> I see where we disagree.
> You suggest a large version of the small logo
> and only the symbol/logo for people to get a
> better idea.

Yes, you could put it that way.

> I suggest two different pictures
> -> One with only the symbol ( 16-32 format)

I suggest that too. Only I think it should be showed in a larger version
too, so it is more sharp and less blurred.

> -> One with the logo and a few more details
> ( 120 format and above).
> When I mean with details, I mean with the
> symbol, the letters and effects

I suggest that too. I call it the custom format.

> > I can understand that you think there should
> > be more details in the larger versions, but
> > that is what the custom / fancy formats are for.
>
> Well,in that case the 120 format ( the one used
> for the [ Banner-Homepage] will look pretty empty
> ( with only the logo in it).

The logo creator can put anything in the custom formats. There's 3 of them,
so one can be simple with a little detail, one can be more interesting,
while the third can be really fancy. It's up to the logo creator.

> > Again, it's to show the simple versions in
> > large formats. You can use shading and
> > reflection too, but that should be in the
> > custom/fancy formats. That's what the
> > custom/fancy formats were made for after all.
>
> To sum up, you suggest only two types of format

>    ( 16-32) and on a larger size (at 120 )


There's 3 of the fancy formats, and "custom format" is a better word
actually, because they don't *have* to be fancy.

Also, you forgot my color format suggestion.

> That still leaves a gap between these two formats.

Why? Anything can be put into the custom formats.

> It might be better to propose a more
> detailed one at 128 and leave the 180 or (much)
> more for the splash-screen.

There's 3 of the custom formats. The logo creator could choose to use one
for a "more detailed one" and another for a "splash-screen one".

> > You are suggesting that we should have free
> > formats *only*
>
> No, I just meant that the logo-designer ( or
> whatever you call him her) should decide
> whether to use effects or not.

That's what I call free format (or custom format).

> I agree that there should be a kind of standards
> ( in sizes) just to compare the logos, but in no
> way we should tell whether to use effects,
> gradients, plain colors or not.

When the logo is going to be used for real, there will be some cases where a
black and white version is needed, or a simple color version is needed.
Therefore we should require such formats in the contest too. However, we
should *also* have custom formats as I suggested.

Remember that everything I write here is just my opinion!

I hope you will reply again and tell what you think.

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