Post your Arch logo concepts here:

Misfit138 · 2007-11-09 20:50:04

daedalusman wrote:

Misfit138 wrote:
cerise wrote:
and had to make the chrome version too, just because:
http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/5407/archchromeei9.jpg
http://img108.imageshack.us/img108/1632 … ainih9.jpg
Chrome? Nah, that's anodized aluminum!
Anodized aluminum would be a matte black finish. The silver part of the chrome is more just machined stainless steel. Looks nice though, good job cerise.

Anodized aluminum can be virtually any color and finish, not necessarily black nor matte:

http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q … ages&gbv=2

cerise · 2007-11-09 20:51:50

Misfit138 wrote:

Anodized aluminum can be virtually any color and finish, not necessarily black nor matte:
http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q … ages&gbv=2

working on putting together the right properties now... maybe with some blue for the triple-arch centre. FUN WITH METALS!

cerise · 2007-11-09 23:43:59

FIRE!

cerise · 2007-11-10 03:59:20

something a little aqua-esque, but much softer:

lunke · 2007-11-10 14:02:59

@cerise
Lovely work, but the triangle thingy feels a little bit unoriginal. I feel like I've seen that shep before somewhere?
Maybe my mind is playing tricks on me though.. However it has a little much sci-fi vibes.

cerise · 2007-11-10 15:30:16

lunke wrote:

@cerise
Lovely work, but the triangle thingy feels a little bit unoriginal. I feel like I've seen that shep before somewhere?
Maybe my mind is playing tricks on me though.. However it has a little much sci-fi vibes.

I've searched through thousands of trademarks, commonly held registrations, and many other sources and I have not found the triple-arch symbol. Hyperbolic arches (curves) are not exactly the easiest thing to draw (especially in vector graphics programs -- it takes thousands of nodes to do correctly), so as I've looked and looked, the likelihood of someone actually creating the triple-arch design actually goes down. But hey, if I missed one, let me know.

What you probably are recognising is the fact that it is completely symmetrical and built upon some of the 'strongest' shapes in the toolbox (the three most people learn as a child are the strongest -- circle, triangle, square.) Keeping the number of disconnected shapes to 3 or 4 'pieces' (or less) is one of the ways any logo can increase mind-share since people can remember 1, 2, 3, or 4 objects easier than a larger number. Your mind may be playing tricks on you, because of the overall recognisability. (Either that or now that you've seen all my wallpapers and multitude of other desktop items, it of COURSE is familiar to you and you've seen it before! )

As for unoriginal, LOL. 'Everything' has been done before -- which is why there are millions and millions of trademarked symbols that you have to search through (grouped conveniently by shape) before you can register a trademark. What myself and design firms I've worked for have done is work to make our designs the most distinguishable from others, since 'everything' has been done (repeatedly.)

Last edited by cerise (2007-11-10 15:40:52)

thayer · 2007-11-10 17:41:59

Perhaps lunke is seeing a Mercedes symbol... that is what it reminds me of. Nice renders though; that's one element of design I need to explore more.

cerise · 2007-11-10 19:16:33

thayer wrote:

Perhaps lunke is seeing a Mercedes symbol... that is what it reminds me of. Nice renders though; that's one element of design I need to explore more.

Well, I guess if you can see a mercedes symbol (skinny arrowheads encased in a circle? LOL I love the way brains work!), then I can see a pair of pants, american indian artifacts, tv logos or bikinis in all kinds designs here too. LOL.
Other people have commented on seeing body parts.
Like I said, *everything* has been done before.

The only thing that matters, honestly, is whether the trademark office / brand identity lawyers think it's 'too close' to another logo.
Sad, no?

Anyway, I'm just posting wallpapers. I like playing with the triple-arch design -- rendering different perspectives while keeping the recognisable design is so much fun, and it's all about the fun parts for me.

I love getting to use all my regular tools and libraries for a worthwhile project like arch. (And who DOESN'T love playing around in a 3d program, eh? I'm making metals! wewt! I haven't had this much fun since I was CNC'ing... less expensive, too...)

Last edited by cerise (2007-11-10 19:20:15)

foxbunny · 2007-11-10 19:49:56

cerise wrote:

Well, I guess if you can see a mercedes symbol (skinny arrowheads encased in a circle? LOL I love the way brains work!), then I can see a pair of pants, american indian artifacts, tv logos or bikinis in all kinds designs here too. LOL.

