You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@mahout.apache.org by Lukas Vlcek <lu...@gmail.com> on 2008/03/16 22:47:46 UTC
Re: Mahout logo proposal (second refactoring)
Hi,
http://picasaweb.google.com/lukas.vlcek/Mahout/photo#5178454146860270354
is a Mahout logo proposal which I consider near-final version (#2.5)
I would like to hear your comments. I think was able to accomodate most of
your comments - the figure of Mahout is bigger and is not that abstract and
I put the beach balloon back. Also I was experimenting with mexican hat as
well but I didn't like the result so it didn't make it into final proposal.
As for the MAHOUT type it is regular font called Impact (only in 80% of its
original height). This can be changed but I think that this kind of font
fits the logo very well. I think the font in previous version (proposal #2)
was Arial Black which look good as well. I already do have everything in
vectors (svg).
Regards,
Lukas
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 8:02 PM, Jeff Eastman <je...@collab.net> wrote:
> Personally, I like the vertical logo better than the horizontal one. The
> icon is larger than the text and I favor that balance. Perhaps the
> mahout on the elephant could be waving a hat like a rodeo cowboy<grin>.
> That would mix metaphors a bit, but add some whimsy to the logo and make
> the mahout stand out more. (Someone on the Hadoop list was looking for
> "Hadoop wranglers" a while back, so the precedent has already been set).
>
> Great initiative Lukas, keep it up!
> Jeff
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: juber patel [mailto:juberpatel@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 12:45 AM
> To: mahout-dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Mahout logo proposal (second refactoring)
>
> hi,
>
> i am new to mahout-dev.
>
> shouldn't the mahout, the guy, be a bit more prominent? when this logo
> is in thumbnail size he would be hardly visible.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Dawid Weiss
> <da...@cs.put.poznan.pl> wrote:
> >
> > Oh, ok -- I'd think we should stick to the font face of Hadoop, so
> that there is
> > a clear visual link connecting the two. But maybe others have
> different opinions
> > about it.
> >
> > D.
> >
> >
> >
> > Lukas Vlcek wrote:
> > > Actually the font is not hand-drawn but regular vector type. The
> same type
> > > is used in both versions (standard and horizontal). Anyway, I can
> try
> > > experimenting with other fonts as well but I do personally like
> this one.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 8:50 AM, Dawid Weiss
> <da...@cs.put.poznan.pl>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> +1 for the basic version. My comment about fonts still applies
> (I'd prefer
> > >> more
> > >> regular glyphs, not hand-drawn).
> > >>
> > >> D.
> > >>
> > >> Lukas Vlcek wrote:
> > >>> Hi,
> > >>>
> > >>> Here is my second proposal for the Mahout logo:
> > >>> Basic version -
> > >>>
> http://picasaweb.google.com/lukas.vlcek/Mahout/photo#5172299040948088882
> > >>> Horizontal version -
> > >>>
> http://picasaweb.google.com/lukas.vlcek/Mahout/photo#5172299040948088898
> > >>>
> > >>> It is *just* draft/preview. Final version can differ in more or
> less
> > >>> details.
> > >>>
> > >>> Feedback gladly welcomed!
> > >>>
> > >>> Regards,
> > >>> Lukas
> > >>>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Juber Patel http://juberpatel.googlepages.com
>
--
http://blog.lukas-vlcek.com/
Re: Mahout logo proposal (second refactoring)
Posted by Lukas Vlcek <lu...@gmail.com>.
Jeff,
I like the discussion. The idea with Rubik's Cube sounds interesting! (It is
interesting to see what some people can do - like solving it with their eyes
closed<http://www.strangepuzzle.com/download.php?videoName=3x3x3-BLD%20MarcusStuhr%2077.61.wmv>...
I will try to draw with my eyes closed :-)
Lukas
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 1:17 AM, Jeff Eastman <je...@windwardsolutions.com>
wrote:
> I agree that the sombrero idea was be a bit over the top and certainly a
> mixed metaphor. I think you are improving with this one. If the elephant
> were working with a Rubix Cube instead of a beach ball it might be more
> like
> the problems we actually face.
