[corkbiomakerspace] Re: Logo thoughts?
- From: "Cathal (phone)" <cathalgarvey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: corkbiomakerspace@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2014 11:56:00 +0100
Hm, you mean the receding half of one strand? I kind of like that it's missing,
it's clearer, lighter and the helix is still clear.
The handedness is correct, btw! Right handed DNA ftw!
On 2 July 2014 11:49:35 GMT+01:00, corkbiomakerspace-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>It is currently double stranded, just in white :D (which, isn't showing
>up
>for obvious reasons...) I'll ask for a complementing colour to be added
>for
>the second strand so we can have a look, it may take a little bit for
>me to
>have it though, the ever lovely Gavin's at work so he may be busy :)
>
>
>On 2 July 2014 11:29, Niall O'Cuilleanain
><niall.ocuilleanain@xxxxxxxxxx>
>wrote:
>
>> Big fan of this logo!
>> Glad we went with a green/yellow mix.
>> Our aim should be international recognition for ireland as a synbio
>hub,
>> with cork/munster leading the pack.
>> Would double strand be better? More recognizable to a general
>audience?
>> ________________________________________
>> From: corkbiomakerspace-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [
>> corkbio.makerspace-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: 02 July 2014 11:18
>> To: corkbiomakerspace@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: [corkbiomakerspace] Re: Logo thoughts?
>>
>> So, this is the same logo as above, but in lower case also. Which do
>you
>> think?
>>
>>
>> On 1 July 2014 13:47, Cathal (phone)
><cathalgarvey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:
>> cathalgarvey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>> It is awfully nice as is.. :)
>>
>>
>> On 1 July 2014 13:45:55 GMT+01:00, "Áine Cahill"
><aine.cahill@xxxxxxxx
>> <mailto:aine.cahill@xxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>> I think a mix of plain letters and the double strand F is something
>we
>> would have to see to see if it would work... Some people could just
>see a
>> squiggle and órma! It could be just overcomplicating a really nice
>clean
>> design.
>>
>>
>> On 1 July 2014 01:35, jean o neill <jean.oneill@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:
>> jean.oneill@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>>
>> What think ye of this? I've had options of text changing and a bit of
>> tweaking, (see how the white's not so good on it :/ ) but it's
>vectorable,
>> and orientable so can be rendered less rectangular more circular for
>> stickers etc if needs be? I was thinking , based on Áine's marvelous
>idea,
>> maybe the 'f' could start the double strand?
>>
>> [
>>
>https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpf1/v/t34.0-12/10446380_10152229376508310_699285707_n.jpg?oh=c1af1b25cbd49316c7d8f9f3ee8b79d1&oe=53B42D68&__gda__=1404302620_e920e66759498462c47e77e9d17e69f7
>> ]
>>
>>
>>
>> On 30 June 2014 11:10, jean o neill <jean.oneill@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:
>> jean.oneill@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>> no, the primary colours will be grand. AFAIK (and I'll check tomorrow
>to
>> be 100%) it comes down to blocks essentially, so if say, we're doing
>headed
>> paper, the logo in primary colors is less of a block of colour area
>wise
>> than the same colours on a dark background on a white page. White
>paper is
>> cheaper than dark papers for leaflets etc too it seems (constant
>thing of
>> complaint in the gallery I'm in, we print everything on black...),
>but if
>> you are going dark background, then it's easier to have it all dark
>and
>> text/logos all the one other colour. But with all that said, I'm by
>no
>> means an expert, I'll talk to them that knows tomorrow and tell ye
>all for
>> definite :)
>>
>>
>> On 30 June 2014 10:29, Áine Cahill <aine.cahill@xxxxxxxx<mailto:
>> aine.cahill@xxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>> Good point Jean, that's why I was a little concerned about the "vibe"
>of
>> the logo.... It could be a little too aggressive for what we are
>going for!
>> Maybe if we kept the untwisting into an "F" shape but softened the
>colour
>> scheme and ditched the stitches?? I'm not sure I understand how the
>colour
>> affects price though, is it how strong the colour is or the actual
>shade?
>> As in if we went with bold primary colours would that be the same
>issue as
>> a black background?
>>
>> Cathal I do think it would look better if it was actually a double
>helix
>> untwisting but my Paint was stuck on ladder mode! :)
>>
>>
>> On 30 June 2014 10:21, jean o neill <jean.oneill@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:
>> jean.oneill@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>> I think they're fabulous :) The two thinkgs I'd comment on, and
>really
>> it's just me being nit picky, is cost if we have a dark background,
>while
>> it will only amount to a few cent extra per piece, that may addd up
>over
>> larger amounts, and with regard to referring back to the
>frankenscience,
>> would it be the type of thing that Joe Public could see/take as a
>joke?
>> I'm all for reclaiming it and making it our own, I think that it's
>hugely
>> important that it is, but I'm not sure that the brand logo is the
>first
>> place to do that, just cause someone somewhere would take it up wrong
>and
>> that might cost funding. But with all that said, I'm incredibley
>hyper
>> aware and sometimes overly paranod about these things, and my sense
>of
>> humour just covers dry and droll, so I most likely am over thinking
>it all
>>
>>
>> On 30 June 2014 10:09, Áine Cahill <aine.cahill@xxxxxxxx<mailto:
>> aine.cahill@xxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>> Hi guys, this is something I was thinking of last night...
