[boost] Re: Logo Contest

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-09 20:28:49

"Zoltan 'cad' Juhasz" <cad_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Greetings!
>
> I suppose the "Boost Logo Contest Conversation" becames forming something 
> philosophical :) I'm not a professional graphic artist any more, but have 
> been worked as a graphic artist for some years.
>
> Although logo gives the face of the project, company, team etc., it does not 
> determine the area of operation of the represented! I mean a logo doesn't 
> need to reflect to all of the services a company provides and it's very hard 
> to find a logo that looks great and tells everything about the company. 
> Conclusion: sometimes that's good enough to have an impressive logo the 
> emotional effect depends on the represented. 

Yes!  That's why I've been saying "C++" and "::" or "<...>" are not
crucial graphic elements.

> However, I'm absolutely sure about the thing that the "user" will
> not spend any valuable minute on racking his brains about the very
> meaning of an abstract logo :).

Agreed.  In fact, that doesn't seem like a "however," but more like an
"also."

>> Pepsi, Nike, Sun, Microsoft Windows, BMW, Toyota, Apple...
>
> The logos of these companies are really impressive and stylish,
> aren't they?  In my point of view Nike, Sun and perhaps Pepsi have
> those logos that are great just by being a logo

I understand that part of the sentence

> the others mentioned need to have the background meaning to catch
> the attention.

But not that part.
>
> Iconify: I share the opinion of those who think about the recognizability of 
> a logo as a basic feature, especially by extremely tiny size... but I don`t 
> think that we would need a sparated icon logo as well. Sometimes the logo 
> itself can work as an icon:
> http://people.inf.elte.hu/cad/etc/boost/famous-logos.png

>
> Although the logo of the Infiniti company is completely abstract, 

Not completely.  Don't you see the road stretching out before you to
infiniti? ;-)

> it`s incredible:
> http://people.inf.elte.hu/cad/etc/boost/infiniti.png
>
>
> As I attended the competition I don`t judge anyone`s work, since I`m affraid 
> I couldn`t stay objective.:)
>
>> Then I examine it, my first thought is: "what is it supposed to be?"
>> This is not good for a logo, IMO: when you look at a logo, it
>> should be clear that a it represents something concrete or that it
>> is a purely abstract design. (If a concrete representation is hidden
>> in what first appears to be an abstract design, that's okay too.)
>> The reason I find myself asking what this particular logo is meant
>> to represent, I think, is that it's not sufficiently complex to hold its
>> own as an abstract design. Once I ask myself what the logo represents,
>> I can only conclude that it depicts a stack of paper. This is a big 
>> problem:
>> aside from the fact that Boost has little to do with a stack of paper,
>> stacks of paper are simply uninteresting.
>
> I would like to protect my 75th application by some words: a logo doesn't 
> need to illustrate anything tangible, since everyone will think and feel by 
> seeing the logo the way he concieves of the represented. Jonathan saws 
> papers, 

I saw papers too.

> I saws component layers. that is subjectivity.

Yeah, but not entirely.  That symbol has been used for multiple sheets
of paper ubiquitously in computing.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com