LMAO! I'm so glad I haven't had too many of those.

Frankly, saying that everything has been done before is like saying there is no room for creativity, a POV I can't identify with too much. It's like stating that every other peron on this planet thinks the same thought... Sure, once in a while you'll bump into something that had been done, but it's hardly always the case.

I agree to that point about trademarks, though.

cerise · 2007-11-10 19:52:38

What I'm currently rendering:

This is an indigo render -- but this is the first initial display (3 hours). It will become 'less noisy' as time goes on.

cerise · 2007-11-10 19:56:14

foxbunny wrote:

Frankly, saying that everything has been done before is like saying there is no room for creativity, a POV I can't identify with too much. It's like stating that every other peron on this planet thinks the same thought... Sure, once in a while you'll bump into something that had been done, but it's hardly always the case.
I agree to that point about trademarks, though.

Nope, it's not. Every day in the design world we say, "everything has been done before" as a chance to take something 'old' and really engage the creative processes to make it new. It takes more work, but it's inherently more flexible to say everything's been done and then opening yourself up to seeing everything as 'available' to work from. One of my favourite design classes challenged us EVERY DAY to take a 'found object' and turn it into something new. It was freeing.

Some of the things people made out of discarded plastic forks were awe-inspiring.

ibendiben · 2007-11-10 20:00:48

thayer wrote:

Perhaps lunke is seeing a Mercedes symbol... that is what it reminds me of. Nice renders though; that's one element of design I need to explore more.

Exactly
but surely there's a lot of skills in the artwork...

PDExperiment626 · 2007-11-10 20:01:39

Um... I thought we weren't supposed to post our commentaries here? Has this changed?

ibendiben · 2007-11-10 20:06:39

PDExperiment626 wrote:

Um... I thought we weren't supposed to post our commentaries here? Has this changed?

oh yeah... I see wrong topic sorry:D

thayer · 2007-11-10 20:49:42

The contest is closed... there's no reason not to comment here.

floke · 2007-11-10 21:56:15

dunc wrote:

Ive been messing about a bit with SLiM lately (seems that I picked a bad time, with all the problems people have been posting here over the last few days), so here's a theme based on my simplified Concept 2:
http://www.dss.talktalk.net/slim-arch-s … review.png
http://www.dss.talktalk.net/slim-arch-simple.tar.bz
Simple, lightweight.

404'd!

Any other hosts for it?

foxbunny · 2007-11-11 00:25:57

cerise wrote:

Nope, it's not. Every day in the design world we say, "everything has been done before" as a chance to take something 'old' and really engage the creative processes to make it new. It takes more work, but it's inherently more flexible to say everything's been done and then opening yourself up to seeing everything as 'available' to work from. One of my favourite design classes challenged us EVERY DAY to take a 'found object' and turn it into something new. It was freeing.
Some of the things people made out of discarded plastic forks were awe-inspiring.

You mustn't forget, though, that such notions come from the 'design world'. Simple repetition of a certain dogma does not necessarily make it true, nor does it exclude other paths towards the goal of creating original work. As a self-taught plugged into a system created by the 'design world' for the 'design world', I've witnessed countless example of boxed thinking where a more relaxed perception would be much more beneficial.

But then again, we might be referring to completely different things here, because for me, 'found object' is not 'something that's already been done'. I must admit I am missing the correlation between the saying that "everything has been done before" and using forks to create original artwork.

cerise · 2007-11-11 01:56:25

Updated work in progress, from the dark side of the moon -- 7 hours and eleven minutes:

Last edited by cerise (2007-11-11 01:59:44)

dunc · 2007-11-11 03:00:13

foxbunny wrote:

As a self-taught plugged into a system created by the 'design world' for the 'design world', I've witnessed countless example of boxed thinking where a more relaxed perception would be much more beneficial.

I'm not as plugged in to that system as you, but from what I've seen of it I tend to agree. I think it's increasingly true in most fields, in fact. On the other hand, I suppose professionals are understandably more risk-averse than amateurs. Far better to follow a proven process than take a punt on something just because you like it.

As for Cerise's logo, I knew it reminded me of something and I've just realised what it is. It's a dead ringer for the combustion chamber of a Wankel rotary engine.

Kind of.

@Floke: Ick. I think there must be a typo in the URL. It's a bit late here, but I'll sort it out tomorrow.

