On 02/08/2011 05:07 AM, Dr. Bernhard Dippold wrote: > Hi Jeff, all, > > Jeff Chimene wrote: >> On 02/07/2011 04:08 PM, Bernhard Dippold wrote: >>> Hi Jeff, * >>> >>> Jeff Chimene schrieb: >>>> Hi Bernard, Drew: >>>> >>>> Thanks so much for taking the time to answer my questions. I /really/ >>>> appreciate your help! I've tried to answer your questions inline below. >>>> I still have a few of my own. >>>> >>>> On 02/06/2011 03:57 PM, Bernhard Dippold wrote: >>>>> Hi Jeff, * >>>>> >>>>> Jeff Chimene schrieb: >>>>>> Hi Folks: >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm hoping someone can help w/ this request. I'd like to get a 5' wide >>>>>> banner for the SCALE event in California at the end of this month. >>>>>> >>>>>> Is there an official logo that's at least 600dpi resolution? >>>>> >>>>> Please have a look at the branding wiki page: >>>>> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Marketing/Branding#Resources >>>> >>>> Got it. Thanks >>> >>> So you found the links there in the table? They are different from the >>> link you give here >>>> >>>> Drew: I'm thinking this image: >>>> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:LibreOffice-Initial-Artwork-Colors_Guidelines_Valid1.png >>>> >>>> >>> This is *not* the official logo file, it just describes how the logo >>> should be used. >> >> It was simply a starting point, not the final banner contents. I spoke >> too informally for the list. >> >>> The links in the table at >>> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Marketing/Branding#Resources contain >>> the logo in different versions. Like the one I mentioned here: >>>>> >>>>> The largest exported PNG version is 2000px width >>> >>> It's direct link in the contemporary version is: >>> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:LibreOffice_Initial-Artwork-Logo_ColorLogoContemporary_2000px.png >> >> Thanks. I've been looking at that image. >> >>>>> but you can use Inkscape with the source file linked >>>>> there to export larger versions too. >>>> >>>> Hi Bernard: >>>> >>>> Is that the image here? >>>> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:LibreOffice-Initial-Artwork-Colors_Guidelines_Valid1.png >>>> >>>> >>>> If not, where do I find it? >>> See above. >>> >>> I can scale it via Gimp. >>> >>> Please *never* upscale a bitmap to get a larger image (except you want >>> to reach the pixelized view as a matter of artistic element). >> >> Right. I was going upscale the vector version. My apologies for the >> confusion. I realize I have to use Inkscape (upscale vector, not bitmap). > > +1 >> >>> If you can't use the vector source from the table, I'll create a bitmap >>> in the right dimensions for you. >> >> Well, I know far less about Inkscape than Gimp. However, I really don't >> want to make additional work for you. > > It's not really hard to do so. >> >>>> The printer is named "VistaPrint" >>> >>> Know it - used it for my private business cards. >>>> >>>> It looks like the best resolution I can get with them is 75 dpi (see >>>> below) >>> >>> So you want a logo in 5' width and 75 dpi resolution? >>> >>> The file would be 5 (foot) x 12 (inch to foot) x 75 (DPI) = 4500 px in >>> width and 1436 px in height. >>> >>> The resulting banner would be 5' x 1.596' (1,52m x 0,484m) >>> >>> I don't know if you want to print the "Basic" or "Contemporary" logo. >> >> Contemporary. Is that what Cor used? > > Cor's vertical banner used the installer graphic containg the contemporary > logo. > > The other banner (ordered by a developer - Kendy IIRC) uses the basic > design. >> >>> While the basic version consists of only two colors (Green and Black), >>> the contemporary uses different gradients in the green tone and grey. >>> >>> I don't know if there will be a difference in the price - the gradient >>> between two different green tones will lead to a multitude of colors, so >>> it might be more expensive... >> >> The VistaPrint pricing does not seem to be color sensitive. > > So I would prefer the contemporary version, looking more friendly and > modern by providing gradients and replacing black by grey. >> >>>>> Especially with posters and banners please remember to include the >>>>> necessary white space area around the logo in your design. >>>> >>>> Right (see below re: full bleed) > > Not only for bleed - the final result should contain the white space. > > Therefore you have to add the bleed borders to the file - the only action > that really needs a bit of time. >>>> >>>>>> I see that >>>>>> there's an interesting design for a vertical banner. Is that design >>>>>> ready yet? >>>>> >>>>> Which design do you talk about? >>>>> Can you link it here? >>>> >>>> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:Banner_Rough_Ideas_fromcornouws.png >>>> >>> >>> There are different ideas on the file. >>> >>> Cor used no 3 on FOSDEM - see below. >> >> >From Cor's response, I found the zip file and the logo. I don't know how >> folks downstream (i.e. subsequent U.S. shows) would react to a vertical >> logo, but I think it's cool. >> >>>>> What size do you need? >>>> >>>> Full Bleed Size (starting document size) >>>> 71.80" x 30.20" >>>> 1824mm x 767mm >>>> 5385 x 2265 pixels >>> >>> That's not the vertical banner - do you speak of the logo banner again? >> >> Yes. That's the size from VistaPrint's specifications. The vertical >> banner would be rotated to fit. As far as I can tell, VistaPrint >> recommends an image sized to the above dimensions, full bleed. Without >> scaling the current images, I agree, there will be too much whitespace >> around the logo. > > Not too much whitespace is my concern - too less is problematic. >> >> Here's my dilemma: >> >> 1. You've already done the work to upscale the vertical image. I'd like >> to reuse that work. But, I don't know how other people would react to a >> vertical orientation. > > If you want to go with one banner, I'd leave the vertical one