[Marketing] first mockup of a rollup banner for booths

[Sean DALY]

I think we're in agreement!

Gary, are you able to sub VAG Rounded Light and justify / match width
of the Sugar on top?

I really appreciate that we are getting this done quickly, I can place
the LinuxTag banner order rapidly and Mike can do the same for NECC

next up... the boot sequence which needs to be done by this weekend (!)

thanks

Sean


On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Christian Marc Schmidt
<christianmarc at gmail.com> wrote:
> Comments inline:
>
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Sean DALY <sdaly.be at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Looking better & better, thanks Gary!
>>
>> * size of "sugar" in title: I understood Eben to say that the font
>> size should be adjusted so the absolute width of "sugar" matched
>> "learning" and "platform" (this differs from Walter's suggestion to
>> use the same point size). Of course, the VAG Rounded Light will be a
>> little wider. For my part, I like the big "sugar" on the top.. banner
>> visible over people's heads as they crowd around the booth looking at
>> XOs and netbooks :D
>>
>> * If you can swap VAG Rounded Light in, please by all means do so (I
>> can buy & transmit it in a few hours if need be but will be traveling
>> tomorrow), one way or another I feel we will be using that for
>> "official" marketing materials. (Christian will remember that an early
>> draft of the first press release I did had all the text in MgOpen
>> Modata and ultimately we stayed with Helvetica instead)
>
> Yes, we should really be using VAG! For longer text paragraphs we
> should use Helvetica (for legibility), but for headlines VAG whenever
> possible.
>
> VAG usually looks better with a little tracking (not too much, though)...
>
>>
>> * I prefer the ring centered like this; the other way felt top-heavy
>> to me. I like that there are only two Activity icons above the ring.
>> N.B. A vertical rollup booth banner is ideally placed beside/ in front
>> of a booth, not in it or behind it and not behind a table...
>>
>> * Colors - much better bravo
>>
>> * Speak - yes better he needs to be looking at *something* in the banner :-)
>>
>> * The lower logo / URL. The recall of the title using color is I think
>> visually strong in terms of branding. I think this is important.
>>
>> To my mind, a completely grey logo +.org is not the way to go, it
>> won't be visible and as such, won't communicate the URL. It's also
>> counter to the logo whose strength is in the fatness+color. If we
>> can't do the "sugar" fattened & colored like it is in the logo, it
>> would be much better to leave off the URL entirely and just leave the
>> logo.
>>
>> But I think that would be a mistake, the goal of a booth banner (or
>> other OOH, or TVC, none of which we have done yet so this is a new
>> problem) is to make an impression when people are *not* in front of a
>> computer and the "real" logo + ".org" will succeed on three counts:
>>
>> * branding
>> * communicating we are community, not a company
>> * retention of the URL
>>
>> If Sugar Labs owned all the TLD variants (.com / .net / .info) it
>> would be less of an issue; but the dot com and the "lab" singular
>> variants belong to squattters. We *are* well-referenced now, but only
>> for "sugar labs" (20 out of top 20 Google), much less so for "sugar"
>> by itself (4 out of top 20). "sugar olpc" references OLPC.
>>
>> I could see the point if we had prefaced the logo'd URL with "www.",
>> but I propose an exception without "www." precisely because a shorter
>> URL will be easier to remember and is closer to the URL-free logo.
>>
>> Why don't we just put ".org" in a lighter grey? We keep an URL and the
>> logo's core is preserved
>
> I see your point. Not sure about the lighter gray. The only other
> solution that comes to mind is to separate the URL from the logo,
> which I agree will feel a little repetitive in this layout. So, for
> now I can let this one go--let's run with the version Gary showed
> last. ;)
>
> But in the long run I do think this is an issue that needs more
> exploration, because of how the .org interfaces with other suffixes
> that we started exploring much earlier. We may indeed end up using
> .org in this way--let's just keep an open mind on the issue until the
> logo system has been explored more fully.
>
>>
>> thanks
>>
>> Sean
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 5:24 PM, Eben Eliason <eben.eliason at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Looking much better!
>>>
>>> I think the higher placement of the ring works, especially since it
>>> does effectively remedy the "second ring" of activity icons nicely.
>>>
>>> I still find the type treatment at the top a bit odd. Christian, do
>>> you think we could letter-space "learning platform" so that it's
>>> justified with "sugar"?
>>>
>>> Let's stick with "sugarlabs.org" in gray
>>>
>>> Some of these colors look a little bit washed out (Speak, specifically).
>>>
>>> Otherwise, it looks fantastic!
>>>
>>> Eben
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 11:02 AM, Gary C Martin <gary at garycmartin.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>> OK, heaps of changes (try to snip each out below), some of you win, some of
>>>> you loose (this round) ;-)
>>>>
