On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Samer Mansour <samer...@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't know what exactly was meant by reproducible. It was points on a > note pad I scribbled while they were talking... > I think it helped me on a meta level for requirements. What is important > in the logo to us? eg. I think we can agree the gulls are. eg. "Must > integrate the idea of the gulls, but not necessarily the existing gull > shape(s)" > Maybe we come up with Primary Requirements and some Secondary > Considerations we find important but not as important. > > I will try to head this and give it more attention. > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Brand+Contest+RFP > I will review and revamp that page. Then I'll post it here and dev for > thoughts. >
Excellent. > Agree, a wine expert is not going to tell me what wine I like. But they > might be able to suggest a wine that's in right now and that a lot of > people like. > Expert's advice is often what is integrated into many commercial products. > So it does hold some value and shouldn't be completely dismissed from > consideration. > > I suggest we frame it as we're looking for a "logo refresh", not a new logo. > We have a lot of history and loyal users from OOo days and even AOO 3.4.1 > that we want to reflect this as a refresh, we're improved. Not new. 4.0! > Agree? > I'd recommend we separate the process by which we pick a new logo (a RFP, a contest, voting, the technical requirements, etc.) from the question of "logo refresh" versus "new logo". If we can get consensus on moving the process forward, then we'll be well on the road to answering the second question. But the 2nd question will spark enough debate that it may be better to discuss it in the context of specific examples, once we receive them. IMHO. -Rob > Samer > > On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote: > >> On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Samer Mansour <samer...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > I just talked to a few full time designers at IBM I ran into while at >> lunch >> > and showed them the proposals so far just as a "what do you think?" >> > >> > Just saying this now, my design got slammed, after they told me tips and >> > feedback I was convinced it was bad, even though I thought very highly of >> > it 10 mins prior. I think I want to pull it out at this point, but we'll >> > leave it up as what not to do... >> > >> > I would recommend anyone here to reach out to designers they know and ask >> > them for feedback on the proposal pages, ideas they have. The more >> > knowledge and feedback we collect the better we are going into this. >> > >> >> And I suppose a wine expert would tell me that the wine I like is not >> good either ;-) >> >> > I can summarize their feedback and some helpful points. We don't have to >> > do any changes we don't feel are right, but it could only help us to hear >> > this. >> > >> > No particular order, I wrote down points, just writing them out detailed >> > now. >> > >> > 1. It has to be reproducible. >> > Chris R's is a great example, very simple logo. Both logo's with >> feathers >> > would be a nightmare to reproduce. Suggested not to be part of the logo, >> > but it can be part of a website design or splash screen, refresh/changes >> > with versions. >> > >> >> Reproduce in what sense? Do you mean print? Or photocopy? Is this a >> concern about how fine details may be lost in mechanical reproduction? >> >> -Rob >> >> > 2. It does not need to be part of the icons. Bonus points if you can make >> > them related though. >> > Tips for icons >> > - Can't go solely on colours for distinguishing modules. >> > - Primary detail (Table, Sigma, Database, Text Lines, etc.) should be >> > fairly large and pronounced as the main idea being communicated to the >> user >> > visually in the icon. >> > - Secondary detail - (brand) smaller, eg. single small bird in corner to >> > tie it to the brand, again optional and remove for simplicity. >> > - Do not user language characters, as it does not internationalize well, >> ie >> > C for calc, M for math. Criticism seen in Adobe products (they get away >> > with it). Sigma is fine, as its internationally known. >> > >> > 3. Font >> > What's in is thin, sleek fonts. ie. my font choice looks like I'm stuck >> in >> > the 90s, very techy looking. Who are we appealing to? End users, >> everyday >> > folk, they like sleek. >> > >> > 4. Don't constrain ourselves to rounded square >> > - We seem to be trying to fit a predefined container. Same with trying >> to >> > integrate the colours. We're trying too hard. Keep it simple and >> original. >> > Don't have the gulls hanging in mid air. "Ground them" Michael's #8 >> where >> > the wings touch the circle is a good example of how to do that. They are >> > part of it. >> > >> > I'm going to go home and make a new proposal that will highlight this >> > feedback, soon hopefully. Just to show the ideas in an example. I will >> > quantify some of these as possible requirements so that we have something >> > to aim for. >> > >> > Samer >> > On Feb 5, 2013 4:41 AM, "Jürgen Schmidt" <jogischm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> On 2/5/13 7:31 AM, Samer Mansour wrote: >> >> > Picking a logo, hmmm. >> >> > >> >> > First part is dates. >> >> > We could find our dates by working backwards: >> >> > 1. When is the estimated release date of AOO4? >> >> >> >> we currently focus on April/May but no exact dates planned yet because >> >> we have still many things to do. I expect a more detailed schedule later >> >> this month. >> >> >> >> > 2. When do we need to have a logo picked (consider time to integrate). >> >> I would say we should focus on end of February. Keep in mind that we >> >> need final design work after we picked a proposal, need icons, app logo, >> >> banner logo etc. >> >> >> >> > 3. When do we need to start a final vote. >> >> aligned with 2. >> >> >> >> > 4. If/When do we need a preliminary/elimination vote. >> >> not sure if this is needed at all >> >> >> >> > 5. When is proposal deadline. >> >> > Consider how much time for each of the above steps, advertise the >> >> schedule >> >> > so that everyone voting knows when voting will occur and won't miss >> it. >> >> > >> >> > Second part is voting: >> >> > How do we pick a logo by voting: >> >> > - We could do rounds of elimination voting. Like American Idol, the >> >> > weakest X number of logo gets eliminated. You can then vote again on >> >> the >> >> > next round for a logo that survived if your first logo pick did not. >> >> > - Who gets to vote? Help me on this one, I'm newb, is it all the >> mailing >> >> > lists? Dev list, etc. one person a vote. >> >> >> >> good question, we can run of course several rounds but I wouldn't do too >> >> many. But I am flexible >> >> >> >> > >> >> > Third part is criteria: >> >> > - What are the minimum criteria for the logo. >> >> > - What are the constraints of the logo, if any, ie. technical. >> >> at least free and proper licensed font >> >> >> >> I personally would keep the blue as our preferred color to demonstrate >> >> continuity. >> >> >> >> We should keep in mind that a logo that can be used for different >> >> merchandising material has some advantages. >> >> >> >> > >> >> > From the sounds of it, we were not proposing finished work at this >> point >> >> in >> >> > time. Still a lot of bouncing ideas, I do feel like our designs are >> >> > beginning to conform to a higher than all of us design from our >> >> feedbacks. >> >> > Maybe voting will be easy, who knows. I'm optimistic here. >> >> >> >> In general I would recommend to select one of the proposals until end of >> >> February and target the final bits until end of March. Integration >> >> should take not too long and we can test it afterwards in detail. >> >> >> >> > >> >> > Feedback is welcome, specially in areas like voting. We can start >> >> > populating this, such as dates. >> >> >> >> thanks for driving this forward. A new fresh design with keeping some of >> >> the former elements or colors is a good move. We don't need a radical >> >> new design, a refresh is perfect form my point of view. >> >> >> >> Juergen >> >> >> >> > >> >> > Samer >> >> > >> >> > On Feb 4, 2013 6:11 AM, "Jürgen Schmidt" <jogischm...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> On 2/1/13 6:03 PM, Kadal Amutham wrote: >> >> >>> I have edited the wiki , giving numbers to all the logos. So all of >> us >> >> > can >> >> >>> have a look and vote as follows giving the ranking. Kinldy use >> >> alphabets >> >> >>> for ranking meaning A as the best, B next one and Z the last. >> >> >> >> >> >> before we start voting on the logos I would suggest that we define >> some >> >> >> basic rules and a timeline (when to start, how long the vote is open >> >> >> etc.). We have some very interesting and good proposals but in the >> end >> >> >> only one can make it. We should also consider a complete brand, >> means a >> >> >> proposal that can be applied everywhere (logo, file icons and app >> icon, >> >> >> webpage, intro, about, ...) >> >> >> >> >> >> Just my opinion >> >> >> >> >> >> Juergen >> >> > >> >> >> >> >>
