ubuntugnome-artwork team mailing list archive

[Charlie Moss <charlie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I fully understand why 'the foot' can no longer be used.

I have no idea if the new design selection has been concluded so here is my
design effort.

I remember hearing recently that a Google Study found that people relate
more to logos that look like a face.  I hope you can see U and G in the
design.


[image: Inline images 1]

Regards,

*Charlie*



On 11 July 2015 at 11:14, Patrik Bubák <bubapa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> To everyone jumping into any subjective conclusions - you ought to
> consider some of the pressing facts:
>
> Nothing from the original GNOME logo can be used as a standalone to point
> a user to *Ubuntu* GNOME. If you use the GNOME foot on its own without
> any text/wordmark you are directly pointing the user to GNOME, not Ubuntu
> GNOME - understand this before you say anything.
>
> Those who want to keep the gnome foot in the logo - that is not going to
> happen any more. It means using somebody else's identity, which is a
> technical mistake and a violation at the same time. GNOME gave us
> permission previously, but that doesn't last and doesn't clearly
> communicate us as a distribution, while all you see is the component (the
> GNOME desktop).
>
> Using someone else's logo as your own is not the right way to go, because
> you're using somebody else's identity to identify yourself, which in most
> cases is illegal. Take it like somebody used Nike's logo in a roundel with
> just the colour changed. Do you really believe people wouldn't be confused?
> Would Nike like that? No.
>
> When you modify somebody else's logo to suit yours you are directly
> violating some rights, hence modifying the GNOME foot anyhow didn't come as
> an option either and we had to make other choices.
>
> To the newcomers to the game: first before mentioning anything consider,
> that we as the design team and me in particular as the logo author, had to
> go through a lot of thinking and research before what was born as mutual
> agreement of an idea that would be the logo. I had to make mainly decisions
> that would be right legally. To please everyone's eye, which I know will
> never be possible because there will always be a sense of nostalgia when a
> major change occurs, is a difficult task and if we should listen to every
> single "idea" we would never get anywhere, ever.
>
> To quote: "
> Another
> logo for "gnome" is a 'thumb' or even a 'hat', a 'pipe', a
> 'toadstool', a 'tree' as long as it's something organic or natural."
>
> - really? A thumb? That idea inclines more to Facebook than us.
>
> - a hat? You mean Red Hat? Sorry, that idea has already been used by a
> corporation backing Fedora and would be a cheap imitation.
>
> - a pipe? I don't see how that anyhow directly points to us and it's also
> something that changes the identity completely and might seem confusing,
> and a lot. Somehow you don't doubt that idea at all, but you doubt the
> current interpretation.
>
> - a tree? I understand your "trying", but believe me, been there done that.
>
> Now don't take this offensively, it's not meant to be, but shift into my
> shoes for a moment and understand that the decision I made is there for the
> right reason and every notion behind it is in place.
>
> Nothing ruins creativity like too many voices weighing in. We call it the *Ice
> Cream Principle*. Tell 10 people to go get ice cream with one condition:
> they all have to agree on one flavour. That flavour is going to be
> chocolate or vanilla every time. Groups of people don't agree on what's
> cool or interesting, they agree on what's easy to agree on.
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [Ubuntugnome-artwork] [Artwork] Ubuntu GNOME - the new logo
> by Patrik Bubak
> Time (GMT): Jul 11 2015 09:36:55
> From: list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To: ubuntu-gnome@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Perhaps the most obvious choice is Gnome logo + Ubuntu colours.
>
> You cannot use the Ubuntu roundel without transforming the entire logo
> into a combination, which Ubuntu does not allow. But if Gnome does not
> allow standalone use of the Gnome logo, yeah..
>
> Personally I feel this new roundel is devoid of significance (the
> form). The colours are not Ubuntu and the logo is not Gnome. I like
> the colour but the logo is very clinical, it might be the logo of some
> medical technology supplier. I'm reminded of disinfection ;-).
>
> Well good luck with it. I just feel Gnome is 90% of the identity of
> Ubuntu Gnome, there are not many distributions that focus on a single
> desktop exclusively, so Ubuntu is like the context (the
> environment/frame) while Gnome is the essence (or interior). Another
> logo for "gnome" is a 'thumb' or even a 'hat', a 'pipe', a
> 'toadstool', a 'tree' as long as it's something organic or natural.
> Ubuntu Gnome - lots of little footprints together ;-).
>
> Anyway, good luck with it.
>
>
> Quoting Satyajit Sahoo <satyajit.happy@xxxxxxxxx>:
>
> > In a standalone logo, when you show a GNOME footprint, it basically
> screams
> > GNOME, and the identity of Ubuntu GNOME is lost.
> >
> > Satyajit Sahoo
> > UX Designer
> > Behance Profile <https://www.behance.net/satyajitha28c7>
> >
> > We're all stories, in the end. Just make it a good one, eh? ? The Doctor,
> > Season 5, Episode 13.
> >
> > On 11 July 2015 at 12:24, Charlie_UK . <charlie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> If the symbol will never appear without the text, then what you say is
> >> true. However, if the symbol part will also be *standalone*, which I
> >> would prefer then the footprint is very important.
> >>
> >> I'm new to the group, so have no knowledge of previous discussions. All
> I
> >> can say, from one user's perspective, is that the present logo is
> >> excellent. The footprint says 'gnome' and the circle says 'ubuntu'. I'm
> >> even planning of making myself a t-shirt with just the logo. Obviously,
> >> this just one person's subjective opinion.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> *Charlie*
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 11 July 2015 at 07:35, Satyajit Sahoo <satyajit.happy@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> The font used is in GNOME's, the colors are GNOME-ish, and the name
> >>> itself has "GNOME". So there is already enough connections to GNOME, I
> >>> think.
> >>>
> >>> Satyajit Sahoo
> >>> UX Designer
> >>> Behance Profile <https://www.behance.net/satyajitha28c7>
> >>>
> >>> We're all stories, in the end. Just make it a good one, eh? ? The
> Doctor,
> >>> Season 5, Episode 13.
> >>>
> >>> On 11 July 2015 at 11:58, Charlie_UK . <charlie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Not my cup of tea. IMHO, without some connection to the Gnome
> footprint,
> >>>> it's meaningless.
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>>
> >>>> *Charlie*
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 11 July 2015 at 06:42, Andrés Muñiz Piniella <
> a75576@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>> > wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> >> Gentlemen,
> >>>>> >>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> And ladies!
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> >> of course, to hear your thoughts and comments.
> >>>>> >>
> >>>>> >> More on the project: http://on.be.net/1J8ezFh
> >>>>> >> See it in action: http://on.be.net/1FERsjc
> >>>>> >>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Looks amazing!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Richmond Makerlabs
> >>>>> Ham United Group
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Ubuntu-GNOME mailing list
> >>>>> Ubuntu-GNOME@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> >>>>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-gnome
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Ubuntu-GNOME mailing list
> Ubuntu-GNOME@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-gnome
>
>
>
> --
> Ubuntu-GNOME mailing list
> Ubuntu-GNOME@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-gnome
>
>