>Unfortunately
>> my Paint skills couldn't really capture what I was imagining but I
>think ye
>> can get the gist of what I mean!
>> So my idea for the logo would include:
>> - cork colours (although as a Kerry girl I have no great attachment
>to
>> them!)
>> - A double helix unwinding and replicating in a fork to form a rough
>"F"
>> shape
>> - A dark green segment of inserted ssDNA attached with staples/old
>school
>> stitches as a play on the Frankenscience aspect of things. It could
>be a
>> way of taking something that is used as a fearmongering tactic and
>making
>> it our own...
>> - It could be kept mostly simple and so would translate well to
>different
>> sizes.
>>
>> What do ye think?
>>
>> Áine
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 30 June 2014 09:40, Cathal Garvey
><cathalgarvey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:
>> cathalgarvey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>> Very true re:white. Red is the more important colour, so it'll be
>grand. :)
>>
>> Other options for corkiness include having a ship passing between two
>> "towers" of DNA rising up from primordial soup (totally approachable
>to
>> average bion00b, totally) or an image of tripe with "FORMA"
>emblazoned
>> on it.
>>
>> On 30/06/14 08:50, jean o neill wrote:
>> > In seriousness though, red is fine, but white will be difficult
>from the
>> > pov of printing etc, unless we're going for a dark background,
>which
>> could
>> > be costlier again. I'll ask for definite, but otherwise, what about
>an
>> > alternative contrasting colour?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On 29 June 2014 23:06, Jean O Neill <jean.oneill@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:
>> jean.oneill@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Nah, blue and blue, cause we can only spell one colour good :D
>> >>
>> >> Sent from my iPod
>> >>
>> >> On 29 Jun 2014, at 22:33, Stephen Geary <sgeary@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:
>> sgeary@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 29 June 2014 22:15, Cathal (phone)
><cathalgarvey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> <mailto:cathalgarvey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Yellow for sulphur, brown for muck? I forget! :P
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On 29 June 2014 22:11:42 GMT+01:00, Jean O Neill <
>> jean.oneill@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:jean.oneill@xxxxxxxxx>>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Ah! *plots for good daycent aul Dublin colours * :D
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Sent from my iPod
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 29 Jun 2014, at 20:00, "Cathal (phone)" <
>> cathalgarvey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:cathalgarvey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Cork colours! Not essential, of course..
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 29 June 2014 19:27:42 GMT+01:00, Jean O Neill <
>> jean.oneill@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:jean.oneill@xxxxxxxxx>>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Shall be on Tuesday, so keep em coming. Why a red n white
>scheme in
>> particular? Or am I picking up something wrong?
>> >>>>> Jean
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Sent from my iPod
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On 29 Jun 2014, at 19:16, Cathal Garvey <
>> cathalgarvey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:cathalgarvey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
>wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> So, Jen; you get in touch with your designer peeps? :)
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On 28/06/14 20:03, Cathal Garvey wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Oh I like the DNA-tree idea!
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Made me think of fusing it with the "tree of life", as
>enclosed.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Naturally the final version would have to have red and
>white,
>> rather
>> >>>>>>> than red and yellow, if a white strand could be done with
>> sufficient
>> >>>>>>> contrast.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Circles are nice, they
>> >>>>>>> make
>> >>>>>>> good badges and stickers. Also, we want the<
>> >>>>>>> br />
>> >>>>>>> name in the icon as Steve did, I'm just playing with imagery
>here..
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> On 28/06/14 14:29, jean o neill wrote:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> So, just while everyone's fermenting with ideas and
>bubbling with
>> >>>>>>>> creativity, I'm meeting with some friends during the week
>who
>> have dabbled
>> >>>>>>>> in design and I was going to approach them for logo ideas.
>Any
>> thoughts on
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> what would be good? Something graphic? Minimalist? A dna
>strand
>> unwinding
>> >>>>>>>> into a tree and a seahorse? (That may be just me...) Any
>and all
>> thoughts
>> >>>>>>>> please.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> --
>> >>>>>> T: @onetruecathal, @IndieBBDNA
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> P: +353876363185<tel:%2B353876363185>
>> >>>>>> W: http://indiebiotech.com
>> >>>>>> <0x988B9099.asc>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>> List homepage: //www.freelists.org/list/corkbiomakerspace
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Please keep this list for local discussion only. To discuss
>DIYbio
>> in general, please use the diybio.org<http://diybio.org> / diybio.eu<
>> http://diybio.eu> mailing lists, or the diybio-ireland Googlegroup.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>> --
>> >>>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my
>brevity.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my
>brevity.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>> --
>> T: @onetruecathal, @IndieBBDNA
>> P: +353876363185<tel:%2B353876363185>
>> W: http://indiebiotech.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>> List homepage: //www.freelists.org/list/corkbiomakerspace
>> Please keep this list for local discussion only. To discuss DIYbio in
>> general, please use the diybio.org / diybio.eu mailing lists, or the
>> diybio-ireland Googlegroup.
>>
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Other related posts:
