Gnome Logo on Slashdot
Recently, Jeff brought up the issue of the use of the old Gnome logo on Slashdot. The reasoning being that since we decided to switch to the new logo as our mark back in 2002, it would be nice if they used that mark to represent stories about us.
Unfortunately this request was shot down by Rob Malda, because the logo is "either ugly or B&W (read:Dull)".
Not to be discouraged, I had a go at revamping the logo to meet Slashdot's high standards. After all, if they were going to switch to the new logo, they would have done so when we first asked. The result is below:
This is based on an earlier design, but I think the drop shadow really completes the image. Iain managed to come up with a variant suitable for use on the games sub-site.
This looks ugly, look at it. Malda is blind, they should accept the original GNOME logo.
I think you should start from the .svg file (Inkscape) and do the drop-shadow feature there. As is,
- it's pixelised
- the shadow is badly cropped.
- there is some blurring.
Most importantly, there are some strong guidelines for the GNOME logo, http://live.gnome.org/LogoGuidelines
Sorry if this is discouraging. I am bad with graphics as well. In any case, there are some good artists on GNOME that can sort out such things.
Michael Zeltner -
You linked the wrong file on the earlier design, I think you meant the version without the 2 in its name.
And, please, tell me you're being sarcastic?
Just to re-iterate, any coloured GNOME foot will probably get shot down by http://live.gnome.org/LogoGuidelines
I agree with the anonymous guy, don't think this version looks good at all. Between the drop-shadow and the colouring, it seems to be the logo with a Slashdot skin, and really doesn't look good to me.
Instead, can I suggest something based on the 2.14 splash or the banner currently on the Gnome homepage? I think the white foot on blue background is a good look - simple and clean, without being boring.
Ulrik Sverdrup -
You are right. That's absolutely tacky enough for slashdot. Seriously, it goes well with the rest of the design ;-)
The foot is good, but the word probably doesn't need to be there because it will be in the context of the article, and it also is very hard to read because of the drop shadow.
Glad to see this wrong being righted!
It needs a photo of Cyborg Bill Gates getting crushed by the foot...also maybe something with more Google logo, then it would make it through Slashdot's rigorous design process
Take a look at Slashdot topics http://slashdot.org/topics.shtml Can someone please explain me how is Sony's logo better than GNOME's official logo (not the current Slashdot one) judging by colors (B&W) and dullness?
Murray Cumming -
Simon, at the moment the Logo Guidelines say "any single color may be used.", right at the start.
So, a simple colored logo would please Slashdot and the guidelines.
Anonymous Coward -
Man, this logo really sucks. Especially the unprofessional drop-shadows. It's perfect for Slashdot!
Ultimate Dinosaur 2004 -
rofl @ the post, double-rofl @ the people that didn't get it.
Jakub Steiner -
I know, I know. You guys just can't wait for April 1st.