 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
PLC = POV-Ray Logo Competition.
Why should POV-Ray have a logo?
What should the purpose of the logo be?
It is important that we define this. Discussions about which qualities the
logo should have, and about how the logo rules should be, are dependent on
this issue.
Is the logo supposed to attract new users by looking appealing to them, i.e.
to "sell" POV-Ray?
Is it supposed to be a logo for all the current users, who will associate
the POV-Ray logo with the program POV-Ray? (In the same way as the name
"POV-Ray" is associated with the program POV-Ray.)
Is it supposed to obtain some status in the POV-Ray society by being used on
web-pages dedicated to POV-Ray, and on desktop wallpapers, and in desktop
themes etc.?
Anything else?
What should the purpose of the logo be, and if more than one thing, what is
more important?
I hope we can have a good discussion about this. Remember that those who
don't join the discussion cannot at a later stage complain about the
conclusions reached. So if you have any opinion please reply. Reply even if
your opinion has already been stated by somebody else. That way we might be
able to see a general tendency. In the end I will write down the conclusions
reached, and we can proceed to the next discussion.
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Rune wrote:
>
> PLC = POV-Ray Logo Competition.
>
> Why should POV-Ray have a logo?
> What should the purpose of the logo be?
Before commenting on this I will wait until I have posted the official
position of the POV-Team regarding the logo competition. I have drafted
an official response for the POV-Team but am waiting for final approval
before posting it publicly.
--
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Rune wrote:
> Is the logo supposed to attract new users by looking appealing to them, i.e.
> to "sell" POV-Ray?
I don't think so. Nice images "sells" POV-Ray.
> Is it supposed to be a logo for all the current users, who will associate
> the POV-Ray logo with the program POV-Ray? (In the same way as the name
> "POV-Ray" is associated with the program POV-Ray.)
> Is it supposed to obtain some status in the POV-Ray society by being used on
> web-pages dedicated to POV-Ray, and on desktop wallpapers, and in desktop
> themes etc.?
Yes, kind of. See my reply to the other thread (POV-team support).
The graphical chart would allow all of this, ensuring that a maximum
of graphical coherence is obtained everywhere.
Fabien.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Rune <run### [at] iname com> wrote in message
news:390b8108@news.povray.org...
> PLC = POV-Ray Logo Competition.
>
> Why should POV-Ray have a logo?
> What should the purpose of the logo be?
snip...
> Is the logo supposed to attract new users by looking appealing to them,
i.e.
> to "sell" POV-Ray?
no
> Is it supposed to be a logo for all the current users, who will associate
> the POV-Ray logo with the program POV-Ray? (In the same way as the name
> "POV-Ray" is associated with the program POV-Ray.)
It would be nice to have a logo that is easily recognizable so we can know
where it's being used
snip...
> Anything else?
I think that the logo should be used to add recognition of the program among
users kind of like how the name "POV-Ray" is recognized, and to possibly
cause others to recognize it and see how abundantly it is used.
> What should the purpose of the logo be, and if more than one thing, what
is
> more important?
see above
> I hope we can have a good discussion about this. Remember that those who
> don't join the discussion cannot at a later stage complain about the
> conclusions reached. So if you have any opinion please reply. Reply even
if
> your opinion has already been stated by somebody else. That way we might
be
> able to see a general tendency. In the end I will write down the
conclusions
> reached, and we can proceed to the next discussion.
>
> Greetings,
>
> Rune
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The broader purpose at the heart of creating any logo I think is the term
"recognizable". Whatever logo comes out of this whole process, it needs to
be easily recognized, even at a glance, for those who know what it stands
for.
I've been reading some of Ken's posts recently about the simplicity of the
logos in the last competition, and I know I have run into this issue before.
My viewpoint is this: if you take the logo by Dan Farmer for example, and
you strip away all the bevels and textures that are there, then you have
text running in a straight line. It is my opinion that a logo should be more
than this, so that if you take it down to its most simple components of
color and shading, there is still something of merit to be found in it. And
thus shall you find most logos in the greater business world. Take Nike,
Bell Atlantic, Texaco, etc. and you will find that their logos all reduce to
a simple shapes that are uniquely recognizable. I think this was what Rune
was trying to get at with the guidlines in the last competition, and I think
it reflects the basic purpose of any logo and also the question put before
us "Why should POV have a logo?"
--
Dan D.
"Through the Eye of a Needle"
http://fbox.vt.edu/D/ddombrow/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
ddombrow wrote:
> Bell Atlantic, Texaco,
You mean Verizon? ;)
--
Lance
The Zone
http://come.to/the.zone
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I'm sure that'd be hilarious if I unserstood it.
--
Dan D.
Lance Birch <-> wrote in message
> You mean Verizon? ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And probably even funnier if I understood it (as opposed to merely
unserstanding it).
--
Dan D.
ddombrow wrote in message...
> I'm sure that'd be hilarious if I unserstood it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
ddombrow wrote:
> And probably even funnier if I understood it (as opposed to merely
> unserstanding it).
>
> --
> Dan D.
>
> ddombrow wrote in message...
> > I'm sure that'd be hilarious if I unserstood it.
hehe, Verizon is the new merger company for Bell Atlantic and GTE.
Sorry to confuse matters, don't mind my ramblings... :)
--
Lance
The Zone
http://come.to/the.zone
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
It seems that people generally agree here.
I think the conclusion could be cooked down to this sentence:
"The purpose of the logo is to add recognition of POV-Ray to those who knows
what POV-Ray is."
Unless you disagree, or the POV-Team come with another statement, I will
consider this the final conclusion to the question raised.
The question of whether the logo should be detailed or simple was not a part
of the question raised here, so we will deal with that question in the next
discussion.
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
