1.
http://s25.postimg.org/esn1suwof/VOTE_15_200_1.png
2.
https://i.imgur.com/IpLaQwA.png
3.
http://s25.postimg.org/ux09ull9r/VOTE_12_800.png
Anna!
Topic: ORA:: Logo submission & discussion thread - page 7. (Read 26239 times)
time to vote....
Deadline for voting on the logos. 31 August 2014!
Please remember to vote today, the designers have come up with some truly wonderful Logos!
Thanks to EVERYONE who participated, and thanks to Pentamon for organising things too
ORA will have a beautiful Logo, no doubt about that!
Please remember to vote today, the designers have come up with some truly wonderful Logos!
Thanks to EVERYONE who participated, and thanks to Pentamon for organising things too
ORA will have a beautiful Logo, no doubt about that!
Every submission will be appreciated for your efforts. I would like to take this opportunity to thank everyone that has put their effort in the designs. You will be appreciated.
very fine logos ITT. here is my vote:
1
https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FgZBAnCS.png&t=543&c=5R7s12uTARZtMQ
2
https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fs25.postimg.org%2Faywb4ewhb%2FORA_202_1000a.png&t=543&c=kouoWFJDUBTVPg
3
https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fs25.postimg.org%2Fesn1suwof%2FVOTE_15_200_1.png&t=543&c=zNnHXYJUrAkFMg
here is my vote:1
https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FgZBAnCS.png&t=543&c=5R7s12uTARZtMQ
2
https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fs25.postimg.org%2Faywb4ewhb%2FORA_202_1000a.png&t=543&c=kouoWFJDUBTVPg
3
https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fs25.postimg.org%2Fesn1suwof%2FVOTE_15_200_1.png&t=543&c=zNnHXYJUrAkFMg
My vote
1.
2.
3.
Extremely difficult to pick just three as all designs have been exceptional.
1.
2.
3.
Extremely difficult to pick just three as all designs have been exceptional.
I like that 1. 
2.
3.https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wookido.com%2Fuploads%2Fora%2Fora.jpg&t=543&c=RRnu5SbEAzy0WA
edit 08/31/2014
2.
3.https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wookido.com%2Fuploads%2Fora%2Fora.jpg&t=543&c=RRnu5SbEAzy0WA
edit 08/31/2014
my vote:
1
figroll contemporary design, it has movement in it and it is fresh
2
gvans square design, trying to be as objective as I can
3
original maximuss' original "ora key" design has cool retro attitude
There were a couple other very solid professional designs, not too easy to pick only three.
1
figroll contemporary design, it has movement in it and it is fresh2
gvans square design, trying to be as objective as I can3
original maximuss' original "ora key" design has cool retro attitudeThere were a couple other very solid professional designs, not too easy to pick only three.
My vote:
1.
2.
3.
1.
2.
3.
1.
2.
3.
2.
3.
Ok, my votes:
Number1
Number2
Number3 (just without "coin")
Number1
Number2
Number3 (just without "coin")
Lots of good submissions. Nice job to everybody.
My Vote
1)
2)
3)
1)
2)
3)
Thank you, gvans, you point out something that has tugged at my mind for a while: What is, strictly speaking, a logo? Just a glyph, or could it be a few letters, or even a font? And with that: are we looking for a logo, or the bigger picture, a clearly identifiable identity? How important is the recognition at the 'artificial' 16x16 pixel level on Coincap and exchanges?
It is also true that a bigger surface has that certain 'wow' factor. Look at the M.C. Escher-like pattern that kussaka's basic hexagon makes. I feel like looking into a beehive, or a fragment of the order that Ora radiates. (or could radiate)
How do you think - should we exclude all those designs that do not meet the strict criteria?
Or should we just encourage people to think of a simple, stand-alone design?
My personal approach is to let all designs stand as they are, but to definitely consider simplicity during voting.
Easy recognizable, is good.
Simple is good.
Full of meaning, is good.
Pentamon
It is also true that a bigger surface has that certain 'wow' factor. Look at the M.C. Escher-like pattern that kussaka's basic hexagon makes. I feel like looking into a beehive, or a fragment of the order that Ora radiates. (or could radiate)
How do you think - should we exclude all those designs that do not meet the strict criteria?
Or should we just encourage people to think of a simple, stand-alone design?
My personal approach is to let all designs stand as they are, but to definitely consider simplicity during voting.
Easy recognizable, is good.
Simple is good.
Full of meaning, is good.
Pentamon
I'd like to emphasize once more the essence of the logo. It has to function on it's own without supporting graphics. I don't intent to undermine the great designs done for additional graphics here, but just to remind you not to be blinded and dazzled by them too much
this is not a logo:
this is a logo:
this is not a logo:
this is a logo:
this is not a logo:
this barely might be:
but actually this is the version of this design that really does work in small scale too:
etc.etc.
Again, they all look great, with and without additional graphics and I like them all, but just something to think about when choosing the final one.
this is not a logo:
this is a logo:
this is not a logo:
this is a logo:
this is not a logo:
this barely might be:
but actually this is the version of this design that really does work in small scale too:
etc.etc.
Again, they all look great, with and without additional graphics and I like them all, but just something to think about when choosing the final one.
You are correct.
I'd like to emphasize once more the essence of the logo. It has to function on it's own without supporting graphics. I don't intent to undermine the great designs done for additional graphics here, but just to remind you not to be blinded and dazzled by them too much
this is not a logo:
this is a logo:
this is not a logo:
this is a logo:
this is not a logo:
this barely might be:
but actually this is the version of this design that really does work in small scale too:
etc.etc.
Again, they all look great, with and without additional graphics and I like them all, but just something to think about when choosing the final one.
this is not a logo:
this is a logo:
this is not a logo:
this is a logo:
this is not a logo:
this barely might be:
but actually this is the version of this design that really does work in small scale too:
etc.etc.
Again, they all look great, with and without additional graphics and I like them all, but just something to think about when choosing the final one.
Wow, losts of new stuff here. Good new stuff.
I will just get quickly back to the combined proposal where my square starfish version was used. If there will be further development with that starfish+ ora-key combination I would suggest using the rectangular starfish as negative like this
as the original idea of the square logo was to have infinite lenght fir the legs of the fish (blenfing to background), so should the starfish blend to the key rather that be just a picture laid on top of the key.
However the key is at it's best in it's original form in my opinion with pure "transformers" style, hard angles etc, whereas my starfish is softer with free arches and does not really meet the formal language of the key itself.
I will just get quickly back to the combined proposal where my square starfish version was used. If there will be further development with that starfish+ ora-key combination I would suggest using the rectangular starfish as negative like this
as the original idea of the square logo was to have infinite lenght fir the legs of the fish (blenfing to background), so should the starfish blend to the key rather that be just a picture laid on top of the key.
However the key is at it's best in it's original form in my opinion with pure "transformers" style, hard angles etc, whereas my starfish is softer with free arches and does not really meet the formal language of the key itself.
Jump to: