From: Reid Sweatman (drunkardswalk_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-09 19:58:01
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
> [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Jonathan Turkanis
> Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2005 3:47 PM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: [boost] Re: Logo Contest
> Reid Sweatman wrote:
> >> Although the logo of the Infiniti company is completely abstract,
> >> it`s
> >> incredible: http://people.inf.elte.hu/cad/etc/boost/infiniti.png
> > Spot on. I'd further add that most of the best commercial
> logos are
> > pretty simple--not all, but it's a lot harder to make a complex one
> > appealing.
> When I talked about logos being "complex," I didn't mean they
> should have lots of moving parts. Perhaps I should have said "subtle."
I wasn't criticizing; I was agreeing with you. I didn't misunderstand you.
> > ... I'm surprised no one used recursion as a means of indicating
> > "boostness."
> See #89.
Not the kind of thing I meant, but then, I wasn't too specific. Also, I
guess I don't know the technique being mentioned. Is the first "cpp" a
> > Incidentally, I'm also surprised no one has tried to define
> a coherent
> > color scheme, especially given that there *are* graphic designers
> > present.
> There are only a few designs whose color schemes I would
> describe as "incoherent".
Okay, since I'm about to point out ones I didn't like, let me state in
advance that I've no intention of insulting anyone's effort, and none of
this is intended as a flame. I intend it constructively. And even though
it usually looks otherwise, I *know* I don't know it all <g>. That said...
76b; yeah, it's supposed to be flames, but it's too sharp a color contrast
for me when that saturated. Actually, all the yellow/blue ones here I find
unpleasant; pulled back a bit, maybe with the yellow duskier, more towards
the orange, I might have liked it better. Maybe push the blue towards teal
a bit at the same time, to get closer to some kind of analogous scheme. If
the yellow is either bright or saturated, then green, black, purple, or red
is about all that I think works, and I think the red or green should be
lightened in that combo. Just my taste, maybe, but the very contrasty, very
saturated ones (66, for instance) I don't care for. There are quite a few
on the list that are very appealing from the standpoint of simply catching
the eye, and they tend to be, with rare exceptions, ones that use toned-down
shades of a single color (of course, when you render in something like Maya
or 3ds max, as some of them clearly are, you tend to get that, but some of
the "Photoshopped" ones have the quality, too). That doesn't necessarily
mean they're the ones I voted for, since there were other considerations, as
well. I also didn't much like the ones that just rendered the name, no
matter how prettily. One thing I do note, though; most of the ones with
that kind of sophisticated monotone color tend to be blue. That was what I
had in mind when I mentioned the existing scheme. Another example: 32a and
b. Two colors I don't really want to see outside of a Lichtenstein. Well,
not even then, truth to tell. <g> The two colors with the most widely
differing effects on index of refraction. Hurts the eyes. Energetic, I
suppose, but a cliché, no? One more and I'll de-tirade: all the 26s.
Dusky burgundy and dark forest green are just a bit too far off any coherent
scheme I can invent on the color wheel (of course, pick a different
theorist's wheel--or thing that isn't a wheel, like the Nippon Color and
Design Institute's scheme--and get a different take on what's coherent;
hmmmn...I wonder how much of what's bugging me might be related to cultural
apprehensions of color affect?). Here, the problem is compounded by having
dark colors on a medium gray background; it's just too dark. Nothing pops
out (or *up* <g>). Okay, first I was bitching about too much contrast, now
I want more. A middle ground, really (and I don't mean neutrals <g>).
Okay, done. Apologies to any who feel savaged.
> > a couple of the entries even try to do much with color, and I can't
> > find any consistency in the usage
> Some color schemes may be unapealing, but I'm not sure which
> ones are actually inconsistent.
Think I got that out of my system above. Uh, if you reply and I seem to
have dropped off the face of the earth, I likely have. Think my mobo's
cooking on me, so I'm gonna be down for a while. Not ignoring you, just not
here (which usually goes without saying <g>).
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk