, Travis Willard <travis@archlinux.org>:

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 19:43:40 -0700 eliott <eliott@cactuswax.net> wrote:

...

I am all for a competition, but I don't know about community vote.

How about community submissions, and voted on by the Arch devs, and TUs?

+1 - I think something like our logo should probably be decided on by the devs (and possibly TUs) - however the community, based on the afore-mentioned threads, seems pretty geared up to contribute their logo ideas.

Perhaps we should decide on some guidelines for submissions?

Something like:

1) Size: 128x128 (larger?)

Should be OK. Additionally it should look and fit well on CD cover designs (sample designs are welcome).

2) Should scale down to 16x16 (8x8? What's a good favicon size?)

Standard favicon size is 16x16 AFAIK, but logo should be readable even on 80x15 buttons that are very popular now.

3) Should be representable in 2 colours. 4) Should be an alternative representation of our current logo, or inspired from our current logo (ie. maintain the recognizability of the current logo)?

IMO it should not differ much from our logo. Why - because the shape of our logo is already well-know in Linux community. Something very different will need *much* longger time to get recognized as our logo by majority of people who knew old logo.

5) Anything else?

-- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)

2007/10/15, Damir Perisa <damir.perisa@solnet.ch>:

| 3) Should be representable in 2 colours.

if we want to be professional, lets be. we should define our own colour palette and stick to it. the logo should be available in one bright coloured version and one dark one (that is i think you mean with "2 colours")

I think Travis meant it should look well in black&white or another two-colours variant - for obvious reasons. -- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)

On 10/15/07, Damir Perisa <damir.perisa@solnet.ch> wrote:

Monday 15 October 2007, Travis Willard wrote: | 1) Size: 128x128 (larger?) | 2) Should scale down to 16x16 (8x8? What's a good favicon size?)

i would rather define: it should be available in a vector-based format - scalable (base for any other format no matter how big or small) .... in addition it should be still recognisable at 16 x 16 px (8x8 is too small for anything nowadays... on my 155dpi screen i see it actually as dot :) )

| 3) Should be representable in 2 colours.

if we want to be professional, lets be. we should define our own colour palette and stick to it. the logo should be available in one bright coloured version and one dark one (that is i think you mean with "2 colours")

| 4) Should be an alternative representation of our current logo, or | inspired from our current logo (ie. maintain the recognizability | of the current logo)?

if we think over the whole concept, then no, it should be free. either we make it open to anything, or we are just looking for a derivate of the one we have.

lucky us, we are not a big company that has to change all the letter-headings, the signs and all the printed material ;) ... i know of banks, that spent multiple milions of CHF to change their logo worldwide ;)

let the competition begin!

I like all these ideas. Let us say that each submission needs 3 things: 1) A 128x128 logo (or vector) 2) A favicon 3) A CD cover Does that sound good?

On 10/15/07, Damir Perisa <damir.perisa@solnet.ch> wrote:

Monday 15 October 2007, Aaron Griffin wrote: | I like all these ideas. Let us say that each submission needs 3 | things: 1) A 128x128 logo (or vector) | 2) A favicon | 3) A CD cover | | Does that sound good?

4) provide list of maximal 16 used colours with RGB values (this is then the colour scheme) - gradients do not count but the colours defining the gradient (from colour A to colour B over colour C) do count.

this would ensure professionallity... and make our publications (website, newsletters, docs, wiki, ...) more corporate-identity constant ... if thats what we want to have ;)

Great idea. Dan's bootsplash idea is good too, BUT, we should't require it. Optional submissions should probably include gnome, kde, ooo spash screens and the like.

