On 03/01/2016 07:32 AM, E. Liddell wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Feb 2016 22:25:13 +0700
> Michele Calgaro <michele.calgaro@...> wrote:
>> On 02/27/2016 06:27 AM, deloptes wrote:
>>> Michele Calgaro wrote:
>>> this looks great
>>> I would have suggested the tetragrammaton as the base of whole universe, but
>>> we would go into deep religious and philosophic dispute if it is 3 or 4
>>> etc. ;-), however it would fit the Trinity part
>> It seems the new logo idea is gathering some consensus.
>> Thomas (or E.), would you be able to come up with some concept logos from the suggested page/symbol
>> and post that to the list for consideration? Once we have a few options, we can further discuss with
>> Tim who is the benevolent project coordinator ;-)
> For your amusement, then, here are some very early stage concept sketches. (I included
> a couple of random ones like the "tree-nity" logo from the batch I did ~4 years ago and
> the spiral-T just to give some variety to the set.) I didn't bother with colour/gradient/fancy
> outline tricks at this point because I'm not inclined to put that much work into something
> we end up not moving forward with.
> Basic design criteria included incorporating some idea of "three-ness" (or "T-ness" in
> a couple of cases), and not looking too much like anyone else's logo that I know of.
> Which is why the one that looks most like Trisquel Linux's has that triangle added.
> Logos too similar = potential trademark infringement.
> E. Liddell
Thanks for posting some logo prototypes, the one with the tree is quite nice.
I think though we should move away from the "gear" concept if we are going to change our logo.
Just my 2 cents, but I appreciate the effort you put in on this (as usual :-) )