>
> Lukas, I'm sure you will get lots of help on this. I like your creativity.
> Jeff
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Lukas Vlcek [mailto:lukas.vlcek@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2008 2:48 PM
> > To: mahout-dev@lucene.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Mahout logo proposal (second refactoring)
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > http://picasaweb.google.com/lukas.vlcek/Mahout/photo#5178454146860270354
> > is a Mahout logo proposal which I consider near-final version (#2.5)
> > I would like to hear your comments. I think was able to accomodate most
> of
> > your comments - the figure of Mahout is bigger and is not that abstract
> > and
> > I put the beach balloon back. Also I was experimenting with mexican hat
> as
> > well but I didn't like the result so it didn't make it into final
> > proposal.
> >
> > As for the MAHOUT type it is regular font called Impact (only in 80% of
> > its
> > original height). This can be changed but I think that this kind of font
> > fits the logo very well. I think the font in previous version (proposal
> > #2)
> > was Arial Black which look good as well. I already do have everything in
> > vectors (svg).
> >
> > Regards,
> > Lukas
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 8:02 PM, Jeff Eastman <je...@collab.net>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Personally, I like the vertical logo better than the horizontal one.
> The
> > > icon is larger than the text and I favor that balance. Perhaps the
> > > mahout on the elephant could be waving a hat like a rodeo
> cowboy<grin>.
> > > That would mix metaphors a bit, but add some whimsy to the logo and
> make
> > > the mahout stand out more. (Someone on the Hadoop list was looking for
> > > "Hadoop wranglers" a while back, so the precedent has already been
> set).
> > >
> > > Great initiative Lukas, keep it up!
> > > Jeff
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: juber patel [mailto:juberpatel@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 12:45 AM
> > > To: mahout-dev@lucene.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: Mahout logo proposal (second refactoring)
> > >
> > > hi,
> > >
> > > i am new to mahout-dev.
> > >
> > > shouldn't the mahout, the guy, be a bit more prominent? when this logo
> > > is in thumbnail size he would be hardly visible.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Dawid Weiss
> > > <da...@cs.put.poznan.pl> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Oh, ok -- I'd think we should stick to the font face of Hadoop, so
> > > that there is
> > > > a clear visual link connecting the two. But maybe others have
> > > different opinions
> > > > about it.
> > > >
> > > > D.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Lukas Vlcek wrote:
> > > > > Actually the font is not hand-drawn but regular vector type. The
> > > same type
> > > > > is used in both versions (standard and horizontal). Anyway, I can
> > > try
> > > > > experimenting with other fonts as well but I do personally like
> > > this one.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 8:50 AM, Dawid Weiss
> > > <da...@cs.put.poznan.pl>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> +1 for the basic version. My comment about fonts still applies
> > > (I'd prefer
> > > > >> more
> > > > >> regular glyphs, not hand-drawn).
> > > > >>
> > > > >> D.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Lukas Vlcek wrote:
> > > > >>> Hi,
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Here is my second proposal for the Mahout logo:
> > > > >>> Basic version -
> > > > >>>
> > >
> http://picasaweb.google.com/lukas.vlcek/Mahout/photo#5172299040948088882
> > > > >>> Horizontal version -
> > > > >>>
> > >
> http://picasaweb.google.com/lukas.vlcek/Mahout/photo#5172299040948088898
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> It is *just* draft/preview. Final version can differ in more or
> > > less
> > > > >>> details.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Feedback gladly welcomed!
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Regards,
> > > > >>> Lukas
> > > > >>>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Juber Patel http://juberpatel.googlepages.com
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > http://blog.lukas-vlcek.com/
>
>
>
--
http://blog.lukas-vlcek.com/
Re: Mahout logo proposal (second refactoring)
Posted by Isabel Drost <ap...@isabel-drost.de>.
