|
From: | Malte Meyn |
Subject: | Re: LilyPond logo? |
Date: | Wed, 3 Aug 2016 18:27:24 +0200 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 |
Am 03.08.2016 um 18:07 schrieb Pierre-Luc Gauthier:
2016-08-03 11:03 GMT-04:00 Andrew Bernard <address@hidden>:The concept is fine I am sure, but the execution difficult, and acceptance problematical.
I know it’s difficult but does that mean one cannot try?
Logo design is fraught with difficulty, and you will inevitably end up with something half the population does not like.
I think that might be realistic but not problematic. If someone doesn’t like the logo, they don’t have to use it; of course it would be nice to have something that is at least acceptable for most people.
And this argument works also for the current logo (an image of a waterlily flower, two leaves, and a score in the background): It’s a nice picture, but I don’t like it as a logo because it cannot be used in print (at least in small sizes).
I agree, but since there already *is* a logo, wouldn't it be acceptable to "simply" make it a b/w vectorialised version of it?
That would be nice but I doubt one can make a convincing b/w version of that. Even if you leave out the background it’s a very complex image. And even if you manage to make a b/w version of that it’s not usable at small sizes.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |