So this meant to be kind of a survey, rather than a proper vote, and for now we use the logo only on Twitter, and it can be changed anytime. Here's what we have:
Logos: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5BwTaGcWGtNS2VaTDhCcDVLQTQ - #1: "<F>" with the infinitely long dropshadow, no gradients or such - #1.5 #1 with fading out (somewhat) the shadow on bottom-right - #2: #.5 with brighter top-left - #3: Totally flat "<F>". The cornets of the square aren't rounded in this one, though that's not up to us, as Twitter will round it. The votes: Sergio Fernández (PPMC): #3 Christoph Rüger: #1.5 Denis Bredelet: #2 Mauricio Nuñez: #3 Jacques Le Roux: #1 #2 (counted as two 0.5 votes) Jacopo Cappellato (PPMC): #1.5 Piyush Mor: #3 Julien NICOLAS: #1.5 Barrie Selack: #3 David E Jones (PPMC): #3 Kirys: #1.5 Daniel Dekany (PPMC): #1.5 Thus the result: #3: 5 total (2 PPMC) #1.5: 5 total (2 PPMC) #2: 1.5 total #1: 0.5 total (I have checked, and no opinion was expressed on the related tweet.) I guess both the #1 and #2 votes would gravitate towards the more similar #1.5, rather than #1. (Also note that while minimalism is trending, it still stands that simply typing something, choosing a standard font and a color, and a flat background color, then calling it a logo is... Let's just say, users won't necessarily realize that the product has a logo at all.) So, Nicolas, can you provide: - What font is that, with what license? Do we have right to use it? - An SVG version of #1.5 without and without the round corner - A 200x200 px rendering of #1.5 *without* the round corner (because Twitter will do the rounding) Thank you! BTW, I guess it could fade out the shadow faster a bit... but, let's not complicate the matter. We want replace that blurry JPEG artifact demonstration that we have on Twitter currently ASAP. -- Thanks, Daniel Dekany