On Monday 17 March 2008, Jeff Eastman wrote:
> Lukas Vlcek wrote:
> > http://picasaweb.google.com/lukas.vlcek/Mahout/photo#5178454146860270354
> > is a Mahout logo proposal which I consider near-final version (#2.5)
I really like the logo - it looks happier and more playful than the previous
version :)
> I agree that the sombrero idea was be a bit over the top and certainly a
> mixed metaphor. I think you are improving with this one. If the elephant
> were working with a Rubix Cube instead of a beach ball it might be more
> like the problems we actually face.
I am not sure whether the Rubik Cube would be a little too much...
Isabel
--
Expect a letter from a friend who will ask a favor of you.
|\ _,,,---,,_ Web: <http://www.isabel-drost.de>
/,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_
|,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'-'
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) (fL) IM: <xm...@spaceboyz.net>
RE: Mahout logo proposal (second refactoring)
Posted by Jeff Eastman <je...@windwardsolutions.com>.
I agree that the sombrero idea was be a bit over the top and certainly a
mixed metaphor. I think you are improving with this one. If the elephant
were working with a Rubix Cube instead of a beach ball it might be more like
the problems we actually face.
Lukas, I'm sure you will get lots of help on this. I like your creativity.
Jeff
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lukas Vlcek [mailto:lukas.vlcek@gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2008 2:48 PM
> To: mahout-dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Mahout logo proposal (second refactoring)
>
> Hi,
>
> http://picasaweb.google.com/lukas.vlcek/Mahout/photo#5178454146860270354
> is a Mahout logo proposal which I consider near-final version (#2.5)
> I would like to hear your comments. I think was able to accomodate most of
> your comments - the figure of Mahout is bigger and is not that abstract
> and
> I put the beach balloon back. Also I was experimenting with mexican hat as
> well but I didn't like the result so it didn't make it into final
> proposal.
>
> As for the MAHOUT type it is regular font called Impact (only in 80% of
> its
> original height). This can be changed but I think that this kind of font
> fits the logo very well. I think the font in previous version (proposal
> #2)
> was Arial Black which look good as well. I already do have everything in
> vectors (svg).
>
> Regards,
> Lukas
>
> On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 8:02 PM, Jeff Eastman <je...@collab.net> wrote:
>
> > Personally, I like the vertical logo better than the horizontal one. The
> > icon is larger than the text and I favor that balance. Perhaps the
> > mahout on the elephant could be waving a hat like a rodeo cowboy<grin>.
> > That would mix metaphors a bit, but add some whimsy to the logo and make
> > the mahout stand out more. (Someone on the Hadoop list was looking for
> > "Hadoop wranglers" a while back, so the precedent has already been set).
> >
> > Great initiative Lukas, keep it up!
> > Jeff
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: juber patel [mailto:juberpatel@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 12:45 AM
> > To: mahout-dev@lucene.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Mahout logo proposal (second refactoring)
> >
> > hi,
> >
> > i am new to mahout-dev.
> >
> > shouldn't the mahout, the guy, be a bit more prominent? when this logo
> > is in thumbnail size he would be hardly visible.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Dawid Weiss
> > <da...@cs.put.poznan.pl> wrote:
> > >
> > > Oh, ok -- I'd think we should stick to the font face of Hadoop, so
> > that there is
> > > a clear visual link connecting the two. But maybe others have
> > different opinions
> > > about it.
> > >
> > > D.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Lukas Vlcek wrote:
> > > > Actually the font is not hand-drawn but regular vector type. The
> > same type
> > > > is used in both versions (standard and horizontal). Anyway, I can
> > try
> > > > experimenting with other fonts as well but I do personally like
> > this one.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 8:50 AM, Dawid Weiss
> > <da...@cs.put.poznan.pl>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> +1 for the basic version. My comment about fonts still applies
> > (I'd prefer
> > > >> more
> > > >> regular glyphs, not hand-drawn).
> > > >>
> > > >> D.
> > > >>
> > > >> Lukas Vlcek wrote:
> > > >>> Hi,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Here is my second proposal for the Mahout logo:
> > > >>> Basic version -
> > > >>>
> > http://picasaweb.google.com/lukas.vlcek/Mahout/photo#5172299040948088882
> > > >>> Horizontal version -
> > > >>>
> > http://picasaweb.google.com/lukas.vlcek/Mahout/photo#5172299040948088898
> > > >>>
> > > >>> It is *just* draft/preview. Final version can differ in more or
> > less
> > > >>> details.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Feedback gladly welcomed!
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Regards,
> > > >>> Lukas
> > > >>>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Juber Patel http://juberpatel.googlepages.com
> >
>
>
>
> --
> http://blog.lukas-vlcek.com/
Re: Mahout logo proposal (second refactoring)
Posted by Dawid Weiss <da...@cs.put.poznan.pl>.
Good points, Andrzej.
> * it should be meaningful and acceptable for the target audience, or
> abstract enough that it doesn't matter. I'm not sure how the IBM-type
> suits would react to the beach-ball if it were to appear in the
> documentation of their product ;)
Oh, the collar worker developers/ consultants wouldn't mind. The lawyers would ;)
D.
RE: Mahout logo proposal (second refactoring)
Posted by Jeff Eastman <je...@windwardsolutions.com>.
+1
Very important to have some decision criteria when choosing among
alternatives
Jeff
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrzej Bialecki [mailto:ab@getopt.org]
> Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 3:49 AM
> To: mahout-dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Mahout logo proposal (second refactoring)
>
> Dawid Weiss wrote:
> >
> > I'm with Karl here --
> >
> > http://picasaweb.google.com/lukas.vlcek/Mahout/photo#5172299040948088882
> >
> > looks nicer to me (more like a logotype, less like a picture).
>
> I recall some of the discussions I had with a graphical designer on my
> team ... His points regarding a logo design (those that I can still
> remember!):
>
> * it should convey one or few concepts, and do it well - i.e. don't try
> to communicate too many messages
>
> * it should be meaningful and acceptable for the target audience, or
> abstract enough that it doesn't matter. I'm not sure how the IBM-type
> suits would react to the beach-ball if it were to appear in the
> documentation of their product ;)
>
> * it should be easy to reduce to black & white (or a fixed number of
> colors) without the loss of meaning. It should be readable when printed
> in reverse.
>
> * elements should be readable at various magnifications, or it should be
> possible to remove some elements (simplify) and still preserve the
> distinguishing features. Think of the logo at a poster size, and at a
> favicon.ico size. There could be two versions of the logo for different
> sizes, where the focus is on different logo element - for example, the
> elephant, or the rubik cube with a stylized "M".
>
> ... etc, etc, he could go on for hours .. ;)
>
> Considering the above, I think I prefer this one:
> http://picasaweb.google.com/lukas.vlcek/Mahout/photo#5172299040948088882
> and perhaps this one is already too complex as it is.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrzej Bialecki <><
> ___. ___ ___ ___ _ _ __________________________________
> [__ || __|__/|__||\/| Information Retrieval, Semantic Web
> ___|||__|| \| || | Embedded Unix, System Integration
> http://www.sigram.com Contact: info at sigram dot com
Re: Mahout logo proposal (second refactoring)
Posted by Andrzej Bialecki <ab...@getopt.org>.
Dawid Weiss wrote:
>
> I'm with Karl here --
>
> http://picasaweb.google.com/lukas.vlcek/Mahout/photo#5172299040948088882
>
> looks nicer to me (more like a logotype, less like a picture).
I recall some of the discussions I had with a graphical designer on my
team ... His points regarding a logo design (those that I can still
remember!):
* it should convey one or few concepts, and do it well - i.e. don't try
to communicate too many messages
* it should be meaningful and acceptable for the target audience, or
abstract enough that it doesn't matter. I'm not sure how the IBM-type
suits would react to the beach-ball if it were to appear in the
documentation of their product ;)
* it should be easy to reduce to black & white (or a fixed number of
colors) without the loss of meaning. It should be readable when printed
in reverse.
* elements should be readable at various magnifications, or it should be
possible to remove some elements (simplify) and still preserve the
distinguishing features. Think of the logo at a poster size, and at a
favicon.ico size. There could be two versions of the logo for different
sizes, where the focus is on different logo element - for example, the
elephant, or the rubik cube with a stylized "M".