Monday 15 October 2007, Varun Acharya wrote: | I think were getting a little ahead of ourselves here... I suggest | we just stick to the 'svg/128x128' as the entry requirement for | the contest. Devs/TU's could decide a winner from these entries | and then the winner/community can go ahead and make other things | like | favicon,cdcovers,splash screens etc. We shouldn't unwillingly turn | off people who are creative but have less time on their hands by | making the contest requirements difficult. i agree! the competntion should include the following: - logo (vector or 128x128) - colours nothing more for the moment. everything else follows later. then we can take the winners logo and colours and announce other competitions for all the other artwork and customisations. the logo as well as arch-identitiy line is the first step. of course, every artist may provide this additional material purely for illustratory purposes, i.e. to illustrate how his/her logo suggestion may look in the context of everything else. - D -- .·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´ ° ° ° ° ° ° ><((((º> ° ° ° ° ° <º)))>< <º)))><

Monday 15 October 2007, Simo Leone wrote: | Quick comment. We have lots of graphic artsy type people in the | community. Like the guy that started the new logo thread on the | bbs, he appears to possibly work in the field and knows what he's | doing. | | It's probably best to let the contest just be whatever, even bad | artists/non-pros may have some great ideas. But in the end we | should let someone who knows what they're doing polish it up and | stuff. i have slight experience in public relations and corporate identity things... but not as a professional. the problem is that with this, you actually degrade the original author and just take his/her idea to the pro to polish it up. hmm... who is then the author of the final product? - D -- .·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´ ° ° ° ° ° ° ><((((º> ° ° ° ° ° <º)))>< <º)))><

Tuesday 16 October 2007, Dan McGee wrote: | On 10/15/07, Damir Perisa <damir.perisa@solnet.ch> wrote: | > Monday 15 October 2007, Simo Leone wrote: | > | Quick comment. We have lots of graphic artsy type people in | > | the community. Like the guy that started the new logo thread | > | on the bbs, he appears to possibly work in the field and | > | knows what he's doing. | > | | > | It's probably best to let the contest just be whatever, even | > | bad artists/non-pros may have some great ideas. But in the | > | end we should let someone who knows what they're doing polish | > | it up and stuff. | > | > i have slight experience in public relations and corporate | > identity things... but not as a professional. | > | > the problem is that with this, you actually degrade the original | > author and just take his/her idea to the pro to polish it up. | > hmm... who is then the author of the final product? | | If we are an open source software distro, then surely we can have | a strings-free logo as well. Its not that the original design is | bad and that the original author can't help do the rest of the | renditions, but surely we should honor submissions from anyone | that looks to improve the winning logo into something that we can | use across the board. | | -Dan i know ... but tell this author that his work is not good enough and that somebody else has to change it for us to be. - D -- .·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´ ° ° ° ° ° ° ><((((º> ° ° ° ° ° <º)))>< <º)))><

Tuesday 16 October 2007, Jason Chu wrote: | On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 10:48:25AM +0200, Damir Perisa wrote: | > Tuesday 16 October 2007, Dan McGee wrote: | > | On 10/15/07, Damir Perisa <damir.perisa@solnet.ch> wrote: | > | > Monday 15 October 2007, Simo Leone wrote: | > | > | Quick comment. We have lots of graphic artsy type people | > | > | in the community. Like the guy that started the new logo | > | > | thread on the bbs, he appears to possibly work in the | > | > | field and knows what he's doing. | > | > | | > | > | It's probably best to let the contest just be whatever, | > | > | even bad artists/non-pros may have some great ideas. But | > | > | in the end we should let someone who knows what they're | > | > | doing polish it up and stuff. | > | > | > | > i have slight experience in public relations and corporate | > | > identity things... but not as a professional. | > | > | > | > the problem is that with this, you actually degrade the | > | > original author and just take his/her idea to the pro to | > | > polish it up. hmm... who is then the author of the final | > | > product? | > | | > | If we are an open source software distro, then surely we can | > | have a strings-free logo as well. Its not that the original | > | design is bad and that the original author can't help do the | > | rest of the renditions, but surely we should honor | > | submissions from anyone that looks to improve the winning | > | logo into something that we can use across the board. | > | | > | -Dan | > | > i know ... but tell this author that his work is not good enough | > and that somebody else has to change it for us to be. | | I'm not worried about this. | | -1 ah ok fine by me then - D -- .·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´ ° ° ° ° ° ° ><((((º> ° ° ° ° ° <º)))>< <º)))><