Edit: Yep, I missed off the "2" at the end of ".tar.bz2". Should work now: http://www.dss.talktalk.net/slim-arch-simple.tar.bz2

Last edited by dunc (2007-11-11 16:58:36)

Misfit138 · 2007-11-11 03:02:08

dunc wrote:

foxbunny wrote:
As a self-taught plugged into a system created by the 'design world' for the 'design world', I've witnessed countless example of boxed thinking where a more relaxed perception would be much more beneficial.
I'm not as plugged in to that system as you, but from what I've seen of it I tend to agree. I think it's increasingly true in most fields, in fact. On the other hand, I suppose professionals are understandably more risk-averse than amateurs. Far better to follow a proven process than take a punt on something just because you like it.
As for Cerise's logo, I knew it reminded me of something and I've just realised what it is. It's a dead ringer for the combustion chamber of a Wankel rotary engine.
Kind of.

Hehe. Good observation. And a good engine, the Wankel. Under utilized, methinks.

cerise · 2007-11-11 04:29:23

One of two concepts I'm working on with organic / bones:

(n.b. @wankel engines: since when does a triangle inside of an oval look like a triple-arch inside of a triangle?! hmmmm engine associations aren't bad though... mazda rx-7's aren't a bad association. )

Last edited by cerise (2007-11-11 04:31:53)

cerise · 2007-11-11 05:02:37

This is the second organic / bone concept:

The first one is essentially bones out of metal, whereas this one seeks to emulate an x-ray.

Acid7711 · 2007-11-11 05:04:01

Damn, great work. These need to be made into wallpapers!

Flying Saxman · 2007-11-11 09:26:27

oh yeah, I also really like the bone-versions of your logo (especially the second one!), even if it looks a little bit too "evil", too H.R. Giger. But then again really good looking! I would reduce the glow-effect anyway.

dunc · 2007-11-11 17:03:06

Flying Saxman wrote:

oh yeah, I also really like the bone-versions of your logo (especially the second one!), even if it looks a little bit too "evil", too H.R. Giger. But then again really good looking!

Yes, they're very beautiful, but I'm not sure what they say about Arch. "Use arch, or you'll end up like this". "Arch Linux: the deadly distro". Heheh...

Arch Linux

#101 2007-11-09 20:50:04

Re: Post your Arch logo concepts here:

#102 2007-11-09 20:51:50

Re: Post your Arch logo concepts here:

#103 2007-11-09 23:43:59

Re: Post your Arch logo concepts here:

#104 2007-11-10 03:59:20

Re: Post your Arch logo concepts here:

#105 2007-11-10 14:02:59

Re: Post your Arch logo concepts here:

#106 2007-11-10 15:30:16

Re: Post your Arch logo concepts here:

#107 2007-11-10 17:41:59

Re: Post your Arch logo concepts here:

#108 2007-11-10 19:16:33

Re: Post your Arch logo concepts here:

#109 2007-11-10 19:49:56

Re: Post your Arch logo concepts here:

#110 2007-11-10 19:52:38

Re: Post your Arch logo concepts here:

#111 2007-11-10 19:56:14

Re: Post your Arch logo concepts here:

#112 2007-11-10 20:00:48

Re: Post your Arch logo concepts here:

#113 2007-11-10 20:01:39

Re: Post your Arch logo concepts here:

#114 2007-11-10 20:06:39

Re: Post your Arch logo concepts here:

#115 2007-11-10 20:49:42

Re: Post your Arch logo concepts here:

#116 2007-11-10 21:56:15

Re: Post your Arch logo concepts here:

#117 2007-11-11 00:25:57

Re: Post your Arch logo concepts here:

#118 2007-11-11 01:56:25

Re: Post your Arch logo concepts here:

#119 2007-11-11 03:00:13

Re: Post your Arch logo concepts here:

#120 2007-11-11 03:02:08

Re: Post your Arch logo concepts here:

#121 2007-11-11 04:29:23

Re: Post your Arch logo concepts here:

#122 2007-11-11 05:02:37

Re: Post your Arch logo concepts here:

#123 2007-11-11 05:04:01

Re: Post your Arch logo concepts here:

#124 2007-11-11 09:26:27

Re: Post your Arch logo concepts here:

#125 2007-11-11 17:03:06

Re: Post your Arch logo concepts here:

Board footer