out, as the > logo > is in relative small scale on it. > > With two banners, the smaller one could have the vertical orientation. >> >> 2. The contemporary logo would have to be upscaled to get to 5385 x 2265 >> pixels. > > This doesn't mean more than a few seconds of work in Inkscape. > >>> I don't know how the banner will be used at future tradeshows, >>> so I don't want to pre-position the image to handle the whitespace. > > There is no sense in cutting and sewing the banner in order to modify the > whitespace for different fairs and tradeshows. > > I'd recomment to position it in the middle, because I think this would be > reasonable fo rmost use-cases. >> >> I guess the best answer is to scale the contemporary logo in svg format >> to VistaPrint's full-bleed measurements at a resolution that keeps the >> total file size under 12 Mb. If that can be done via PICT, that's fine. >> It may be that due to embedded font considerations, it's easier to send >> as a BMP. > > I don't know what PICT means, but I'd recommend using PNG, as every > printer does know about their restrictions. >> >> I don't know what's involved to get Inkscape to export a PDF that's >> useable by VistaPrint (there's bound to be an issue w/ fonts). > > My main concern is that Inkscape exports RGB colors while most printers > use CMYK colors in PDFs. > > Fonts are not a problem, as the logo characters have already been > converted to paths in the source. > > There are PDF/EPS conversion problems with transparency in Inkscape > (sometimes with gradients too), so it is necessary to have a close look at > the export results. > > In principle PDF export produces higher quality results, because the file > stays in vector format (especially if the result needs to become rescaled a > bit). >> [...] >>>> >>>> I'd like some feedback from you folks: do you want a 75 dpi banner, or >>>> should we go for higher resolution (but more $) Personally, I think the >>>> "LibreOffice-Initial-Artwork-Colors_Guidelines_Valid1.png" (if that's >>>> the logo) will be OK at 75 dpi: graphic edges are straight, sans-serif >>>> font. At a distance (> 6 feet), I think we can get by for a trade show. >>> >>> I think 75 dpi per color should be enough, but I'm not that experienced >>> in creating vinyl banners. >> >> How did the vertical banner look at that resolution? It seems like the >> shading at the upper left and lower right edges would benefit with >> higher resolution. > > I don't think so: even gradients and shadings are not very detailed.. >> >>>> If we buy by 10-Feb, we get a free banner which has the following >>>> dimensions: >>>> >>>> Full Bleed Size (starting document size) >>>> 35.70" x 20.20" >>>> 907mm x 513mm >>>> 2678 x 1515 pixels >>> >>> So you need this size too. >> >> If we can accomplish this by 10-Feb. After that, it's not free. I'd use >> the contemporary logo, in svg format and downscale it to the above >> dimensions. Again, the same export issues occur with the font. > > Perhaps you could use this size for the vertical banner? > > With some modifications in the source the broader width might be > possible, i you want to avoid a white stripe at the side of the banner > (I don't know if you can cut the Vinyl banner without problems). >> >>> Please avoid scaling from one to another size (and if you need to: >>> downscaling to the smaller size is less problematic than upscaling). >>> >>> It would be best, if you would extract .png bitmap files from the source >>> with Inkscape. >>>> >>>> Document Trim Size (final size after being cut) >>>> 35.50" x 20.00" >>>> 902mm x 508mm >>>> 2662 x 1500 pixels >>>> >>>> Again, 75 dpi, but up close (< 3 ft) it should be OK. >>>> >>>>> Cor used a enlarged version of the installer image for FOSDEM, but there >>>>> have been some other proposals in the past... >>>> >>>> Is that image available? >>> >>> Yes - it is contained in the Initial Artwork package linked from the wiki: >>> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:LibreOffice-Initial-Artwork-Package.zip >> >> Right. Got it. >> >>> I extracted the file for Cor to a size of 6170 x 11811 px (for a banner >>> of 1 m height and 52 cm width in 300 dpi) - would be 4 m in 75 dpi ;-) >>> >>> Can you tell me the size you want it? >> >> Well, that size is interesting. According to VistaPrint's >> specifications, their full-bleed dimensions are 5385 x 2265 pixels. So, >> Cor's image would be too tall, and too narrow. >> >> I should think that downscaling to 5385 pixels would be OK. Whitespace >> for the vertical orientation wouldn't be so visually distracting as the >> whitespace of the horizontal orientation. > > I think it's the other way round: > > The horizontal logo only banner will not > experience any problem in adding some more white space to the already > existing white area. > > Adding white areas to the vertical banner might be less attractive, as the > image itself contains a border. showing cleary, that the design has been > re-used from another resource... > >> I think it would look good, >> but I don't want to force that decision on future tradeshow people. > > Just discuss it here (and perhaps on the marketing list). If the group can > agree on a design and scale, we should use this one as "official resouce". > [...]
OK. We (Drew, mostly) have 72x30 images on the wiki Quoting from http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/design/msg00779.html > http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:Banner_72inx30in_contemp.pdf > > [change pdf to svg again to get source files] > > With the non-contemporary logo, as last night > http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:Banner_72inx30in.pdf > > Both have been adjusted to conform to the white space requirements. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to design+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/design/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
