[OpenID] Proposed logo redesign ...

[Drummond Reed]

David, ironically of the three new logo candidates the one you attached a
16x16 version of is IMHO the weakest of the three at 16x16 -- and yet I
agree it is still much stronger than the current logo.

I think the other two are even stronger still -- with much more of the
visual eye-catching power of, say, the Firefox logo at 16x16 -- see
http://www.mouserunner.com/sitebuilder/images/Fx_LogosPreview-600x102.png. 

=Drummond 

-----Original Message-----
From: general-bounces at openid.net [mailto:general-bounces at openid.net] On
Behalf Of David Fuelling
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 6:23 PM
To: general at openid.net
Subject: Re: [OpenID] Proposed logo redesign ...

You're right.  At 16x16, the current logo (see attached) is not easy to
view.  However, it seems like the problem with the old logo at 16x16 is just
a contrast issue.  The new logo (see attached) at 16x16 seems to work
because it has better coloring/contrast.

While I am able to resize and crop, I'll leave it to more talented people
with better artistic ability to determine if the old logo can look good with
different coloring at these sizes.

david 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: general-bounces at openid.net [mailto:general-bounces at openid.net] On
> Behalf Of Drummond Reed
> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 8:52 PM
> To: 'Scott Kveton'; general at openid.net
> Subject: Re: [OpenID] Proposed logo redesign ...
> 
> In my personal opinion, the fatal flaw with the current logo, no matter
> how
> it might be reskinned, is that it is so hard to distinguish at 16x16,
> which
> is where we need it to be most recognizable.
> 
> I wish that were not true as it would save us time and energy, but I don't
> see any way around it. IMHO the new logo should be designed with this as
> the
> #1 criteria -- that was the origin of options A and C.
> 
> =Drummond