struts-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Lukasz Lenart <>
Subject Re: New logo
Date Thu, 06 Mar 2014 22:00:56 GMT
Work continues, 3rd version of logo, wdyt? I think dark-blue version
would be also nice.

2013-11-26 8:59 GMT+01:00 Lukasz Lenart <>:
> I have passed your comment to designer - anyway we have time and we
> can always start over when the first logo won't be good enough ;-)
> Reagrds
> --
> Łukasz
> + 48 606 323 122
> 2013/11/24 Rene Gielen <>:
>> Am 20.11.13 14:52, schrieb Christian Grobmeier:
>>> On 12 Nov 2013, at 16:51, Lukasz Lenart wrote:
>>>> 2013/11/12 Cameron Morris <>:
>>>>> I love the look of steampunk and rickety old bridges, but I think it
>>>>> sends
>>>>> the wrong message for a project fighting the perception of being old
>>>>> legacy.  I'd say the more modern looking the better.  However, some
>>>>> of the
>>>>> more modern bridges look so space age it might be hard to tell that they
>>>>> are bridges if they are made into a small icon.  Perhaps some of these
>>>>> might spark an idea:
>>>> Hmm... you know everything new someday will be old anyway ;-) I'd
>>>> rather say let's focus on having cool logo and not the message it
>>>> sends ;-)
>>> +1 on the cool logo NOW instead of wasting more time.
>>> Its always funny with us devs. We have a crap logo for years.
>>> Somebody shows up and contributes a fantastic logo (compared to the
>>> other one).
>>> Suddenly all devs become designers and social media communicators.
>> You are right with our out-of-style old logo, and that things should
>> change here. But why exactly are we in such a hurry? Going too long with
>> an old logo does not mean that a new logo should replace the old one as
>> soon as it is just "better". IMHO we would want to replace it with
>> something that satisfies us for years. It should be cool and catchy now
>> and in five years. "Fantastic compared to the other one" is IMO not
>> enough. Do we want old-time users to be surprised to find better logo
>> now, or do we want anyone stumbling over our site or a Zeroturnaround
>> web frameworks survey to think "hey man, nice logo!"?
>> I'm not a social media designer, and for that reason I need to interact
>> with a designer. I need inspiration and suggestions to formulate in turn
>> which directions to go for the next iteration. Since I'm not a designer,
>> I'm for sure too lame with my own cool logo proposal.
>> Over all the years I was involved with design tasks, I've seen design
>> emerge after some iterations in a process similar to what I outlined
>> above. I have never ever experienced being given a first proposal that
>> makes it directly to production.
>>> Personally I am super-happy that we have such a great proposal.
>>> And if we don't have another option (one of us devs IS a designer AND
>>> does some work)
>>> we should definitely consider it.
>> I'm super happy with the work being done, and I like some of the ideas
>> incorporated in the first proposals. I like the fact that someone steps
>> up and is kind enough to donate work and creativity, and I am super
>> thankful for that - and, to be honest, it makes me bit shy to provide
>> too much criticism, especially since it is not my profession the actual
>> work is all about.
>> I went back and forth many times the last two weeks to think and
>> re-think if I like the logo, how it might be seen, and what well founded
>> criticism I could give. In my review I tried to both incorporate what I
>> as a non-professional know about design, as well as what I as a
>> "professional design recipient" (read: consumer) feel when I see the logo.
>> Some of my thoughts:
>> Most common to me seems a combination of a dedicated logo icon with a
>> clean writing for the brand, or just an elaborate writing without logo
>> icon. From time to time you see some font gimmickry to make a pure
>> writing recognizable. But I have failed so far to come up with a example
>> for a iconified design building a writing and a font design.
>> Have a look at those two sites (scroll to bottom on both)
>> There a good bunch of logos, both of companies and open source projects,
>> that look cool, clean and modern, yet timeless.
>> If you want to follow newest hipster logo trends,
>> might be a source for inspiration. Nevertheless, this seems to be not so
>> much on the timeless side...
>> That said and reviewed many times during last week, I'm more in favor
>> for the combination of an icon symbol combined with with a clean and
>> modern typographic font for the brand name Struts.
>> Stepping back a bit when viewing the proposed designs, what strikes me
>> most is that iconified graphic elements are used to construct a font.
>> How does this font look like? It does not seem to follow all of the well
>> established rules for font design. If you color it completely black from
>> the outline and reduce it to the font shape, it does not look like very
>> "clean" typography, even a bit clunky. But besides (or even more than?)
>> graphical details and tasteful colouring, the shape makes the first
>> impression to a viewer. I doubt that it is a good idea to bind the font
>> shape of a writing to iconified graphics as building blocks, as this
>> limits how elaborate the typographic shape itself will look like.
>> Designing a font is a science by itself, you can find tons of
>> information on the web. Just for some reading giving an impression:
>> As for me, this breaks down to: I have tried to like it, but - as
>> proposed so far - I don't. This is my honest personal view. And I also
>> think it is a great starting point to go into design iteration. It
>> teases me to think, it gives the inspiration someone like me needs to
>> imagine and maybe phrase what he thinks the final logo (or a next step)
>> should look like.
>> Earlier in this discussion, Dave came up with an interesting Google
>> search for an isolated logo icon to maybe be combined with a clean brand
>> writing:
>> Those two for example could be excellent templates for an iconified logo
>> graphic:
>> Also a very reduced and iconified bridge could be interesting for a logo
>> icon.
>> I suck badly at crafting graphics, but if time permits I'll give it a
>> try to express my thoughts in some graphical draft. But basically my
>> overall thoughts go into a direction like the Typesafe or Hazelcast logos.
>>> As far as I understood it, this contribution is backed by Lukasz
>>> company. I am very grateful
>>> for the huge effort they already put into this.
>> +1
>>> Instead of discussing completely new approaches and ideas which might
>>> lead to even more discussion,
>>> we all should answer these two question:
>>> 1) Can you live with the proposal logo?
>> just me: actually no, but it's a great start :)
>>> 2) If yes, do you prefer the dark or the bright version?
>>> My answer to 1) is YES!!!!
>>> My answer to 2) I LOVE BOTH
>>> Cheers
>>> Christian
>>>> Regards
>>>> --
>>>> Łukasz
>>>> + 48 606 323 122
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>>> ---
>>> @grobmeier
>>> GPG: 0xA5CC90DB
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>> --
>> René Gielen
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:

+ 48 606 323 122

View raw message