Rune wrote:
> 
> "Ken" wrote:
> > The last round had all entries restricted
> > to a square aspect ration of 1:1. I see no
> > reason for this. There is a POV-Ray logo
> > that the POV-Team is currently using at
> > povray.org that does not conform to this
> > aspect ratio and I personally think a 1:1
> > ratio artistically limiting.
> 
> The logo isn't limited to a square. Only the max width and height of the
> image containing the logo.
> You could see that many of the submitted logos for the "old" competition
> were not square-formed. If the image size shouldn't be limited by a max
> width and height, then we'd just have to find another way to define a limit.
 
> > This logo http://www.povray.org/images/povlogo.gif,
> > which has an aspect ration of about 3.2:1,
> > was created by the POV-Ray legend Truman
> > Brown using POV-Ray and was enhanced using
> > PhotoShop. I think that an aspect ration
> > where the horizontal dimension exceeds the
> > vertical dimension should be allowed.
> 
> There must be some limit. The question is how the limit should be defined.

I see no reason why a limit of up to 4:1 should not be allowed. This would
make a logo that would easily cover the top of a wep page or even across
the top of a piece of paper if it were printed. This is of course a ratio
of 4:1 = width:height and not 4:1 = height:width.
 
> > As can be seen in Truman's logo a high
> > level of craftsmanship has been achieved.
> > While it would be nice if a logo can be
> > reduced to a two tone black and white
> > representation and still be recognizable
> > it should not be a mandatory rule.
> 
> I disagree. If a logo is detailed, it is not always easy recognizable in
> various, possible low resolutions. But a logo with few details is easy
> recognizable in any format. Furthermore a simple logo can be presented in
> various ways, and can be made more detailed and interesting. Different
> people could make different versions/ways of presenting the logo.
> 
> Summarize: A detailed logo is always detailed and inflexible while a simple
> logo can be presented in both simple and detailed ways, and is more
> flexible.

In an electronic computer environment like POV-Ray and the WWW why would
you bother with a low resolution version of a logo ? I personally do not
see the benefit. I mean if we were creating a logo for illustrator
or some other print based program I could see a reason for it but not
in a compuer graphics related industry. Reach for the stars..........


-- 
Ken Tyler - 1400+ POV-Ray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/

Post a reply to this message