On Sat, 02 Jul 2011 03:42:42 -0400, James Fisher <jameshfis...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 6:18 PM, Steven Schveighoffer
<schvei...@yahoo.com>wrote:
I think you are way overthinking this...
I've never quite understood what "overthinking" actually means. If you
mean
exploring all possible trains of thought the viewer, I'll take that as a
compliment. By all means disagree with what I say -- it's either valid
or
it's not (it may well not be!).
Then I disagree -- the case you bring up is obscure, plus it makes an
assumption that having to explain historical references in the logo is a
negative.
The main focus of the logo is the D, the moons might generate some trivia
questions, but is that really a turnoff?
rule #1 -- the logo should have the letter 'D' in it.
and, um... that's it :)
That is most definitely *not* it. By your specification, would you be
happy
with just the 'D' from Comic Sans?
No. But it would qualify as a D logo candidate -- it has a D in it. I
didn't imply that we should randomly select from all possible logos that
have a D in it to be our logo. I was saying that we should not make any
other rules disqualifying a logo because of some obscure invented
situation that might occur. As long as there's a D in it, it can be
considered as a logo, and if it generates quizzical looks, who cares?
There is a huge number of explicit and implicit rules and guidelines to
consider when creating the one image that will represent your project for
time immemorial. That's why there are books, websites, careers forged on
this.
As a non-designer, this is the *only* rule I would go by to disqualify a
logo for D -- if it doesn't have a D in it, I don't think it should be the
logo for D. I'll leave all the asthetics and other things up to the real
designers. I can only say what I like and don't like, I have no skill to
design such things.
-Steve
