systemml-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rose Peng <rosypeng...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] SystemML New Logo Ideas
Date Tue, 25 Oct 2016 22:35:50 GMT
Thank you for your votes and feedback everyone!

Going with the idea of using both designs as a family of logos, we will be
using the minimalistic design as the SystemML logo for headers and smaller
use cases, and the isometric design as the mascot for illustrations, etc
(naming it DML-bot for now). Attached you will find various colors and
sizes for the logo, the isometric character in three different
configurations, and a poster that showcases both being used.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B70RXaqBkBoyTGJwZXVBc2E2MlU
<https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B70RXaqBkBoyTGJwZXVBc2E2MlU>

Rose

On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Glenn Weidner <gweidner@us.ibm.com> wrote:

> +1 for using both.
>
> Cheers,
> Glenn
>
>
> [image: Inactive hide details for Deron Eriksson ---10/25/2016 02:24:35
> PM---+1 sounds great to me too. On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 12:44 P]Deron
> Eriksson ---10/25/2016 02:24:35 PM---+1 sounds great to me too. On Tue, Oct
> 25, 2016 at 12:44 PM, <dusenberrymw@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From: Deron Eriksson <deroneriksson@gmail.com>
> To: dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org
> Date: 10/25/2016 02:24 PM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] SystemML New Logo Ideas
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
> +1 sounds great to me too.
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 12:44 PM, <dusenberrymw@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > +1 that sounds great to me.
> >
> > --
> >
> > Mike Dusenberry
> > GitHub: github.com/dusenberrymw
> > LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/mikedusenberry
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone.
> >
> >
> > > On Oct 25, 2016, at 10:45 AM, Madison Myers <madisonjmyers@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I agree!
> > > +1 to using both. I think, like you suggested, that using #1 for
> headers
> > > and #4 for other uses sounds fantastic.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Jason Azares <jason.azares@gmail.com
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hey guys,
> > >>
> > >> Branding wise, we also feel that #1 and #4 are the best choices. It's
> > great
> > >> that we're all on the same page. To answer the question of pros and
> > cons of
> > >> each logo, here is a quick list:
> > >>
> > >> Logo 1:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>   - More versatile because of its scalability; We think logo 4 will be
> > >>      hard to discern once sized down; Logo 1 looks cleaner in website
> > >> headers
> > >>      with text
> > >>      - Relevant because it has a matrix bracket
> > >>      - It's a simplified version of the robot. Think of it as the
> batman
> > >>      signal and the robot is batman.
> > >>
> > >> Logo 4:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>   - More original because it has a personality
> > >>      - Diverse in the actions it can perform because it can move,
> > animate,
> > >>      and be customized based on intent and use
> > >>      - The robot is kind of cute and approachable
> > >>
> > >> Our suggestion is to use both. Logo 1 is the simplified version of the
> > >> robot. Logo 4 is the personification of the logo used to explain
> > concepts.
> > >>
> > >> We'd love to hear your thoughts!
> > >>
> > >> Regards,
> > >> Jason and the design team
> > >>
> > >> P.S. In general, here are our guidelines for creating a great logo:
> > >>
> > >>   - *original* - something that stands out from competitors
> > >>   - *relevant* - reflects the brand's mission and values
> > >>   - *versatile* - look good in black and white, in different colors
> and
> > >>   sizes depending on context (e.g. billboards, websites, t-shirts,
> toys,
> > >>   business cards, etc)
> > >>   - *memorable* - easily recognizable everywhere (e.g. mickey mouse,
> > nike)
> > >>   - *timeless* - not just based on what's currently popular
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 9:47 AM, <dusenberrymw@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Looks like there is a large amount of support for both #1 and #4.
> > Design
> > >>> team, could you provide some more thoughts on the pros and cons for
> > each,
> > >>> and perhaps any thoughts on ways the icons could be used in various
> > >> project
> > >>> materials?
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>>
> > >>> Mike Dusenberry
> > >>> GitHub: github.com/dusenberrymw
> > >>> LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/mikedusenberry
> > >>>
> > >>> Sent from my iPhone.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> On Oct 25, 2016, at 9:41 AM, Acs S <acs_s@yahoo.com.INVALID>
wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I like #4 as well.
> > >>>> +1 on #4.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> -Arvind
> > >>>>
> > >>>>     From: Berthold Reinwald <reinwald@us.ibm.com>
> > >>>> To: dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org
> > >>>> Sent: Monday, October 24, 2016 12:34 AM
> > >>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] SystemML New Logo Ideas
> > >>>>
> > >>>> +1 on #4.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Regards,
> > >>>> Berthold Reinwald
> > >>>> IBM Almaden Research Center
> > >>>> office: (408) 927 2208; T/L: 457 2208
> > >>>> e-mail: reinwald@us.ibm.com
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> From:  Luciano Resende <luckbr1975@gmail.com>
> > >>>> To:    dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org
> > >>>> Date:  10/21/2016 04:37 PM
> > >>>> Subject:        Re: [VOTE] SystemML New Logo Ideas
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Frederick R Reiss <
> > >> frreiss@us.ibm.com>
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> These are awesome! I'm more a fan of option #4 myself.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> I like option $4 myself as well.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> Luciano Resende
> > >>>> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
> > >>>> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > *Madison J. Myers*
> > > *UC Berkeley, Master of Information & Data Science '17*
> > >
> > > *King's College London, MA Political Science '14*
> > > *New York University, BA Political Science '12*
> > >
> > >   -
> > >      LinkedIn <http://linkedin.com/in/madisonjmyers>
> >
>
>
>
>


-- 
----------------------------------------
*Rose Peng*
MS HCI 2015 - Georgia Institute of Technology
(www.rosepeng.com)

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message