... etc, etc, he could go on for hours .. ;)
Considering the above, I think I prefer this one:
http://picasaweb.google.com/lukas.vlcek/Mahout/photo#5172299040948088882
and perhaps this one is already too complex as it is.
--
Best regards,
Andrzej Bialecki <><
___. ___ ___ ___ _ _ __________________________________
[__ || __|__/|__||\/| Information Retrieval, Semantic Web
___|||__|| \| || | Embedded Unix, System Integration
http://www.sigram.com Contact: info at sigram dot com
Re: Mahout logo proposal (second refactoring)
Posted by Dawid Weiss <da...@cs.put.poznan.pl>.
I'm with Karl here --
http://picasaweb.google.com/lukas.vlcek/Mahout/photo#5172299040948088882
looks nicer to me (more like a logotype, less like a picture).
D.
Karl Wettin wrote:
> I still like this one the most:
>
> http://picasaweb.google.com/lukas.vlcek/Mahout/photo#5172299040948088882
>
> it's more juicy and abstract.
>
>
> karl
>
> Lukas Vlcek skrev:
>> Hi,
>>
>> http://picasaweb.google.com/lukas.vlcek/Mahout/photo#5178454146860270354
>> is a Mahout logo proposal which I consider near-final version (#2.5)
>> I would like to hear your comments. I think was able to accomodate
>> most of
>> your comments - the figure of Mahout is bigger and is not that
>> abstract and
>> I put the beach balloon back. Also I was experimenting with mexican
>> hat as
>> well but I didn't like the result so it didn't make it into final
>> proposal.
>>
>> As for the MAHOUT type it is regular font called Impact (only in 80%
>> of its
>> original height). This can be changed but I think that this kind of font
>> fits the logo very well. I think the font in previous version
>> (proposal #2)
>> was Arial Black which look good as well. I already do have everything in
>> vectors (svg).
>>
>> Regards,
>> Lukas
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 8:02 PM, Jeff Eastman <je...@collab.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Personally, I like the vertical logo better than the horizontal one. The
>>> icon is larger than the text and I favor that balance. Perhaps the
>>> mahout on the elephant could be waving a hat like a rodeo cowboy<grin>.
>>> That would mix metaphors a bit, but add some whimsy to the logo and make
>>> the mahout stand out more. (Someone on the Hadoop list was looking for
>>> "Hadoop wranglers" a while back, so the precedent has already been set).
>>>
>>> Great initiative Lukas, keep it up!
>>> Jeff
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: juber patel [mailto:juberpatel@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 12:45 AM
>>> To: mahout-dev@lucene.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: Mahout logo proposal (second refactoring)
>>>
>>> hi,
>>>
>>> i am new to mahout-dev.
>>>
>>> shouldn't the mahout, the guy, be a bit more prominent? when this logo
>>> is in thumbnail size he would be hardly visible.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Dawid Weiss
>>> <da...@cs.put.poznan.pl> wrote:
>>>> Oh, ok -- I'd think we should stick to the font face of Hadoop, so
>>> that there is
>>>> a clear visual link connecting the two. But maybe others have
>>> different opinions
>>>> about it.
>>>>
>>>> D.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Lukas Vlcek wrote:
>>>> > Actually the font is not hand-drawn but regular vector type. The
>>> same type
>>>> > is used in both versions (standard and horizontal). Anyway, I can
>>> try
>>>> > experimenting with other fonts as well but I do personally like
>>> this one.
>>>> >
>>>> > On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 8:50 AM, Dawid Weiss
>>> <da...@cs.put.poznan.pl>
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> +1 for the basic version. My comment about fonts still applies
>>> (I'd prefer
>>>> >> more
>>>> >> regular glyphs, not hand-drawn).
