Buildroot Logo Pictograph
Hi Buildroot developers,
We have a nice recognizable logo that illustrates what Buildroot is about. Being far from expert (or even amateur) in graphic design, I find it perfect. But when Hadas Cohen, SolidRun's graphic designer, considered using the Buildroot logo in a brochure, she noticed a problem. It turns out that a realistic picture is no go for logo design. As a result she could not use the logo as is, because it looks markedly different than other logos in the brochure.
Hadas referred me to this professional looking explanation of why photograph is not a good choice for a logo:
https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1270284
Hadas also collected a few hundred random logos to demonstrate the point:
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/2616906744_a238697a95_b.jpg
SolidRun management agreed to let Hadas design an iconic pictograph version of the Buildroot logo. Here is the result.
Two colored logo alternatives:
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/colored_logo.png
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/colored_logo2.png
Two monochromatic alternatives:
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/bw_logo.png
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/bw_logo2.png
Hadas can provide the vectorized SVG and PDF sources of these raster images.
What do you think?
baruch
Signature · 3 lines
http://baruch.siach.name/blog/ ~. .~ Tk Open Systems
=}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{=
- baruch at tkos.co.il - tel: +972.52.368.4656, http://www.tkos.co.il -Quoted 28 lines
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
"Baruch" == Baruch Siach <[email protected]> writes:
Hi Buildroot developers,
We have a nice recognizable logo that illustrates what Buildroot is about. Being far from expert (or even amateur) in graphic design, I find it perfect. But when Hadas Cohen, SolidRun's graphic designer, considered using the Buildroot logo in a brochure, she noticed a problem. It turns out that a realistic picture is no go for logo design. As a result she could not use the logo as is, because it looks markedly different than other logos in the brochure.Hadas referred me to this professional looking explanation of why photograph is not a good choice for a logo:
https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1270284
Hadas also collected a few hundred random logos to demonstrate the point:
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/2616906744_a238697a95_b.jpg
SolidRun management agreed to let Hadas design an iconic pictograph version of the Buildroot logo. Here is the result.
Two colored logo alternatives:
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/colored_logo.png
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/colored_logo2.png
Quoted 8 lines
Two monochromatic alternatives:
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/bw_logo.png
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/bw_logo2.pngHadas can provide the vectorized SVG and PDF sources of these raster images.
What do you think?
I also don't really know anything about graphics design, but I like them! Thanks!
Anyone disagrees, otherwise please send a patch adding the SVG to the repo (and if you feel up to it, update the website as well).
Signature · 1 line
Bye, Peter Korsgaard
Hello,
Quoted 24 lines · On Fri, 13 Sep 2019 15:37:26 +0200 Peter Korsgaard <[email protected]> wrote:
Quoted 23 lines
Hadas referred me to this professional looking explanation of why photograph is not a good choice for a logo:
https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1270284
Hadas also collected a few hundred random logos to demonstrate the point:
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/2616906744_a238697a95_b.jpg
SolidRun management agreed to let Hadas design an iconic pictograph version of the Buildroot logo. Here is the result.
Two colored logo alternatives:
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/colored_logo.png
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/colored_logo2.pngTwo monochromatic alternatives:
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/bw_logo.png
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/bw_logo2.pngHadas can provide the vectorized SVG and PDF sources of these raster images.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 1 line
What do you think?
I also don't really know anything about graphics design, but I like them! Thanks!
Anyone disagrees, otherwise please send a patch adding the SVG to the repo (and if you feel up to it, update the website as well).
First of all, thanks a lot Baruch for proposing those logos, and many thanks Hadas for working on them! I understand the idea that our logo being a photograph makes it not the best logo, so I like your proposal of a pictograph version.
As I am not a native English speaker and not at all a graphics/design expert, it's a bit difficult to put words on how I feel about the logo proposal. While I like the idea, I find the design a bit "coarse", maybe too "pictographic". I know this feeling is not very helpful as-is because it doesn't say what needs to be fixed or improved.
In any case, this is not a very strong feeling, so I certainly won't oppose to this new logo just because of my vague comment, and I'll be happy to see a logo change accepted!
Best regards,
Thomas
Signature · 3 lines
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com
Quoted 42 lines · Thomas Petazzoni
Hello,
Quoted 24 lines · On Fri, 13 Sep 2019 15:37:26 +0200 Peter Korsgaard <[email protected]> wrote:
Quoted 23 lines
Hadas referred me to this professional looking explanation of why photograph is not a good choice for a logo:
https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1270284
Hadas also collected a few hundred random logos to demonstrate the point:
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/2616906744_a238697a95_b.jpg
SolidRun management agreed to let Hadas design an iconic pictograph version of the Buildroot logo. Here is the result.
Two colored logo alternatives:
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/colored_logo.png
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/colored_logo2.pngTwo monochromatic alternatives:
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/bw_logo.png
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/bw_logo2.pngHadas can provide the vectorized SVG and PDF sources of these raster images.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 1 line
What do you think?
I also don't really know anything about graphics design, but I like them! Thanks!
Anyone disagrees, otherwise please send a patch adding the SVG to the repo (and if you feel up to it, update the website as well).
First of all, thanks a lot Baruch for proposing those logos, and many thanks Hadas for working on them! I understand the idea that our logo being a photograph makes it not the best logo, so I like your proposal of a pictograph version.
Quoted 4 lines
As I am not a native English speaker and not at all a graphics/design expert, it's a bit difficult to put words on how I feel about the logo proposal. While I like the idea, I find the design a bit "coarse", maybe too "pictographic".
Do you mean that it seems oversimplified? I would say it is actually still much
more detailed/complex than the typical logo. The PNG is very high resolution, it becomes better if you zoom it out a lot (like it is intended to be used).
For me, the logo2.png looks a bit better because it simplified more. I like the
vertical gray line which gives structure to the image. However, it is very much a large yellow blob. I think this could be improved by lowering the intensity of the horizontal part of the helmet a little (which also returns a bit of the 3D effect). We could even try to add a slight gradient to that part (although possibly a gradient in a logo is not a good idea either).
Quoted 6 lines
I know this feeling is not very helpful as-is because it doesn't say what needs to be fixed or improved.
In any case, this is not a very strong feeling, so I certainly won't oppose to this new logo just because of my vague comment, and I'll be happy to see a logo change accepted!
+1 to that!
Regards,
Arnout
Quoted 72 lines · Arnout Vandecappelle
Quoted 42 lines · Thomas Petazzoni
Hello,
Quoted 24 lines · On Fri, 13 Sep 2019 15:37:26 +0200 Peter Korsgaard <[email protected]> wrote:
Quoted 23 lines
Hadas referred me to this professional looking explanation of why photograph is not a good choice for a logo:
https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1270284
Hadas also collected a few hundred random logos to demonstrate the point:
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/2616906744_a238697a95_b.jpg
SolidRun management agreed to let Hadas design an iconic pictograph version of the Buildroot logo. Here is the result.
Two colored logo alternatives:
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/colored_logo.png
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/colored_logo2.pngTwo monochromatic alternatives:
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/bw_logo.png
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/bw_logo2.pngHadas can provide the vectorized SVG and PDF sources of these raster images.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 1 line
What do you think?
I also don't really know anything about graphics design, but I like them! Thanks!
Anyone disagrees, otherwise please send a patch adding the SVG to the repo (and if you feel up to it, update the website as well).
First of all, thanks a lot Baruch for proposing those logos, and many thanks Hadas for working on them! I understand the idea that our logo being a photograph makes it not the best logo, so I like your proposal of a pictograph version.
Quoted 4 lines
As I am not a native English speaker and not at all a graphics/design expert, it's a bit difficult to put words on how I feel about the logo proposal. While I like the idea, I find the design a bit "coarse", maybe too "pictographic".
Do you mean that it seems oversimplified? I would say it is actually still much
more detailed/complex than the typical logo. The PNG is very high resolution, it becomes better if you zoom it out a lot (like it is intended to be used).For me, the logo2.png looks a bit better because it simplified more. I like the
vertical gray line which gives structure to the image. However, it is very much a large yellow blob. I think this could be improved by lowering the intensity of the horizontal part of the helmet a little (which also returns a bit of the 3D effect). We could even try to add a slight gradient to that part (although possibly a gradient in a logo is not a good idea either).Quoted 6 lines
I know this feeling is not very helpful as-is because it doesn't say what needs to be fixed or improved.
In any case, this is not a very strong feeling, so I certainly won't oppose to this new logo just because of my vague comment, and I'll be happy to see a logo change accepted!
+1 to that!
Quoted 7 lines
Regards,
Arnout_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot at busybox.net
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
The yellow ones become meaningless spots when reduced to around 100x100 pixels. The yellow color does not help much. :-/
The monochromatic ones still look like a helmet when reduced and bw_logo seems to have more "volume" and looks like a construction helmet more than bw_logo2.
Signature · 1 line
Carlos Santos <[email protected]>
Hi Thomas, Carlos, Arnout, all,
Quoted 25 lines · Carlos Santos
Quoted 15 lines · Arnout Vandecappelle
On 13/09/2019 22:03, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
Do you mean that it seems oversimplified? I would say it is actually still much
more detailed/complex than the typical logo. The PNG is very high resolution, it becomes better if you zoom it out a lot (like it is intended to be used).For me, the logo2.png looks a bit better because it simplified more. I like the
vertical gray line which gives structure to the image. However, it is very much a large yellow blob. I think this could be improved by lowering the intensity of the horizontal part of the helmet a little (which also returns a bit of the 3D effect). We could even try to add a slight gradient to that part (although possibly a gradient in a logo is not a good idea either).Quoted 3 lines
I know this feeling is not very helpful as-is because it doesn't say what needs to be fixed or improved.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 3 lines
In any case, this is not a very strong feeling, so I certainly won't oppose to this new logo just because of my vague comment, and I'll be happy to see a logo change accepted!
+1 to that!
Regards,
Arnout
Quoted 6 lines
The yellow ones become meaningless spots when reduced to around 100x100 pixels. The yellow color does not help much. :-/
The monochromatic ones still look like a helmet when reduced and
bw_logoseems to have more "volume" and looks like a construction helmet more thanbw_logo2.
Thanks for your concrete logo suggestions.
Hadas sent me another set of logo alternatives:
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/all_buildroot_logos.pdf
What is your favorite option?
Thanks,
baruch
--
http://baruch.siach.name/blog/ ~. .~ Tk Open Systems
=}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{=
- baruch at tkos.co.il - tel: +972.52.368.4656, http://www.tkos.co.il -
Quoted 38 lines · Baruch Siach
Hi Thomas, Carlos, Arnout, all,
Quoted 25 lines · Carlos Santos
Quoted 15 lines · Arnout Vandecappelle
On 13/09/2019 22:03, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
Do you mean that it seems oversimplified? I would say it is actually still much
more detailed/complex than the typical logo. The PNG is very high resolution, it becomes better if you zoom it out a lot (like it is intended to be used).For me, the logo2.png looks a bit better because it simplified more. I like the
vertical gray line which gives structure to the image. However, it is very much a large yellow blob. I think this could be improved by lowering the intensity of the horizontal part of the helmet a little (which also returns a bit of the 3D effect). We could even try to add a slight gradient to that part (although possibly a gradient in a logo is not a good idea either).Quoted 3 lines
I know this feeling is not very helpful as-is because it doesn't say what needs to be fixed or improved.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 3 lines
In any case, this is not a very strong feeling, so I certainly won't oppose to this new logo just because of my vague comment, and I'll be happy to see a logo change accepted!
+1 to that!
Regards,
ArnoutQuoted 6 lines
The yellow ones become meaningless spots when reduced to around 100x100 pixels. The yellow color does not help much. :-/
The monochromatic ones still look like a helmet when reduced and
bw_logoseems to have more "volume" and looks like a construction helmet more thanbw_logo2.Thanks for your concrete logo suggestions.
Quoted 8 lines
Hadas sent me another set of logo alternatives:
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/all_buildroot_logos.pdf
What is your favorite option?
Thanks,
baruch
Based on the rigorous criterion of personal taste I'd choose #1 but with the darker color used in #3.
Signature · 1 line
Carlos Santos <[email protected]>
Hi Baruch,
See inlines below.
Quoted 25 lines · Baruch Siach
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 15:15:03 +0300
From: Baruch Siach <[email protected]>
To: buildroot <[email protected]>
Cc: Hadas Cohen <[email protected]>
Subject: [Buildroot] Buildroot Logo PictographHi Buildroot developers,
We have a nice recognizable logo that illustrates what Buildroot is about. Being far from expert (or even amateur) in graphic design, I find it perfect. But when Hadas Cohen, SolidRun's graphic designer, considered using the Buildroot logo in a brochure, she noticed a problem. It turns out that a realistic picture is no go for logo design. As a result she could not use the logo as is, because it looks markedly different than other logos in the brochure.
Hadas referred me to this professional looking explanation of why photograph is not a good choice for a logo:
https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1270284
Hadas also collected a few hundred random logos to demonstrate the point:
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/2616906744_a238697a95_b.jpg
Quoted 7 lines
SolidRun management agreed to let Hadas design an iconic pictograph version of the Buildroot logo. Here is the result.
Two colored logo alternatives:
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/colored_logo.png
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/colored_logo2.png
This is a clearcut trademark conflict with MontaVista Hard Hat Linux,
https://www.computerhistory.org/revolution/personal-computers/17/307/1222. Also google "hardhat linux logo", and asking for trouble, as is the yellow hardhat currently displayed on the Buildroot site.
Whatever logo we choose, before investing in graphics we need to do a careful trademark search. I suggest that you ask Thomas about the possible adverse results of trademark conflicts. You really need to be careful.
It is clear that we also need trademark protection for whatever logo is chosen. This is not cheap.
- yba
Quoted 20 lines
Two monochromatic alternatives:
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/bw_logo.png
http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/bw_logo2.pngHadas can provide the vectorized SVG and PDF sources of these raster images.
What do you think?
baruch
--
http://baruch.siach.name/blog/ ~. .~ Tk Open Systems
=}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{=
- baruch at tkos.co.il - tel: +972.52.368.4656, http://www.tkos.co.il -
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot at busybox.net
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
Signature · 3 lines
9590 8E58 D30D 1660 C349 673D B205 4FC4 B8F5 B7F9 ~. .~ Tk Open Systems
=}-------- Jonathan Ben-Avraham ("yba") ----------ooO--U--Ooo------------{=
mailto:yba at tkos.co.il tel:+972.52.486.3386 http://tkos.co.il skype:benavrhmOn 22/09/2019 07:53, Jonathan Ben Avraham wrote:
[snip]
Quoted 4 lines
This is a clearcut trademark conflict with MontaVista Hard Hat Linux,
https://www.computerhistory.org/revolution/personal-computers/17/307/1222. Also google "hardhat linux logo", and asking for trouble, as is the yellow hardhat currently displayed on the Buildroot site.
First of all, if there is a trademark issue, this new logo doesn't change that
because we've already been using the hardhat logo for 10 years or so.
Second, does MontaVista really have a trademark here? I used the USPTO search
engine to find "hard hat linux" and turned up nothing. I didn't search for the logo itself because that's more difficult to do, but it would be surprising if they held a trademark on the logo but not the name.
Quoted 3 lines
Whatever logo we choose, before investing in graphics we need to do a careful trademark search. I suggest that you ask Thomas about the possible adverse results of trademark conflicts. You really need to be careful.
I disagree. If we have to change our logo, so be it. And it's hard for anyone
to sue for damages because there's nobody to sue or no money to be gained from it.
Quoted 1 line
It is clear that we also need trademark protection for whatever logo is chosen.
I disagree with this as well. If someone else wants to use the same logo, I
don't think we have a problem with that.
Quoted 1 line
This is not cheap.
That I agree with :-)
Regards,
Arnout
Quoted 25 lines
?- yba
Quoted 20 lines
Two monochromatic alternatives:
?http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/bw_logo.png ?http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/bw_logo2.png
Hadas can provide the vectorized SVG and PDF sources of these raster images.
What do you think?
baruch
Signature · 7 lines
??? http://baruch.siach.name/blog/????????????????? ~. .~?? Tk Open Systems =}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{= ? - baruch at tkos.co.il - tel: +972.52.368.4656, http://www.tkos.co.il - _______________________________________________ buildroot mailing list buildroot at busybox.net http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
Quoted 9 lines · Arnout Vandecappelle
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 16:40:12 +0200
From: Arnout Vandecappelle <[email protected]>
To: Jonathan Ben Avraham <[email protected]>, Baruch Siach <[email protected]>
Cc: Hadas Cohen <[email protected]>,
buildroot <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Buildroot] Buildroot Logo PictographOn 22/09/2019 07:53, Jonathan Ben Avraham wrote:
[snip]
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
This is a clearcut trademark conflict with MontaVista Hard Hat Linux,
https://www.computerhistory.org/revolution/personal-computers/17/307/1222. Also google "hardhat linux logo", and asking for trouble, as is the yellow hardhat currently displayed on the Buildroot site.First of all, if there is a trademark issue, this new logo doesn't change that because we've already been using the hardhat logo for 10 years or so.
