i like it for some reason, can you make a 1280x1024 for me so i can put them on my monitorsLathanStanley wrote:New Site Logo....
everyone seems to yell at eachother anyways...
New Spring site design, I need your feedback.
Moderator: Moderators
-
Tim Blokdijk
- Posts: 1242
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 11:18
Welcome,carbon wrote:...
I work in high res so this will obviously need to be scaled down. Tim, what dimensions would you want this in if you decide to use it?
...
WIP, crits welcome: http://www.wispaninternet.com/dev/SpringLogo.jpg
The current header is made out of two pictures that slide in on each other to make it scale with different resolutions.
The Sping logo is a separate picture.
If you can make good replacements for these two pictures
http://newspring.clan-sy.com/theme/spri ... r-left.jpg
http://newspring.clan-sy.com/theme/spri ... -right.jpg
I would advice to make it match with the current theme as I don't know how long it will take for someone to make a total new design.
You can adjust the width of the pictures as long as both combined give a width wider then 1680px.
It's also possible to use only one picture that is wider then 1680px. It can be fixed to the top left or right of the screen.
Picture hight is fixed at this moment you would have to change the code yourself if you like to have a different hight.
Maybe you can take a look at this topic and use it as a basis? http://spring.clan-sy.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=1921
If you replacements get some positive feedback here then I will include them.
Some general things to keep in mind, try to keep it mod neutral, I/we need the source files. GIMP if possible but if enough people like to work with PhotoShop and can maintain the site graphics without my help then that's fine to.
The Spring logo is a bit of a open discussion, multiple logo's are floating around and no good way to pick one for now.
I like to have some form of competition, AF is against that, Neutralise is mia.
I can put up LathanStanley's logo until we figure out how to do this?
-
SwiftSpear
- Classic Community Lead
- Posts: 7287
- Joined: 12 Aug 2005, 09:29
We'll be using some variation of the current logo. It's used too often all throughout spring crap all over the place. Every preview vid, most teaser screenshots, icons, lobby art, ingame art. It too established to change the logo so it won't be happening. That being said, feel free to ask for virtually any variation you can think of in any format, someone will be willing to take it on most likely...
-
Tim Blokdijk
- Posts: 1242
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 11:18
-
SwiftSpear
- Classic Community Lead
- Posts: 7287
- Joined: 12 Aug 2005, 09:29
Isnt the logo just A capital R iin windings with the botom removed... Im sure the guy who made it said that...
Andway, Anyone could make one, its an easy shape to copy.
Also, like AF was saying it would not have to be exactly the same, just similare enough that people identifid it with spring.
aGorm
Andway, Anyone could make one, its an easy shape to copy.
Also, like AF was saying it would not have to be exactly the same, just similare enough that people identifid it with spring.
aGorm
I would strongly advise against modelling and rendering the logo especially if it shows of gometry of any kind. The logo is flat and imo the attempts to show versions of it with bevels are not good.
A vector graphics version such as an svg, a photoshop shape, a flash file, or an svg scaled up to an absurd resolution and saved as a png should do the trick
A vector graphics version such as an svg, a photoshop shape, a flash file, or an svg scaled up to an absurd resolution and saved as a png should do the trick
-
SwiftSpear
- Classic Community Lead
- Posts: 7287
- Joined: 12 Aug 2005, 09:29
With modeling and rendering I can play with alot more visual tricks quickly and easily... Textures and whatnot are easier to slap on a model than an image. Also lighting from different angles and different geometry features, especially in the blades, take a long time to emulate entirely in 2D. I don't want to work with it entirely in 3D, but a 3D version can be a useful tool to play with.AF wrote:I would strongly advise against modelling and rendering the logo especially if it shows of gometry of any kind. The logo is flat and imo the attempts to show versions of it with bevels are not good.
A vector graphics version such as an svg, a photoshop shape, a flash file, or an svg scaled up to an absurd resolution and saved as a png should do the trick
http://spring.unknown-files.net/file/34 ... _Sun_Logo/
Right there you go, a photshop shape file and a PNG (3000 px wide ish) of the sun logo bit.
That what yoru after? I could model a 3D one tommorow lunch for you if you want, I have wings at work. Ive done it befor plenty of times, and on more complex logos.
aGorm
Right there you go, a photshop shape file and a PNG (3000 px wide ish) of the sun logo bit.
