[ubuntu-studio-devel] ubuntu-studio-devel Digest, Vol 110, Issue 5
set at ubuntustudio.org
Tue Jun 14 08:10:52 UTC 2016
Thanks for getting involved Ralf!
> On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 20:31:51 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>> On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 19:25:20 +0200, Set Hallstrom wrote:
>> No, don't even try this! Keep in mind, how you inspire the desire to
>> drink a coke from your company. Not by replacing the logo of the
>> Set Coke, with the traffic sign of a motorway restaurant and a
>> background picture showing chumps.
>> You will show the picture of a glass of coke, palms, shiny happy people
>> and place the Set Coke logo in the right bottom corner.
:) i agree (although, this is not about "my" brand, but we all know
that...right? :D) The thing is that we _will_ have the logo all over the
place like you suggested in your Post Scriptum.
On 2016-06-13 20:44, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> PS: Assumed the CoF is else were on the website, then replacing it by
> the category icons makes sense
In fact it made me realize that i didn't ask for anything to illustrate
the first section of the feature tour, that outlines what U-S is more
broadly. That would be the place for the logo as placed in Geirdal's
proposals. It would also be a great place for a background that is
>> The background pictures of the three graphics have nothing to do with
>> video, graphics and audio.
That is the point i tried to make of merging the abstract Mandelbrot
patterns with something more figurative like the icons. But it could be
(preferably one that has no brand)
Although, we have to be careful not to clutter it too much to preserve
>> Regarding colouration. Sound transfairs by air, air = blue, ok.
>> Graphic is seen by light, sunlight = orange, ok.
>> Violett for video is ok, but to complete something like a color circle,
>> I would chose green, and perhaps show something natural in combination
>> with video.
>> It would also be possible to make video orange and graphics green, just
>> blue for audio shouldn't be replaced, since the distros logo is blue
>> and IMO the important domain of Ubuntu Studio is audio.
Although i might not personally be 100% convinced about our color scheme
I'm not sure it is a good idea to start moving the colors around. Color
is a difficult thing to agree over, and setting up a voting system will
take a lot of time for something that is already established and
functioning. As far I understood, blue orange and purple where decided
before i joined. They have been the colors for the categories in
question since at least 14.04. I think changing them now is doing what
you warned us about above with your kokakola allegory: diluting focus.
It would also theoretically render false lots of things that we have
been done until now, not to mention the difficult task to synchronize
the community with the new color-values.
What we could discuss at this point is the exact tonality of the orange
and the purple (the blue being exactly defined since way back as Ralf
says). But because these images are not plain colors, i think Geirdal
should carry on with the current toning.
Discussion about exact hexadecimal tonality values should, if desired,
be focused on other graphic elements that we include in the desktop
(icons, woodmarks, highlight etc...) Changing "corporate" branding is
something that has to be well prepared and communicated, and therefor i
think they should go into a separate thread.
I'm sorry to come off as such a naysayer, Ralf. I think you make good
points and i'm glad you chose to take part of this. I like your ideas as
you suggested for the mockup of 16.04
I'd very much like to take a deeper look together with everyone into
this color thing for next LTS :)
Set Hallstrom aka sakrecoer
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the ubuntu-studio-devel