Simen Kvaal wrote:

> Without intended insultation of any possible opinion of the POV-team, the
> logo should be a _symbol_ rather than just fancy letters...

I don't think the POV-Team has a problem with the logo not saying
"POV-Ray". They merely suggested that if it does that you include
a tiny TM symbol along with it. Other than that what is wrong with
spelling it out ? The corporate world has a long history of adopting
logos comprised of nothing more than stylized letters of their
company name.

-- 
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

In article <39163c6a@news.povray.org>, "TonyB" 
<ben### [at] panamac-comnet> wrote:

> Do electrons travel in eliptical paths in the hydrogen atom?

What does a circular orbit look like when you look at it from an angle 
instead of perpendicular to the plane of the orbit?(ignoring the fact 
that electrons don't orbit anything like this)
It just bears a strong resemblence to the usual symbol of electrons 
orbiting an atomic nucleus...though they usually have more 
electrons(like 3 orbits-what is so special about lithium?).


> I'm kinda in love with that color, but I'll see what other shades fit it.

Well, the biggest problem is that those colors say "water", so the way 
they make up the whole logo makes it look like a logo for something to 
do with water. I would look for another color scheme, and also look for 
a way to make it look more like an eye...maybe make the central sphere 
smaller and place a torus around it(so the sphere is the pupil and the 
torus is the iris). That should be enough to shift it from a hydrogen 
model to an eye.
I do like the idea of an eye logo for POV though, it fits the name 
"Persistence of Vision" quite well.

-- 
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

> it still looks like a water softener or pool
> supply logo.

you've got a thing for water softer and pool supplies havn't you!

Rick

Post a reply to this message

> I like it better than the Crusoe logo, but to me it still doesn't say
"POV".

does a good logo have to have the word povray splattered all over it,
personnally i think insisting a logo features text can be very restricting,

Rick

Post a reply to this message

>Better, as others mentioned I'm not sure I like the blue but I
>do have a idea to try... How about adding the traditional checkered
>plane inside the eye so that it looks like a sphere on a plane and
>an eye at the same time.

O...K... I'll give it a try to see how that looks... Thanks for the
comments. :)

Post a reply to this message

>Yes! This it is something like this one should be looking after; I
>personally didn't like all the rambling about placing "POV" and "RAY" in
>numerous shapes and colors.

I got tired of trying, and also just ran out of ideas.

>Without intended insultation of any possible
>opinion of the POV-team, the logo should be a _symbol_ rather than just
>fancy letters...

Not necessarilly, you can see lots of commercial logos that are just text.
Think of the Nintendo logo for example. There are many others out there. I
believe that the possibility exists of someone finding a nice font to write
"POV-Ray" in and turn it into a logo.

>And an eye is a good example. This one is stylized and
>looks good in low-res, which should be a good criterion.

I agree. Although very minor tweaking was used to improve it slightly.
Mostly sharpening, and manual "invisible" pixels removal.

>The colors is a point many argue about, and I can see the problem.
>It _might_ perhaps do with two different colors?
>But I like the pastel idea, that's for sure.

It does use 2 different colors. One for the ring and one for the pupil. I'll
be trying out more combinations today. I did go into Photoshop to play with
the Hue, but honestly, none of the colors worked.

>IMO you need more fantasy to see the hydrogen atom than an eye.. ;-)

You don't need fantasy to see that... you just have to be nerdy, like the
all of us. :)

>The problem might be that it doesn't say "POVRAY!" at first glance. First
of
>all, that is the case with _all_ logos in the beginning, before people can
>familiarize themselves with it.

Yeah. I mean, does the Black & Decker logo say "Black and Decker" to you?
Does the Imation hand-with-a-magic-wand logo say "Imation"? Getting back to
our logo, I've reached the following conclusion: I don't think there is a
logo out there that can both NOT include the text "POV" and/or "Ray" AND
"say" POV-Ray at the same time. We've got to either find a nice one that we
can get used to, or find some nice, stylized way of writing POV-Ray that
everyone is happy with. How about a rip-off of the Playstation logo?

>Second, "povray" to most people here, I
>think is a "reflective sphere over a checkered plane"; perhaps it's time to
>reconsider?

If you think about it, that represents any raytracer. It's not POV-specific.
Knowhatimean? We could do that, but we also have to find a way of setting it
apart, so it doesn't say "generic raytracer".

>Just suggesting here, but maybe simply adding the word "POVRAY"
>in capital sans-serif (I'd suggest Univers) in black above the logo, with
>good letter spacing, would do the trick?

I'll do that in my next post.

>Just my opinions in the moment here...

I appreciate them. Thanks.

Post a reply to this message

This logo is very nice I think!

In my opinion your should keep it simple like it is now.

Experiment with the colors and see what looks best.

I don't think you should add text saying POV-Ray. Text can be good for some
logos, but I don't think it is needed in this one.

I don't think you should add a checkered plane. Why stick to that old idea?

I don't think you should add media or other "effects" and I don't think you
should change the pupil. I like the current simplicity.

That is just my opinions.

I think the logo could easily be presented in just black and white, and that
is, as I see it, a definite plus. Still, the logo looks great in 3D too (in
my opinion).

Only suggestion is that maybe you should try making the eye a little wider
or a little less tall. You could always try it out and see if it is better
or worse, but maybe you have tried that already. Also, experiment with
starting the ring at other positions. If the thick end started a little
higher (a little more anti-clockwise) maybe it would look more like a
eyebrow.

Anyway, one of my favorites! :-)

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

>This logo is very nice I think!
>Anyway, one of my favorites! :-)

I'm very glad. I am playing around with other colors right now. I'll try
your suggestion for the eyebrow. And yes, it's very easy to get a b&w
version of this. You just output +UA and take the inverse of the alpha
channel as the logo. :)

Post a reply to this message

> >Second, "povray" to most people here, I
> >think is a "reflective sphere over a checkered plane"; perhaps it's time
to
> >reconsider?

i think its high time povray got away from that image, it need to be taken
seriously as a quality render engine, not as some generic raytracer capable
only of generic images.

Rick

Post a reply to this message

"Rick [Kitty5]" wrote:
> > Second, "povray" to most people here,
> > I think is a "reflective sphere over
> > a checkered plane"; perhaps it's time
> > to reconsider?
>
> i think its high time povray got away
> from that image, it need to be taken
> seriously as a quality render engine,
> not as some generic raytracer capable
> only of generic images.

I agree!

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