# Colobot Forum - International Colobot Community

Full Version: Fixing logos (this time properly)
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Since a particular individual just can't let it go and constantly reminds us about his little problem, I want to end this comical debate which started a year ago. I fixed all the little bugs in logos by aligning nodes properly and using basic math. The original logos were not exactly what they were supposed to be, the new ones have qualities which I wanted the original ones to have but apparently I didn't have as much experience with vector graphics. They look almost the same, which is more than ok. This means that they don't need to be updated everywhere at once (if at all), but gradually, since most people won't see the difference anyway.

Most important changes and features:
• The base size for logos is 512x512 pixels, it doesn't really matter though since vectors are easy to scale.
• The coordinates of each node are integers for easier calculations. They are also all even. What a nice feature noticeable by everyone looking at the logo. Not.
• `T`s in TT logo are now perfectly symmetrical.
• All letters have the same thickness which equals 64 pixels, which also "happens" to be the height of the recesses. Completely by accident of course. Not.
• Imagine that the recesses divide the logo into 5 columns.  Then, the three larger columns are of the same size, the other two are of size 64.
• The `C`s are now perfectly round, as they were created from circles and their nodes were not touched since cutting. No more bugs to find here.
• The gaps between parts of letters are consistent. I'll leave the proof as an exercise to the reader. (Note: the gaps were to match the diagonal gaps, but some rounding was done (actually, flooring, to remove the illusion that even though the gaps are perfectly the same, they still seem like they are not)).
• Angles and proportions are now consistent. Thickness of letters is also consistent, although some letters are a little bit thicker than previously.
• The symmetry of the emblems was fixed, now there should be no problems with joining the logos together vertically (note: in Inkscape you will see white gaps anyway, but it's the nature of Inkscape, not a bug in logos).
• The letters are not perfectly matching the 3D logo of the game or any font. The letters were designed specifically for these 2D logos to look as good as possible on the emblems. This is a feature, whether totally not a specific person likes it or not. They are very similar to the game's logo font anyway.
• Everything is perfectly aligned with each other, see the pictures below showing new logos with guidelines.
• Colors are exactly the same. They're fine.
In the pictures below, on the left is the original logo, in the centre is the logo from @RaptorParkowsky , which was denied a year ago, on the right is my proposition. This is only a lazy preview, so don't kill me for the grey border and low resolution.

Is the change needed? No. Does a certain individual (not me) need a change for some unknown reason? Maybe. Regardless, it is up to you to decide -- just vote in the poll above the post. The poll will end in a week from the publication of this post.

Also, I will not insult you for having a different opinion than mine. I will also not haunt you for months if I won't be happy with the decision. I also may make some more modifications if you think they are needed, even if I don't like them. I mean, they're our logos, right? Not only mine. I just want this debate to end once and for all. And it is my sincere hope that it will when the poll ends.

In case of draw, only TerranovaTeam members votes shall be counted. If there's still draw, only administrators' votes shall be counted. If there's still draw, the result shall be "No".

I don't want to make a... nevermind. But this thread is pleasing for this...
For TT I prefer @RaptorParkowsky concept. For ICC @Simbax 's concept.

My decision is this because @RaptorParkowsky wanted to keep logos with their 3D counterpart which is cool idea for me. But @Simbax ICC concept looks almost the same (even better!) as the @RaptorParkowsky concept.

So I refrain from giving my vote.
Round 2, huh?

I said it before (I think) and I'll say it again, Raptor's TT logo seems too thick. Too big change I'd say. Sorry. I fell like right TT is just right.

The ICC logo though, when you put all 3 next to each other they all look eh. I find the best looking "CC"s to be in center logos, the "I" there is again, too thick for my taste. "I" feels off in both logos anyway, even in Simbax's logo it feels disproportionately thick, even though it matches exact proportions of TTs above

Having to choose both logos I think I'd go with right ones. Just want to make it clear, I'm not sold on right ICC logo