Logo for D

On 16.01.2016 18:55, karabuta wrote:
> How do you see it?
>
> http://amazingws.0fees.us/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/dlang2.png
>
> Many variants are on the way.

Do you intend to propose this for the official logo?

If so, be aware that the logo is a delicate matter. There have been various proposals to change it from the current one, and all have been rejected. It's Walter himself who is rather strictly against any changes.

I have been pushing for this variant:

https://gist.github.com/aG0aep6G/0803ec5ae49f6afb0196

You see it's very, very similar to the current one. To the point that you could say it's really the same logo. Yet, it was the one part of the red-top-bar redesign that didn't fly with the powers that be. I haven't given up yet, though.

By the way, I'm not sure if this is announcement material. If you're looking for feedback, I think the General group would have been a better fit.

On Saturday, 16 January 2016 at 17:55:13 UTC, karabuta wrote: > How do you see it? > > http://amazingws.0fees.us/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/dlang2.png > > Many variants are on the way. In all honesty I like the current one better. The binary background feels gimmicky.

On Saturday, 16 January 2016 at 18:15:06 UTC, anonymous wrote: > On 16.01.2016 18:55, karabuta wrote: >> [...] > > Do you intend to propose this for the official logo? > > If so, be aware that the logo is a delicate matter. There have been various proposals to change it from the current one, and all have been rejected. It's Walter himself who is rather strictly against any changes. > > [...] Nope. Just playing around. Why did they reject yours by the way?

On 2016-01-16 18:55, karabuta wrote: > How do you see it? > > http://amazingws.0fees.us/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/dlang2.png > > Many variants are on the way. I think any new logo should have a base form, with only two colors, black and white. This allows for further variations without loosing the identity and recognizability. -- /Jacob Carlborg

On Saturday, 16 January 2016 at 18:56:36 UTC, karabuta wrote: > Nope. Just playing around. Why did they reject yours by the way? It's not been rejected outright. More like put on ice. Or maybe I'm just not getting the hints :) Andrei said: "Can we defer any changes to the logo so we don't get sidetracked in this? Just scale the existing logo to fit and defer any changes to it to later." -- http://forum.dlang.org/post/n591ec$aqv$1@digitalmars.com

On Saturday, 16 January 2016 at 20:13:07 UTC, anonymous wrote: > > It's not been rejected outright. More like put on ice. Or maybe I'm just not getting the hints :) > > Andrei said: "Can we defer any changes to the logo so we don't get sidetracked in this? Just scale the existing logo to fit and defer any changes to it to later." > -- http://forum.dlang.org/post/n591ec$aqv$1@digitalmars.com Ohh! A great design is better seen by a designer. "Iron with steal, steel with gold, gold with diamond". Always room for improvement.

On Saturday, 16 January 2016 at 17:55:13 UTC, karabuta wrote: > How do you see it? > > http://amazingws.0fees.us/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/dlang2.png > > Many variants are on the way. The current logo is very good and there is value in keeping it. Now if it didn't have this extremely 90s-looking borders, it would be even better.

On Monday, 18 January 2016 at 10:28:48 UTC, Guillaume Piolat wrote: > On Saturday, 16 January 2016 at 17:55:13 UTC, karabuta wrote: >> How do you see it? >> >> http://amazingws.0fees.us/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/dlang2.png >> >> Many variants are on the way. > > The current logo is very good and there is value in keeping it. Now if it didn't have this extremely 90s-looking borders, it would be even better. +1 Also, change just for the sake of change is just bad strategy.

Forums