"Philippe Debar" wrote:
> Define admissible file formats (like : gif,
> png, zipped or not) and a maximum total file
> size and let author/designers take care of
> what they want to include or not. Write some
> guidelines (what currently are submission
> rules). This way no author could complain
> about too constraining rules but we will all
> take care of that when voting. Authors could
> choose for themselves if they want to follow
> the guidelines ("security") or if they
> prefer to "break the rules" to gain
> something else.

I don't agree. I think the voters should be able to compare the logos on the
same basis. They also should be able to see how the logo looks in certain
different formats so they can see how flexible it is and how it looks when
presented very simple.

> PS : added benefit : easier rule redaction,
> interpretation and less possible
> fuss/protestations.

There might be more possible fuss/protestations from the voters when they
can't compare the logos properly... ;-)

> Perhaps a rule about a max number of
> logo(s) by the same person.

Why should we have a max number of different logos per person? (We *are*
talking about *different* logos, right?) What purpose would it serve other
than suppressing creativity? I think it is in our interest to get as many
logos as possible. There maybe should be some restrictions, but they should
not be based on who has made the logos.

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

In article <3922b186@news.povray.org>, "Philippe Debar" 
<phi### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:

> Perhaps a rule about a max number of logo(s) by the same person.

Why? This sounds counter-productive...

-- 
Christopher James Huff - Personal e-mail: chr### [at] yahoocom
TAG(Technical Assistance Group) e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
Personal Web page: http://chrishuff.dhs.org/
TAG Web page: http://tag.povray.org/

Post a reply to this message

In article <3921b24e@news.povray.org>, "Rune" <run### [at] inamecom> 
wrote:

> It's just because... If we allow gradients and the like, how exactly 
> can we prevent things like shading, reflection, and other complicated 
> effects, which belongs to the custom formats only?

Just allow gradients but not "3D effects" like shading, reflection, and 
so on. I don't see any real reason to disallow gradients in the color 
version...


> > 120*120 isn't that big on many monitors, and
> > many of the smaller details on the fancy
> > versions could be lost... an upper limit should
> > be set, of course, maybe 300*300.
> 
> So we have 2 custom formats of 120x120 max, and one custom at 300x300 
> max?
> I don't like it personally, but if other think we should have it...

I just think something bigger than 120*120 is needed, at least for one 
image.

-- 
Christopher James Huff - Personal e-mail: chr### [at] yahoocom
TAG(Technical Assistance Group) e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
Personal Web page: http://chrishuff.dhs.org/
TAG Web page: http://tag.povray.org/

Post a reply to this message

Sounds OK.

Post a reply to this message

"TonyB" <ben### [at] panamac-comnet> wrote in message
news:39232c7a@news.povray.org...
> Sounds OK.
>

    See Rune? TonyB thinks -my- suggestions are the best... 8-)

Post a reply to this message

Bill DeWitt wrote:

>     See Rune? TonyB thinks -my- suggestions are the best... 8-)

I don't think Rune likes mine however :(

-- 
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

I didn't read any of the messages thoroughly. :) I only read Rune's. I was
aknowledging what he wrote last.

Post a reply to this message

>A 32x32 pixel black and white version. Shades of gray is allowed, but only
>for anti-aliasing. For the reason of keeping the sizes small I think 16
>shades of gray is enough. I personally hardly can tell the difference
>between 256 shades of gray and 16 shades of gray, when the shades of gray
is
>used only for anti-aliasing.


i agree.

>A 14400 pixel black and white version. This version must contain 14400
>pixels at most, but the logo-designers can decide for themselves if they
>want a 60x240, or 80x180, or 120x120 resolution, or something completely
>else. This is so no shapes of logos are favored. Shades of gray is allowed
>in the same way as in the previous version.


i agree.

>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.


would those 3 custom versions be obligatory?

>So, these 5 formats are my suggestion. What do you think of it?


nice :)

-alt

Post a reply to this message

I think the best way to determine the sizes and colors of the logos is to know
where and how they are going to be used.

Is the logo going to be used to start POV as an application ?
-> a 16 x 16 and a 32 x 32 colored icon is best suited. This one should display
only the symbol. There is no space for lettering.
The 16 x 16 is needed in windows to start the applications.
The 32 x 32 is the average size for icons on desktop ( Linux and windows). I
think Mac and Amiga users have about the same needs.


Is the logo be displayed on the POV-Ray Homepage ?
-> any full-color logo with about 128 x 128 pixels should do. But in this case,
it should be up to the 'logo designer' to decide how large the original size
should be and if the logo should be square or not. Any large image can be
downsized to about 128 x 128 and still be easily recognizable.


Is the logo meant to be used for Web pages ( ie : comparing render stats or
pictures between POV and BMRT, or links to tutorials or the POV Homepage) ?
-> a size between 32 and 64 pixels should do. There again, a webmaster can
easily downsize a 64 x 64 logo to 32 x 32. That's why I would stick to a 64 x 64
logo ( upsizing a 32 logo to 64 would ruin it).


Is the logo to be inserted in one corner of pictures as a 'made with POV'
scheme?
-> a black and white version of the 32 x 32 icon with the symbol should be fine.
A 32 x 32 logo may look large on some pictures but it can be downsized. And
there again, it's up to the designer to decide if it should be square or not.


To sum up, I think the following formats for the 'contest' should be :


to suit needs) [Application starter].

colors and lettering,...and whatever you can think of for banners and the
homepage is POVadmin agrees. This is one to be downsized to about 128 pixels
[Banner and Homepage]




Tell me what you think, but my opinion is that we should know beforehand how the
logo is going to be used to know where we are going.







> After having found out the general qualities of the logos we can proceed and
> begin to discuss the technical requirements. That is mainly about
> resolutions.
>
> I suggest that each logo should on the voting page be presented in the
> following 5 formats:
>
> A 32x32 pixel black and white version. Shades of gray is allowed, but only
> for anti-aliasing. For the reason of keeping the sizes small I think 16
> shades of gray is enough. I personally hardly can tell the difference
> between 256 shades of gray and 16 shades of gray, when the shades of gray is
> used only for anti-aliasing.
>
> A 14400 pixel black and white version. This version must contain 14400
> pixels at most, but the logo-designers can decide for themselves if they
> want a 60x240, or 80x180, or 120x120 resolution, or something completely
> else. This is so no shapes of logos are favored. Shades of gray is allowed
> in the same way as in the previous version.
>
> 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.
>
> So, these 5 formats are my suggestion. What do you think of it?
>
> BTW, the POV-Ray Logo Contest Page is updated:
> http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/logo/logo.html
>
> 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

Attachments:
Download 'us-ascii' (5 KB)

"Ken" <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote in message
news:39237CE0.775CA590@pacbell.net...
>
>
> Bill DeWitt wrote:
>
> >     See Rune? TonyB thinks -my- suggestions are the best... 8-)
>
> I don't think Rune likes mine however :(
>

    I am pretty sure TonyB was talking about my comments of May 3rd where I
suggested that the logo should be an object and must be submitted with
pov-code. But I agree, his comments were a -stinging- rebuttal of your
Left-Handed arguments of February.

Post a reply to this message