Same here, B. Although, it's just because the kerning seems to be out of place without the other proposed changes, sadly. I think I'll not do help with that (and probably be counter-productive), but my personal taste is still for C [1].
~Paulo [1] - http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/cgi_img_auth.php/f/f1/LogoImprovementStep2.png -- Paulo José O. Amaro Estudante de Ciência da Computação / UFSJ Webdesigner / Linked E.J. Blogueiro / CasaTwain.com 2011/3/15 Johannes Bausch <[email protected]> > Yes, to be honest, I don't like that half-broken ligature either. Maybe I > really should only do something about the kerning. > > 2011/3/15 Daniel Merker <[email protected]> > > > > > My vote: B > > > > Why: It seems that the other option is employing a style that isn't > > consistent across the entire logo; moreover, it doesn't seem to match > > anything else. > > > > > > -Daniel Merker > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 6:48 PM, Bernhard Dippold < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hi Joey, all > > > > > > I think we manage to finalize this task soon - great work, Joey! > > > > > > Johannes Bausch schrieb: > > > > > > Hey, > > >> > > >> following your discussion I added another draft - which is rather a > > >> step backward, but I see that the connected ligature is your main > > >> concern. > > >> > > > > > > If I understand the comments right, some people feel more comfortable > > > with the distinct characters. > > > > > > In fluent text they probably would not have even mentioned the > > > difference (except the more balanced general visual impression), but > > > in comparison with the present logo they felt different. > > > > > > Thanks for taking these thoughts into account and to present a > > > compromise containing all the other tiny modifications you included in > > > order to create an improved visual impression. > > > > > > [...] > > >> > > > > > > I compared your last proposal with the current logo here: > > > http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:Logo_ligature.png > > > (force reload) > > > > > > If anybody wants to be pointed to the differences, please have a look > > > at Joey's userpage in the wiki (I won't provide the link here, but > > > you'll find it). > > > > > > For me it is much more important to compare the general impression > > > rather than the tiny modifications. > > > > > > So I ask you to vote on this comparison: > > > > > > Which logo is more balanced and expresses better the feelings we want > > > to be associated with LibreOffice? > > > > > > > > > > > > And if you prefer the present logo: Should we include the other > > > modifications except the "ffi" in the old logo? > > > > > > > > > Best regards > > > > > > Bernhard > > > > > > PS: I don't vote now, because some people might look at the image > > > already with my voting in mind which might influence their decision... > > > > > > -- > > > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected] List > > > archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/design/ > > > *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected] List > > archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/design/ > > *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** > > > > > > -- > > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected] > > List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/design/ > > *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** > > > > > > -- > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected] > List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/design/ > *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** > > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected] List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/design/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
