Rockbox General > Rockbox General Discussion
Rockbox Logo...
Llorean:
Could we see that latest logo with a lower-case "box", and perhaps (I'm not sure how this will look) shaving the point off the upper left corner so that it's also a right angle?
soap:
--- Quote from: Llorean on October 06, 2008, 06:27:00 AM ---Could we see that latest logo with a lower-case "box", and perhaps (I'm not sure how this will look) shaving the point off the upper left corner so that it's also a right angle?
--- End quote ---
Perhaps also some shading on the right side of the note so the line between it and the yellow background is more distinct @ lower resolution?
:D
hayden:
--- Quote from: Llorean on October 03, 2008, 06:10:00 PM ---One thing I'd like to ask Hayden: Ignoring the "they can scale down to smaller images" factor since that's pretty much irrelevant, what exactly is your goal with the image redesigns? My personal perspective on your redesigns is that you're basically attempting to take any life out of them and make it "a boring word and an icon", which I know sounds really negative, but it's the impression I get from it, and I'd like to hear what your intent with it was to understand. At that point maybe I can offer some constructive feedback instead.
--- End quote ---
Hi Llorean,
In the first place my goal (as with my general approach to design) was to try and say something as efficiently and/or eloquently as possible. Looking at the current logo I didn't feel that all the elements were necessary or clear enough in their intent in order to 'say' what rockbox is. Most well designed logos aren't made up of arbitrary decisions, which means they can be interrogated. What is the meaning of x, what is the hierarchy of elements etc etc.
To use denny's example (which I think is great) his logo to me says 1) music 2) box 3) construction which I think is pretty much the right order - and additionally it doesn't use a whole lot of extraneous elements to communicate this.
I suppose that my desire to see a change in the logo comes from not understanding the current one
- why the textured nature of the box?
- why the (architectural) lines ? is that the strongest way to talk about the idea of construction or evolution ?
- why does the music (note) element appear to be secondary to (or less important than) the others ?
Secondly, the huge changes (eg since 2.4) aren't reflected in how rockbox is presenting itself. All the amazing work going on behind the scenes is staying behind the mask so to speak.
If you felt my suggestion lacked life then obviously I missed the mark, and I'm glad to see denny's response getting positive feedback because I think it goes a long way towards solving some of the perceived 'issues'. Though to throw it on top of an old blue and white bb forum would do it a disservice ;)
h
Llorean:
Ah, I see one of the difficulties here then, from your comment about the forum (which isn't phpBB at all, but SMF). Some of us look for information first, and have the imagery as decoration. Some of us value the decoration, and ignore the information (such as the bits that tell you this is an SMF forum).
Almost all the "amazing work" between Rockbox 2.4 and 3.0 really is behind the scenes. I would hazard that a large percent of it is things "under the hood" as it were, that users won't notice. The most user-noticeable features is obviously the new theme, and while that was first released with 3.0, the featureset that theme demands has existed for years (since the H300 port got bitmap graphics, more or less).
So, while you're trying to communicate "It's shiny and new and sleek" I personally (and I suspect several of the developers) would like to communicate "This is the product of many peoples' work. It is planned. It is a piece of software we put together from many peoples' contributed pieces. It plays music."
Make no mistake, the project plays music, but what it is is a piece of open source software developed by many people over a long period.
Heck, some people probably don't even play music on their MP3 players. I'm sure a lot of people use it for audiobooks, as it's surely a decent way to have voice-navigated use of audiobooks.
Speaking of "Communication", what elements of your logo actually communicate anything about what Rockbox is? I see an R and a musical note, and that's about it. Nothing about that communicates "software" or "a continually developed project" or "many rough edges are to be expected" or anything else about the project other than "there's a letter R, and it involves music."
GodEater:
--- Quote from: Llorean on October 06, 2008, 10:31:41 AM ---Heck, some people probably don't even play music on their MP3 players. I'm sure a lot of people use it for audiobooks, as it's surely a decent way to have voice-navigated use of audiobooks.
--- End quote ---
Don't forget the RockDoom / Rockboy crowd either ;)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version