That what yoru after? I could model a 3D one tommorow lunch for you if you want, I have wings at work. Ive done it befor plenty of times, and on more complex logos.
aGorm
-
Tim Blokdijk
- Posts: 1242
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 11:18
I made my logo in Blender for that reason.
Anyway, I think I changed my mind a bit about how to pick a logo.
A topic with a poll between me and AF's version would fix the current problem. At any time we can have a new poll if a logo is updated or a new logo pop's up.
[EDIT]This was in reply to Swift[/EDIT]
Anyway, I think I changed my mind a bit about how to pick a logo.
A topic with a poll between me and AF's version would fix the current problem. At any time we can have a new poll if a logo is updated or a new logo pop's up.
[EDIT]This was in reply to Swift[/EDIT]
-
Tim Blokdijk
- Posts: 1242
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 11:18
Problem was that you went ahead without settling the discussion, my mind was still set on the direction I discussed with Neutralise. And I still like the idea of a more 'official' competition at some point. But it's not practical right now. As I see it your and my "new" Spring logo would be the only real options as the work Neutralise made deviates from the already know logo as brought up by Swift here.Tim Blokdijk wrote:I think I changed my mind a bit about how to pick a logo.
The photoshop format is still a problem, I can't change the size of the header for example without you making the needed changes to the photoshop logo. But life sucks, it's less flexible but as more people are interested in the graphics part of the site my involvement is less critical.
Just know that I hate .psd with a passion, and you guy's will hate it to when you try to open a .psd "source file" I had to generate with gimp as nobody with PhotoShop was around to make the needed changes.
Then make a png image and scale it up very big. The logo shouldnt need fixing or changing beyond simple resizing. And if it does then either it isnt good enough, its too complex, or the work needed isnt possible within 10 minutes and would be best done with someone in photoshop.
However your entire anti psd arguement assumes that every single offering of graphics will cater to your specific version of GIMP using the native format which is even less portable and even more cumbersome to share graphics with as it isnt even portable between most versions of gimp.
Photoshop is pretty much industry standard from what Ive heard and all the packages Ive used that have any half decent editing abilities can open the psd format. Its a common piece of software and rejecting artwork because its original source is a photoshop file is going to seriously dent your ability to do this site properly.
--------------------------------
As it is this site has no work being done on it. Free work to graphically improve it is awkward as eveyr change has to be stated, its implementation explained, and its reasoning. As an artist I find that hugely constraining and tbh I simply wouldnt bother. Your process should be fine for code changes, but creative changes just fall apart with it. This is a website, for an opensource project. People are far more likely to just drop something in your lap then take the effort to do stuff.
Ontop of that the sites source is for all intensive purposes unnaccessible. SVN is jargon to 99% of all users. Your never going to get anywhere while your telling people to use it. If you want any progress, provide downloadable source packages. Ontop of that your unlikely to get site improvements via .patch or .diff files.
Lets take an example, the background with that strange bar through the middle.
Lots of people have complained about it. Theres no justification behind it.
To replace it someone has to:
1) Say its bad
2) Say why its bad
3) Suggest a replacement
4) Say how theyre going to replace it
5) Seek approval and wait
6) Finally implement it and provide the diff
7) wait for it to be reviewed
8 ) wait for it to go on the site.
If they're new add the extra following steps
9) figure out what svn is
10) download an svn client
11) figure out howto do a checkout
Thats 11 steps altogether for anyone in this thread who doesnt know howto use svn already. This is incredibly time consuming, counter productive, and is HUGELY demotivating.
No work is currently being done on the site, you have a trustless ellaborate development process that isnt appropriate for blanket application and would be better suited to engine and code development. You desperatley need a rethink of your entire development ethic. I know you like documentation and proper structure but this just isnt how things work for this kind of project.
However your entire anti psd arguement assumes that every single offering of graphics will cater to your specific version of GIMP using the native format which is even less portable and even more cumbersome to share graphics with as it isnt even portable between most versions of gimp.
Photoshop is pretty much industry standard from what Ive heard and all the packages Ive used that have any half decent editing abilities can open the psd format. Its a common piece of software and rejecting artwork because its original source is a photoshop file is going to seriously dent your ability to do this site properly.