A good case can be made that the Buildroot Association has never used the yellow hardhat in the sense of a trademark.
In order to be considered a trademark there are specific legal tests that must be passed. Merely *decorating* a web site with an image does not in itself confer any rights to use that image in the sense of a trademark. The fact that this decoration has been used for many years does not constitute an assertion of title to trademark, nor does it protect the Association from legal claims of dilution of brand by any party who might in the future elect to register the yellow hardhat as a trademark of some software business.
AFAIK the Buildroot Association has never even made a claim or an assertion that the yellow hardhat is a symbol of either the Buildroot software or of the Buildroot Association. Such assertion and claim is an important part of the legal test for trademark use. Before investing any more time in the image and its use, I advise the association to at least publish a notice that the yellow hardhat in some specific way is considered to be a symbol of the Buildroot software.
Quoted 4 lines
Second, does MontaVista really have a trademark here? I used the USPTO search engine to find "hard hat linux" and turned up nothing. I didn't search for the logo itself because that's more difficult to do, but it would be surprising if they held a trademark on the logo but not the name.
Either MontaVista or some other company could register the yellow hardhat as a trademark of some Open Source or Linux-related software product or company and sue the Buildroot Association. My advice is to forestall this by at least making a public claim that the yellow hardhat is a symbol of the Buildroot software or of the Buildroot Association.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Whatever logo we choose, before investing in graphics we need to do a careful trademark search. I suggest that you ask Thomas about the possible adverse results of trademark conflicts. You really need to be careful.
I disagree. If we have to change our logo, so be it. And it's hard for anyone to sue for damages because there's nobody to sue or no money to be gained from it.
When you have to change the logo because you haven't taken steps to protect it, you are showing disrespect to the volunteers who worked to create and promote the logo, and then worked again to replace it.
Furthermore, when you have to change the logo because you were careless about protecting it, you bring disrepute to the Association.
It is not hard for anyone to sue. There are thousands of trolls who sue beneficiaries of unclaimed insurance pay-outs for bringing the pay-outs to their attention, patent and trademark trolls. These people think nothing of filing claims. If one claim in ten pays out then their business is worthwhile. I myself have been sued by one such troll. I won the case, but it cost money. You don't' want to the there.
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 1 line
It is clear that we also need trademark protection for whatever logo is chosen.
I disagree with this as well. If someone else wants to use the same logo, I don't think we have a problem with that.
We do have a problem. If a company decides tomorrow that the yellow hardhat is available for use as a trademark, registers it and aggressively defends it, then we will have to stop using it because the Association does not have the resources to defend a claim it has never made.
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 2 lines
This is not cheap.
But it is also not that expensive to get minimal legal advice on how to protect a logo or symbol.
- yba
Quoted 31 lines
That I agree with :-)
Regards,
ArnoutQuoted 25 lines
?- yba
Quoted 20 lines
Two monochromatic alternatives:
?http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/bw_logo.png ?http://tinkie.tkos.co.il/buildroot-logo/bw_logo2.png
Hadas can provide the vectorized SVG and PDF sources of these raster images.
What do you think?
baruch
--
??? http://baruch.siach.name/blog/????????????????? ~. .~?? Tk Open Systems =}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{= ? - baruch at tkos.co.il - tel: +972.52.368.4656, http://www.tkos.co.il -
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot at busybox.net
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
Signature · 3 lines
9590 8E58 D30D 1660 C349 673D B205 4FC4 B8F5 B7F9 ~. .~ Tk Open Systems
=}-------- Jonathan Ben-Avraham ("yba") ----------ooO--U--Ooo------------{=
mailto:yba at tkos.co.il tel:+972.52.486.3386 http://tkos.co.il skype:benavrhm