Due to the opinions I've seen so far I've decided to make a new design: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/27846912/OO_4_final_design_Robin-Fowler.jpg?version=1&modificationDate=1364582663662
Overall it has a flat look and yet still some depth to make it stand out from the microsoft brand. I think it is also important to think about the form itself, the silhouette should ideally be recognisable on its own, which is one reason using the apache feather is a good idea. Some other thoughts: One of the problems i see with a lot of the proposals is the lack of thought given to typography. It seems the text is just slapped on as an afterthought, in many cases the 'apache' is floating somewhere randomly above 'openoffice'. Think of what you want the logo to imply, it should not look disorganised. Another thing worth pointing out is the kerning (spacing between letters) which could be optimised on some of the proposals. This is an extremely important aspect of the whole logo design and should be considered when choosing a design. After all, many logos consist of nothing other than text. I also want to say i really like Vasilis Xenofontos design. It might be too different from the current, but it's a very good logo imo. Robin On 28 Mar 2013, at 12:38, Samer Mansour <[email protected]> wrote: > Robin brought up a good point that we should pick a logo before we start > work on the application artifacts or the website as it will influence those. > > I initially was excited that we could have a new logo, an opportunity to > change the face of OpenOffice. > > But after I saw Chris R. proposal I convinced myself refreshing rather than > re-branding was the better path. > > So I would like to start a conversation that will hopefully give us strong > arguments to picking a logo. > > I already mentioned I liked the flat logo. > Here are reasons: > > - It is very similar to the current logo and that logo has a history of > being recognized. > - Flat is 'in', easily recognizable on and works well on social platforms, > screens and print media. (Think corporate and product logos of today, > recently Pepsi, Domino's, Microsoft, Skype, Twitter) > - This logo can be severed from the word mark to make it fit in a square > and still carry the branding image. Icons, site, etc. > - A middle ground for community members who like the current logo. Who want > to achieve a new image of 4.0 without tossing history. > > Looking back, we had lots of ideas but it only took me a moment when i saw > Chris r.'s proposal to realize the logo didn't need to be complex and > completely new. That simple was actually beautiful. > > Thoughts? Agree? Disagree (and your solution is)? > > Samer Mansour --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