--------------------------------
As it is this site has no work being done on it. Free work to graphically improve it is awkward as eveyr change has to be stated, its implementation explained, and its reasoning. As an artist I find that hugely constraining and tbh I simply wouldnt bother. Your process should be fine for code changes, but creative changes just fall apart with it. This is a website, for an opensource project. People are far more likely to just drop something in your lap then take the effort to do stuff.
Ontop of that the sites source is for all intensive purposes unnaccessible. SVN is jargon to 99% of all users. Your never going to get anywhere while your telling people to use it. If you want any progress, provide downloadable source packages. Ontop of that your unlikely to get site improvements via .patch or .diff files.
Lets take an example, the background with that strange bar through the middle.
Lots of people have complained about it. Theres no justification behind it.
To replace it someone has to:
1) Say its bad
2) Say why its bad
3) Suggest a replacement
4) Say how theyre going to replace it
5) Seek approval and wait
6) Finally implement it and provide the diff
7) wait for it to be reviewed
8 ) wait for it to go on the site.
If they're new add the extra following steps
9) figure out what svn is
10) download an svn client
11) figure out howto do a checkout
Thats 11 steps altogether for anyone in this thread who doesnt know howto use svn already. This is incredibly time consuming, counter productive, and is HUGELY demotivating.
No work is currently being done on the site, you have a trustless ellaborate development process that isnt appropriate for blanket application and would be better suited to engine and code development. You desperatley need a rethink of your entire development ethic. I know you like documentation and proper structure but this just isnt how things work for this kind of project.
-
Tim Blokdijk
- Posts: 1242
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 11:18
PSD was a documented format till PhotoShop 6 as I understand it. From then on Adobe did not disclose any info about the format and as a result all import/export stuff is reversed engineered. Anyway I'm fine with PhotoShop source files, just know that I (and other Linux users) can't edit things effectively in it.
---
People can still drop something in my lap, but that would not mean I would actually do something with it. I might if it happens to fit into something I'm implementing at that time anyway. Following the process would more or less guaranties that the work done would actually be used.
You are free to provide downloadable source packages for people that can't use svn. I don't mind.
If someone like to replace the background with that strange bar through the middle then I would suggest to do the following:
(And if you would compare it with the actual dev. process it would match to a large degree.)
1) Say its bad and why.
2) Make a suggestion on how you would replace it.
3) See if the people involved don't think you're nuts and actually support the idea.
4) Make a replacement.
5) See if the people involved like it.
6) Get it in svn.
In this case people already did (1), a few did also did (2).
With (3) I support the idea to just remove it and I will get to it at some point but if somebody likes to get his (4) hands dirty, I don't mind it if it's done without me having to get involved. If you don't have svn access then I understand AF might accept your zipfile/plaintext with the changes in it.
If there are no (5) major objections AF will (6) commit it for you and it will show up on the dev. env. at newspring.clan-sy.com (once I have that automated).
The dev. process is just describing something that is already being done only more structured. I think that if you would actually follow the thing once without presuming it's complicated bureaucracy you would find it empowering not demotivating.
Also look at how MelTraX is working on the screenshots code, he did all the steps in some way or the other and is now at points 4 and 5.
It's true that right now I'm doing no (a little) work on the files in the www-root dir. But I disagree that no work is done on the site. I'm hard at work discussing and improving the development processes here with you, I like to automate the dev. env. and I'm trying to get some more people to involve themselves with the site. More code wise I'm trying to update the sql file with a phpbb schema. You people can expect me to start topics about site translation and more Spring video's within a week or so. All these things require a lot of time and have little to do with coding anything.
---
People can still drop something in my lap, but that would not mean I would actually do something with it. I might if it happens to fit into something I'm implementing at that time anyway. Following the process would more or less guaranties that the work done would actually be used.
You are free to provide downloadable source packages for people that can't use svn. I don't mind.
If someone like to replace the background with that strange bar through the middle then I would suggest to do the following:
(And if you would compare it with the actual dev. process it would match to a large degree.)
1) Say its bad and why.
2) Make a suggestion on how you would replace it.
3) See if the people involved don't think you're nuts and actually support the idea.
4) Make a replacement.
5) See if the people involved like it.
6) Get it in svn.
In this case people already did (1), a few did also did (2).
With (3) I support the idea to just remove it and I will get to it at some point but if somebody likes to get his (4) hands dirty, I don't mind it if it's done without me having to get involved. If you don't have svn access then I understand AF might accept your zipfile/plaintext with the changes in it.
If there are no (5) major objections AF will (6) commit it for you and it will show up on the dev. env. at newspring.clan-sy.com (once I have that automated).
The dev. process is just describing something that is already being done only more structured. I think that if you would actually follow the thing once without presuming it's complicated bureaucracy you would find it empowering not demotivating.
Also look at how MelTraX is working on the screenshots code, he did all the steps in some way or the other and is now at points 4 and 5.
It's true that right now I'm doing no (a little) work on the files in the www-root dir. But I disagree that no work is done on the site. I'm hard at work discussing and improving the development processes here with you, I like to automate the dev. env. and I'm trying to get some more people to involve themselves with the site. More code wise I'm trying to update the sql file with a phpbb schema. You people can expect me to start topics about site translation and more Spring video's within a week or so. All these things require a lot of time and have little to do with coding anything.
I might be interested in helping, but like you(tim) and AF have shown....there are a ridiculous amount of steps. Who truely judges what people have made? From what i've seen, it doesn't matter about general consensus as you have the final say in everything.
Whats more, I really don't have a clue where to go to download the site to actually make changes....anyone?
There should be a maximum of 2 steps involved for me.
Step 1: Make replacement
Step 2: Accept criticism, Repeat Step 1 until it looks amazing.
Someone would then stick it in the SVN (whatever that is).
The process you describe is utterly stupid. For starters, Justifying any design through words is easy, even if the design is shit. Its all a matter of opinion.
The website is an interface, anything that isn't intuitive, isn't obvious, is confusing or isn't consistent with the rest of the design even for a second should be changed.
If anyone at all who has problems using this interface, it means you did something wrong in your design. The design should speak for itself, anything you need to explain is bad design.
You have experience with your own website, you know its ins and outs, its quirks, how everything works, etc. Therefore your opinion on useability is completely and utterly void. You've trained yourself to use a bad interface, expecting everyone else to learn all the quirks and silly things is very bad.
A easy example of bad design in the current website is the way the website scales with your resolution:
You're essentially making multiple different interfaces of the same content (bad). If someone switches to another computer to view the same website or any number of different resolution scenarios. Everything has changed shape, so you have to relearn the positions of everything.
The site is terrible to use especially in low/high resolutions. A high resolution screen is generally a lot bigger than lower res screens. This means your eye will focus on certain parts of the screen on big monitors, if the site scales with that, it means the eye has to cover a larger physical area in order to find what they are looking for, where as if the site doesn't scale with resolution, the physical area the eye has to focus on is prettymuch the same independent of screen size
Whats more, I really don't have a clue where to go to download the site to actually make changes....anyone?
There should be a maximum of 2 steps involved for me.
Step 1: Make replacement
Step 2: Accept criticism, Repeat Step 1 until it looks amazing.
Someone would then stick it in the SVN (whatever that is).
The process you describe is utterly stupid. For starters, Justifying any design through words is easy, even if the design is shit. Its all a matter of opinion.
The website is an interface, anything that isn't intuitive, isn't obvious, is confusing or isn't consistent with the rest of the design even for a second should be changed.
If anyone at all who has problems using this interface, it means you did something wrong in your design. The design should speak for itself, anything you need to explain is bad design.
You have experience with your own website, you know its ins and outs, its quirks, how everything works, etc. Therefore your opinion on useability is completely and utterly void. You've trained yourself to use a bad interface, expecting everyone else to learn all the quirks and silly things is very bad.
A easy example of bad design in the current website is the way the website scales with your resolution:
You're essentially making multiple different interfaces of the same content (bad). If someone switches to another computer to view the same website or any number of different resolution scenarios. Everything has changed shape, so you have to relearn the positions of everything.
The site is terrible to use especially in low/high resolutions. A high resolution screen is generally a lot bigger than lower res screens. This means your eye will focus on certain parts of the screen on big monitors, if the site scales with that, it means the eye has to cover a larger physical area in order to find what they are looking for, where as if the site doesn't scale with resolution, the physical area the eye has to focus on is prettymuch the same independent of screen size