Subject: Re: official logo proposal
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Mark E. Perkins <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 09/17/2007 18:48:16
On 2007/09/17 09:11, Louis Guillaume wrote:
> I find this looks awful clunky. It looks thrown together. There are 2
> elements that do not relate to each other: an edge-less box and the word
> "pkgsrc" in a bulky roundy font. There's also something strange going on
> with the perspective of that cube.
> And the 3D-ness of the cube does not blend well with the flatness of the
> text. This will not be easy to work with in context of printed or
> web-based materials.
> I *much* prefer Thomas Bieg's design, which was a paper cut-out for a
> box marked "pkgsrc". This is clever and the presentation looks finished.
> I even printed it out and made a box and it looks good! It's flat yet
> suggests the "source" for a 3-dimensional object.
> In the last discussion Thomas Bieg's logo seemed to be more liked by
> those who commented too.
> His site is still up: http://www.3tb.de/pkgsrc/logo.html
> The site shows that this logo is very versatile.
I agree on all points. And the perspective of the "box" is still pretty
bad. To my eye, it actually looks a little unstable. The two "vertical"
sides look as if they are about to fall outwards.
If the only objection to Thomas Bieg's designs is the complexity of the
edge-thingies, then leave them off the official logo. Those of us who are
so inclined can still print a version that has them and use them to
assemble our own personal pkgsrc cube.