D brand identity repository

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On Sat, 02 Jul 2011 03:42:42 -0400, James Fisher <jameshfisher at gmail.com>  
wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 6:18 PM, Steven Schveighoffer  
> <schveiguy at yahoo.com>wrote:
>
>> I think you are way overthinking this...
>>
>
> I've never quite understood what "overthinking" actually means.  If you  
> mean
> exploring all possible trains of thought the viewer, I'll take that as a
> compliment.  By all means disagree with what I say -- it's either valid  
> or
> it's not (it may well not be!).

Then I disagree -- the case you bring up is obscure, plus it makes an  
assumption that having to explain historical references in the logo is a  
negative.

The main focus of the logo is the D, the moons might generate some trivia  
questions, but is that really a turnoff?

>
> rule #1 -- the logo should have the letter 'D' in it.
>>
>> and, um... that's it :)
>>
>
> That is most definitely *not* it.  By your specification, would you be  
> happy
> with just the 'D' from Comic Sans?

No.  But it would qualify as a D logo candidate -- it has a D in it.  I  
didn't imply that we should randomly select from all possible logos that  
have a D in it to be our logo.  I was saying that we should not make any  
other rules disqualifying a logo because of some obscure invented  
situation that might occur.  As long as there's a D in it, it can be  
considered as a logo, and if it generates quizzical looks, who cares?

> There is a huge number of explicit and implicit rules and guidelines to
> consider when creating the one image that will represent your project for
> time immemorial.  That's why there are books, websites, careers forged on
> this.

As a non-designer, this is the *only* rule I would go by to disqualify a  
logo for D -- if it doesn't have a D in it, I don't think it should be the  
logo for D.  I'll leave all the asthetics and other things up to the real  
designers.  I can only say what I like and don't like, I have no skill to  
design such things.

-Steve