>>>> On 3 Jun 2009, at 11:55, Sean DALY wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> * Walter had mentioned it might be better for the "sugar" in the title
>>>>> to be the same font size as "learning platform", I'm inclined to agree
>>>>> but would need to look at that to be sure...
>>>>
>>>> Fonts are the same MgOpen Modata for now, will swap out with VAG when
>>>> someone says.
>>>>
>>>>> This would allow us to raise the ring a bit, ideally to
>>>>> the center of the banner; the title won't look top-heavy if the ring
>>>>> is centered vertically
>>>>
>>>> Ring is raised close to centre in this one, maybe too high now? Depends I
>>>> guess if this drops to the floor and you have a booth or table/chairs in the
>>>> way. Bounce with Eben about how high it should be ;-)
>>>>
>>>>> * Sugar Labs + URL logo: taking into account Eben and Christian's
>>>>> comments, I do think the "sugar" in that line should be the same color
>>>>> as on top...
>>>>
>>>> This version has SL logo with .org, I'm staying out of this fight, but at
>>>> least you can see both treatments now.
>>>>
>>>>> * I agree with Fred, we have a bit too much blue in our avatars, Speak
>>>>> icon, Browse icon in the center... is it difficult to change those
>>>>> colors?
>>>>
>>>> Sean, I've massively altered the colours as per the original PDF, this was
>>>> part in line with Walters comment on the XO colour not being Sugar interface
>>>> compliant, and choosing stronger variants from the various documents/files
>>>> and Frederick's examples. I think they now all come from points in the much
>>>> more finite UI set  of XO colours (except for the Browse Activity icon which
>>>> I've kept matching the Suagr logo blues as per Eben's call).
>>>>
>>>>> * The TurtleArt icon could have a peppier fill color maybe?
>>>>
>>>> Changed.
>>>>
>>>>> * Speak: could he be off to the left, looking longingly at the banner
>>>>> title? Will direct passersby's gazes to the title ;-)
>>>>
>>>> Lots of movement (due to trying to centre the ring). Gaze is more to the
>>>> right so hard to look up at banner title, I've tried to place to Speak is
>>>> looking to the ring of XOs.
>>>>
>>>> On 3 Jun 2009, at 14:51, Eben Eliason wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I think that it might work better to size "Sugar" relative to
>>>>> "learning platform" so that the lines are justified. Right now, the
>>>>> slight difference in line width makes it feel slightly off, and not
>>>>> quite intentional.
>>>>
>>>> My centre alignment was off in the previous version, any better for you with
>>>> this one?
>>>>
>>>>> Incidentally, I much prefer the ring to be below
>>>>> center, vertically, and would argue that this actually helps with the
>>>>> visual balance since the Sugar logo and the ring are the areas of bold
>>>>> color and weight.
>>>>
>>>> It is close to centre in v2 so you may not like. Likely compromise between
>>>> the two?
>>>>
>>>>> I'd recommend keeping the colors of the Browse icon in the center. It
>>>>> was a conscious decision to make this match the Sugar logo on my part,
>>>>> because I think it helps guide one's eye down through the focal points
>>>>> of the banner.
>>>>
>>>> Yep, I like that choice... even though it's a bit of a colour cheat, and the
>>>> XO that shared it must have left the collaboration after the others joined
>>>> ;-) I've matched the Browse icon with the logo again.
>>>>
>>>>> Removing this color from the Speak icon is probably the way to go.
>>>>
>>>> Colour changed.
>>>>
>>>>> I think the space is starting too look a bit cluttered with all the
>>>>> activity icons. Could we drop one or two of them?
>>>>
>>>> Possibly. Someone needs to make a final call.
>>>>
>>>>> I think the biggest
>>>>> issue for me is that, due to the limited space, these icons
>>>>> approximate a ring, creating a concentric effect, which is the
>>>>> opposite of what we want. It should convey a portion of a plane strewn
>>>>> with activities, and ironically I found fewer activities to convey
>>>>> that more effectively. Perhaps some rearrangement could also mitigate
>>>>> the double-ring effect.
>>>>
>>>> Lot's of movement, for better or worse, likely the ring centre shift is
>>>> going to be the first call someone needs to make.
>>>>
>>>>> Also, there seems to have been some corruption of the memorize icon.
>>>>> It looks like a solid block instead of individual tiles.
>>>>
>>>> Funny, I thought exactly the same when I saw the old mock-ups :-) The
>>>> Memorise Activity and it's SVG icon are definitely as now being shown – so
>>>> it the corruption in the current official release, or our mock-ups ;-b
>>>>
>>>> On 3 Jun 2009, at 14:54, Christian Marc Schmidt wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Let me chime in here--I really don't think we should start using the
>>>>> logo with the ".org" suffix, it begins to undermine the logo and it
>>>>> wasn't intended to be used that way. Isn't there another possibility?
>>>>
>>>> Understood, personally I'm not offended either way. From a technical point,
>>>> the only problem with the latest mock-up is that I had to do the .org in
>>>> MgOpen Modata so it's not quite a match (not a problem with v1 as the whole
>>>> grey sugarlabs.org was all MgOpen Modata).
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> --Gary
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> anything at christianmarcschmidt.com
>
> http://www.christianmarcschmidt.com
>
> 917/ 575 0013
>