"TonyB" wrote:
> > A 32x32 pixel black and white version.
>
> Sounds fine.

Fine!

> I suppose this is so that the logo can
> later become the icon as well, right?

Partly, but also just to show how the logo looks in general when presented
in a small black and white resolution.

> I would like to suggest that if this
> is the case, that the icon be permitted
> to be different from the larger
> resolution versions of the actual logo.
> The icon can be just a small part of
> the larger concept, and the real logo
> can include a specific font for the
> "POV-Ray" text, for example.

I'm not very fond of this personally.
I think the small version should show the whole logo.
However, additional details could be added to the larger custom versions.

So what I want is to have the small version being the "real" logo while the
larger versions may have extra (not so important) details. What do you think
of this?

> > A 14400 pixel black and white version.
>
> How did you decide on that number?

120*120 is a nice size to begin with I think. The reason I chose that exact
number is that there are many different combinations of width and height
that when multiplied will give that number.

> Anyway, it sounds fine to me. This would
> allow the author to show the complete logo,
> with all of its features.

That's what I thought. I think both the little and the big bw version should
have all the details (they should be identical), but of course the details
may only be visible in the big format.

> > 3 custom versions. For these 3 versions
> > the size limit is 14400 pixels as in
> > the previous version, but any amount of
> > colors may be used. These versions are
> > supposed to show how interesting the
> > logo can be presented, and how flexible
> > it is. It is encouraged that the 3
> > versions are made as different as
> > possible, to show flexibility.
>
> Oh, OK. So what you're saying is that the
> official logo must be black and white, and
> that there will be no official colors for
> it? I guess that's OK by me, but maybe we
> could choose the best of the three
> presentations for deciding on the best
> official colors?

My intention of the 3 custom formats were not just to show how the logo
could be colored. People could also use them to present the logo in 2D, 3D,
or really fancy versions, and so on, to show how flexible it is.

But maybe we should add an optional format for logos that has "official"
colors. See my reply to Chris Huff.

Greetings,

Rune

---
Updated April 25: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk
Containing 3D images, stereograms, tutorials,
The POV Desktop Theme, 350+ raytracing jokes,
miscellaneous other things, and a lot of fun!

Post a reply to this message