 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
If you ask me, that lensflare is just a little bit to bright.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Ken" wrote:
> Discussing the POV-Ray logo competition
> in .general I mentioned the fact I thought
> the rules for the last competition too
> limiting artistically. The attached image
> is one I was working on for the POV-Ray
> TAG. While it may be a little over kill
> for an actual logo it does show what you
> can do with a concept if you really put
> your mind to it.
That is a nice image, but it certainly isn't a logo.
What you've done is to blend a name, a slogan, and a logo together, and make
it look interesting by using various effects. There's nothing wrong with
that, but it isn't a logo.
If you had the hands and the spark only, and made a silhouette of it, *that*
could be a logo.
To prove that a logo by definition is very simple, I think we could all go
hunting for logos on the internet and post links to them here. If a logo is
available in different version it is the most simple version that counts.
Then we could see how simple a logo generally is. The more known company,
the better, because they know what they're doing. I think we will find out
that a logo generally is very simple and uses one or a few colors only.
Examples that I know without link references are the logos of Apple,
Windows, McDonald's, Intel, Shell, Nike, MTV, Amnesty International, and
hundreds more I can't remember right now. They all use one or a few colors
only, and they're all easily recognizable in a very low resolution, and in
black and white. Please remind me of / show me some that are more detailed,
because I can't think of any.
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I wrote:
> To prove that a logo by definition is
> very simple, I think we could all go
> hunting for logos on the internet and
> post links to them here.
It's probably better that we discuss this in povray.general instead.
See the message "PLC: General qualities of the logo."
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
It's a tad overkill, hackney and feeble.
The lens flare really isn't needed.
The theme is overdone and does not necessarily reflect the purpose of the TAG
The motto could use some work: "Bridging the gap between the POV-Team and
POV-User"?
I'd have to agree with Rune, it's a fine image but not an effectual logo. It
seems to have been done for impact rather than purpose.
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricy net> ICQ 55354965
Please visit my website: http:/www.faricy.net/~davidf/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote:
> I'd have to agree with Rune, it's a fine image but not an effectual logo. It
> seems to have been done for impact rather than purpose.
Just thinking; it would make a good splash screen. Don't know where you could use
it though...
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
Please visit my website: http:/www.faricy.net/~davidf/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>Just thinking; it would make a good splash screen. Don't know where you
could use
>it though...
POVOS?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote:
>
> It's a tad overkill, hackney and feeble.
> The lens flare really isn't needed.
> The theme is overdone and does not necessarily reflect the purpose of the TAG
> The motto could use some work: "Bridging the gap between the POV-Team and
> POV-User"?
No reason to hold back to protect my feelings. Tell me what you really think
about it.
--
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken wrote:
> No reason to hold back to protect my feelings. Tell me what you really think
> about it.
You sir are a tribute to your hobby. This masterpiece is a true zenith among POV
logos. You have gloriously manifested your infinite wisdom and understanding of all
that is POV. Yours is a towering pantheon in the POV logo industry. Kudos to you
sir, and kudos again.
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
Please visit my website: http:/www.faricy.net/~davidf/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"David Fontaine" <dav### [at] faricynet> wrote in message
news:390CE905.5955C73D@faricy.net...
| Ken wrote:
|
| > No reason to hold back to protect my feelings. Tell me what you really think
| > about it.
|
| You sir are a tribute to your hobby. This masterpiece is a true zenith among POV
| logos. You have gloriously manifested your infinite wisdom and understanding of all
| that is POV. Yours is a towering pantheon in the POV logo industry. Kudos to you
| sir, and kudos again.
I don't believe it ;-)
Well, to add a comment myself I'll just say it has an official look to it.
The implied (whether or not intended) religious symbolism--- wait, forget that.
The rendering IS copying a religious painting. Well, anyhow, that seemed a bit much.
Only if you neglect the relation to the TAG-Team and POV users though, so in that
context
it seems fine. I like it.
Bob
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote in message <390CE905.5955C73D@faricy.net>...
>You sir are a tribute to your hobby. This masterpiece is a true zenith
among POV
>logos. You have gloriously manifested your infinite wisdom and
understanding of all
>that is POV. Yours is a towering pantheon in the POV logo industry. Kudos
to you
>sir, and kudos again.
Don't underdo it!
<grin>
Mark
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
