[PD] logo or icon?? (my opinion)
colvin at dvida.net
Thu Oct 23 02:32:53 CEST 2003
>Since pd is "graphically challenged", the logos and icons should be
To address something I missed earlier:
Pd is *not* graphically challenged, thank you! Its interface is. GEM
does a bang up job with graphics, as does framestein (though I haven't
used framestein much, the screenshots look good).
>It doesn't have to be impressive, and that's the whole point.
>Pd has a very basic interface, and people using pd care more
>about its functionalities than its look. Branding doesn't
>always depend on shiny graphics; if the logos and icons are
>designed to be impressive, there's a high risk that a bunch
>of clueless newbies will complain about pd's look. So we should
>keep it simple, to the extreme. We love screen captures..
And while I agree that the interface is basic (how could I not), and for
good reason, I don't see why Pd's logo should reflect the ugly interface
rather than the attractive possibilities.
And if the newbies are going to complain about the look, it will happen
whether the logo is aesthetically 'impressive' or not.
Obviously, there are a lot of different opinions about this :-)
I'm gonna have to second (or third, whatever) the motion that we somehow
set a contest page that has only the submitted pics, with no explanation
or reasoning involved, so that the votes will be cast based upon the
individual interpretation of what looks best from a purely aesthetic
More information about the Pd-list