Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Hi Nik, all,

sorry for not replying earlier, but...

Nik wrote:
[... skipping the short version - too much to reply inline...

Hi Bernhard!
I know I told you I'd be busy with my research but you keep raising 
interesting topics that lure me back! =)

Should I say I'm sorry? Only if this activities here reduce the quality of
your main work, your private life, your sleep quality or any other more 
important task. ;-)

OK - I'm very glad that you're here! :-)

Besides, some /*very*/ important stuff is being decided right now, that 
if I miss out on, I know it will never get changed again.
That is the way of Open-Source huh? like a big machine on rails that can 
only go forward, not back =)

Of course it can - but it cost's nearly as much as in the corporate world. 
(Sometimes money, but more credibility, consistency and fun...)

On 1/31/2011 9:12 AM, Bernhard Dippold wrote:
Do you think we can present this logo (or something similar) to the 
Steering Committee as our Design Team proposal for an official logo of 
LibreOffice for external use?

Comments? Critics? Improvements?

If the possibility of /small/ changes are possible to the logo in this 
context, can we take this opportunity to address some if its shortcomings?

I didn't talk to the Steering Committee on this question, but I think we can.

[...] It wouldn't entail major changes, but the longer we trudge on with an 
"interim logo", the more certain I become that it will remain the *only* 
logo tried.

At least for some time. 

The point is that some people want to use a logo for representing
LibreOffice outside the community now. So we are restricted in time, 
but not as much to avoid any discussion on improvement.

We just shouldn't need more than one or wo weeks to come to a final

R03 is what I would recommend, I think the gap could decrease and 
because the letter L has a good "corner" effect, it perfectly juxtaposes 
the icon when aligned.
This way, the entire arrangement would look like one visual "block" 
which is what you want; White space /around/ the logo, rather than 

I support this standing - we don't need as much space between the parts
of the logo.

If we were feeling adventurous, I think small changes could really 
improve the look of the current logo; (refer to R05)
- Clip the L so it is cut by the same gap which slices the paper icon: 
for continuation.

Good idea - even if I don't think we should do the same with the "b2"
as in R06.

I've already tried to reduce the distance between symbol and "L" even
more by extending the green corner to the "L" - not really a valid idea,
but you might get what I mean, when I'll upload the draft tomorrow 
(today only mail access).

- Lighten the colours to mid-grey instead of dark-grey, this will still 
print well and compliments the green better.

The lighter grey looks more friendly, but there are some drawbacks,
we need to keep in mind: 

1. Reproduction of grey tones are problematic on prints, the lighter
the color is, the more differ prints on different printers.
2. Contrast to the background will be reduced, thus leading to a even 
more restrictive Branding Guideline ("keep the white background of
the logo").

I think the positive aspects of the lighter grey are more important - I
just wanted to mention.

Your green gradient introduces a new green tone different from the 
existing green branding colors (I didn't compare - it's just my 

Especially with the next point this becomes important:

- Colour the "broken corner" of the paper icon to create a focal point 
that leads the eye through the logo

I like the colored corner. It integrates the symbol with the text and 
adds a visible distinction from the TDF symbol by keeping it's 

But with your new gradient the general impression of the green
moves towards yellow.

I would like to avoid modifying the Initial Branding Colors before we
work on the Community Branding.

I'm not sure giving the members "logos" is the entire solution because 
it just creates many logo variations.
I think creating "badges" for community members with a non-TDF logo 
/attached/ will send the right message without diluting the brand.

I don't mind if they are "logos" or "logos with badges".

But we are on the same side: Being allowed to use a visible reference
proving that someone belongs to an LibO Team is a positive motivation.

Because it suggests affiliation without suggesting ownership.
I think Charles mentioned this in an Email to the Design list (I've 
CC'ed him), I was really excited by the prospect of making team badges,
but because I'm short on time, I've only got roughs (plenty of 
glitches). I thought the topic could wait, but these are related things.

I still think that they have some more time. Before anybody can use them,
it is necessary to create rules about their usage (who is allowed to use 
them where).

I thought we could create "shields" or "emblems" for our community. R07 
shows "members" and "distributors" roughs only;

They really look great!

I personally like the left shields better, but the straight upper borders of 
the right ones resembles better to the TDF symbol.

And they could be arranged in something like this way (R08);
This way it is not a logo, it is more like signage.

But here I see two problems: 

If you don't want to use it as logo, it had to respect the white space rules
for the logo.

And if you don't include the logo symbol, people might consider the shield
as main LibO symbol. 

 ... and I feel blindsided by the amount of green (the arrow at the bottom 
looks a bit heavy to me).

But these are points that can be addressed (or not, if it's just me feeling
this way).

Do you think it is possible to concentrate on the LibO logo now and add
the team logos/ badges/signatures later?

I think we should try to create the logo as soon as possible.

Right about now, you're probably hoping you hadn't asked for feedback 
right?  I'm sorry =) ...

Not at all!

Great work and an unquestionable improvement over my design!

But let me know what you think, these are all embedded in my page now 

I'm sorry I keep bringing this up, but I think it's necessary to discuss 
and plan for this.
Most people will see our logo before they even try the software. We 
might lose them before we even shake their hand.

You really think that we lose most of our possible customers because
of our poor logo? I didn't think it would be *that* bad...

Best regards


Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
List archive:
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.