Hi Drew, Drew Jensen wrote: > On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 01:16 +0100, Bernhard Dippold wrote: > > Drew Jensen schrieb: > > > On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 20:53 +0100, Volker Merschmann wrote: > > >> Somewhat nice idea, but may I remind you to obey the branding rules: > > >> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Marketing/Branding > > > > > > sure - that is part of why I placed it up here - do you think it fails? > > > > > > How could I make it pass - or you just want to see draft 2 and see if it > > > is closer? > > > > > ... wrong font (Didn't you mention you used the SVG source of the logo?) > Yup that is it, it is directly from the logo.
Probably you used the version with text (left on the SVG) instead of the one turned into paths. If you imported in in Draw, the font might have been replaced by your standard font (Liberation sans?), while the differentiation between bold and regular text wasn't imported correctly. This is obviously our fault - we shouldn't provide the text version at all... > > > > > ... wrong aspect ratio (probably related to the point above) > This is the problem - I didn't take the time to qualify the ratio, just > pulled it out for a basic layout pass. Same as above - should work without problems if you take the path version > > > > > ... bold "Office" part > hmm - yes noticed that, I think the svg file is out of date on > that..isn't it? I figured the one I was using form the wiki currently > was, so didn't really sweat it yet. Not really out of date, just providing one version too much ;-) > > > > > ... dark background > > Yes - it is, but surely we aren't going to pass on all dark backgrounds- This is a general problem with logos on colored backgrounds / photos. >From the branding aspect it should stand alone, not merged with the background (and without adding shadows, 3D-effects and so on). It would work, if the logo would be taken as unity with a white background area - placing it as an opaque graphical element (with fading borders, if appropriate) on top of the image. But this will create a different general impression of the general design. It's always a question about the importance of a strict branding design comparted to the creative liberty of artists. As we are the one to define it for LibreOffice, it's up to us to decide about the priorities. > I can use the white out logo but it really doesn't come across as well, > IMO in a big way - still I can put one together and put it up to compare > against. Saw the link in your next mail (http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:Miss-liberty-2.png): It keeps the language of the poster while being more consistent with the branding. I'd just propose to use the Vegur font (link at the branding wiki page) for the additional text: Might improve the general impression even better. Best regards Bernhard -- E-mail to [email protected] for instructions on how to unsubscribe List archives are available at http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/marketing/ All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