>>>> >>
>>>> >> D.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Lukas Vlcek wrote:
>>>> >>> Hi,
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Here is my second proposal for the Mahout logo:
>>>> >>> Basic version -
>>>> >>>
>>> http://picasaweb.google.com/lukas.vlcek/Mahout/photo#5172299040948088882
>>>> >>> Horizontal version -
>>>> >>>
>>> http://picasaweb.google.com/lukas.vlcek/Mahout/photo#5172299040948088898
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> It is *just* draft/preview. Final version can differ in more or
>>> less
>>>> >>> details.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Feedback gladly welcomed!
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Regards,
>>>> >>> Lukas
>>>> >>>
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Juber Patel http://juberpatel.googlepages.com
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Re: Mahout logo proposal (second refactoring)
Posted by Karl Wettin <ka...@gmail.com>.
I still like this one the most:
http://picasaweb.google.com/lukas.vlcek/Mahout/photo#5172299040948088882
it's more juicy and abstract.
karl
Lukas Vlcek skrev:
> Hi,
>
> http://picasaweb.google.com/lukas.vlcek/Mahout/photo#5178454146860270354
> is a Mahout logo proposal which I consider near-final version (#2.5)
> I would like to hear your comments. I think was able to accomodate most of
> your comments - the figure of Mahout is bigger and is not that abstract and
> I put the beach balloon back. Also I was experimenting with mexican hat as
> well but I didn't like the result so it didn't make it into final proposal.
>
> As for the MAHOUT type it is regular font called Impact (only in 80% of its
> original height). This can be changed but I think that this kind of font
> fits the logo very well. I think the font in previous version (proposal #2)
> was Arial Black which look good as well. I already do have everything in
> vectors (svg).
>
> Regards,
> Lukas
>
> On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 8:02 PM, Jeff Eastman <je...@collab.net> wrote:
>
>> Personally, I like the vertical logo better than the horizontal one. The
>> icon is larger than the text and I favor that balance. Perhaps the
>> mahout on the elephant could be waving a hat like a rodeo cowboy<grin>.
>> That would mix metaphors a bit, but add some whimsy to the logo and make
>> the mahout stand out more. (Someone on the Hadoop list was looking for
>> "Hadoop wranglers" a while back, so the precedent has already been set).
>>
>> Great initiative Lukas, keep it up!
>> Jeff
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: juber patel [mailto:juberpatel@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 12:45 AM
>> To: mahout-dev@lucene.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Mahout logo proposal (second refactoring)
>>
>> hi,
>>
>> i am new to mahout-dev.
>>
>> shouldn't the mahout, the guy, be a bit more prominent? when this logo
>> is in thumbnail size he would be hardly visible.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Dawid Weiss
>> <da...@cs.put.poznan.pl> wrote:
>>> Oh, ok -- I'd think we should stick to the font face of Hadoop, so
>> that there is
>>> a clear visual link connecting the two. But maybe others have
>> different opinions
>>> about it.
>>>
>>> D.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Lukas Vlcek wrote:
>>> > Actually the font is not hand-drawn but regular vector type. The
>> same type
>>> > is used in both versions (standard and horizontal). Anyway, I can
>> try
>>> > experimenting with other fonts as well but I do personally like
>> this one.
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 8:50 AM, Dawid Weiss
>> <da...@cs.put.poznan.pl>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> +1 for the basic version. My comment about fonts still applies
>> (I'd prefer
>>> >> more
>>> >> regular glyphs, not hand-drawn).
>>> >>
>>> >> D.
>>> >>
>>> >> Lukas Vlcek wrote:
>>> >>> Hi,
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Here is my second proposal for the Mahout logo:
>>> >>> Basic version -
>>> >>>
>> http://picasaweb.google.com/lukas.vlcek/Mahout/photo#5172299040948088882
>>> >>> Horizontal version -
>>> >>>
>> http://picasaweb.google.com/lukas.vlcek/Mahout/photo#5172299040948088898
>>> >>>
>>> >>> It is *just* draft/preview. Final version can differ in more or
>> less
>>> >>> details.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Feedback gladly welcomed!
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Regards,
>>> >>> Lukas
>>> >>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Juber Patel http://juberpatel.googlepages.com
>>
>
>
>