Artwork update

[jmak]

On 12/21/06, Vincent <imnotb at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 12/21/06, jmak <jozmak at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 12/21/06, Vincent <imnotb at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 12/21/06, jmak <jozmak at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On 12/21/06, Vincent < imnotb at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > They look very cool, just too bad the logo is plain again, I liked
> the
> > > > > glossy one...
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > The logo was kept simple intentionally to contrast with the text part;
> > > > the opposite how it was with edgy; there the logo image was glossified
> > > > the text part was simplified.
> > >
> > > Why does it have to contrast with the text? Is there some usability
> > > reasoning behind that or do you just like it?
> > >
> >
> > Normally, there must be a hierarchy behind the various compositional
> > elements. If visually everything is on the same level, it becomes
> > confusing. This is just a basic compositional principle.
>
> Ah, right.  But can't the logo and name be looked at as one?
>

I gave a second thought to the matter and I replaced all artworks with
the glossy logo. The text and the image have enough contrast, in term
of colors so they still function well.

-- 
2007 Calendar, Great Xmas gift
http://www.lulu.com/content/512622
http://jozmak.googlepages.com/