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


thanks Bernhard for your clearing words - I agree with what you say about
changing the logo. You might be right that the community accepts a change
towards the community branding (I'm not sure about companies who use it,
Although funding is the main concern atm I have been working on the logo
this afternoon and tried to incorporate your citicism. You can see my
step-by-step improvement on my user page on the wiki:
I tried to explain every step I did and why I think it was necessary.
Finally, I've done a quick render in blender (see bottom of page).
Comments & critique as always welcome.


2011/2/22 Bernhard Dippold <>

Hi Joey, all,

Johannes Bausch schrieb:

[...] For me it seems like we've already somehow
finalized the design on the "LibreOffice" logo. Do all of you (really
everyone) comply with the design? Because although we're aiming for a
community-based design, I would strongly discourage you (us) from
changing the logo at such a late time. The logo itself is one of the most
important identifiers, so I would just work on the finishing. Because when
we have all that incredible amount of graphics and media and so on, who is
going to change the logo later on? Noone. Then we're stuck with what we

I slightly disagree because of two reasons:

Even if we came up now with a new logo, it would break what we have
achieved by now. People have already produced marketing material, our logo
has been presented to the public for nearly five months, two product
versions contain it and have been marketed by this logo.

So - if we "just" want to change the logo to something totally different,
we are already too late.

But: We can design a new logo and replace the present one, if there is a
really good reason to do so. It has to be backed by a good marketing
strategy, we probably need to combine this replacement with the release of a
new major (or at least minor) product version.

All this can be handled, provided that our users will follow us...

With the community branding such a major positive effect can take place,
strengthening our team and the community's perception in public. I can't
tell you how the logo will look like after this effort: It might be kept
(nearly) as it is, modified partially by keeping the general design language
or changed more radically.

Let's see, what we can achieve in the meantime.

 The logo is ok, but it has some flaws, as I've already pointed out. (some
which I've addressed, see e.g. the kerning issue in the wiki).

Just for reference:

(Your logo_2 seems to fit more with the community branding)

In my eyes slight modifications to the logo are possible, if they are small
enough that people recognize it at the first glance.

I reduced the space between symbol and text for the external logo, and
caused by the different positions and sizes this logo looks different from
the TDF logo.

If you worked on kerning and ligatures of the logo text, this could be
integrated in the main source quite soon.

But I don't really like the "ffi" ligature: it looks a bit too "serif"
instead of "sans". Perhaps it's just me..

Best regards


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

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.