Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Design a favicon #8

Open
waldyrious opened this issue Aug 25, 2017 · 6 comments
Open

Design a favicon #8

waldyrious opened this issue Aug 25, 2017 · 6 comments

Comments

@waldyrious
Copy link
Collaborator

Probably something with two columns (prose on the left and code on the right), or something cleverer like serif & monospace characters to represent both parts.

@waldyrious waldyrious changed the title Add a favicon Design a favicon Oct 2, 2017
@andrewbash
Copy link

I'll try making one.

@andrewbash
Copy link

screen shot 2017-10-02 at 7 52 27 pm

Thoughts on these rough sketches? (Obviously can refine and add color if one of them stands out)

@waldyrious
Copy link
Collaborator Author

waldyrious commented Oct 3, 2017

Thanks for working on this! So far the top right and middle right ones are those that stand out to me.

The former would obviously need some simplification to work well at the favicon size. For the latter, perhaps it would work even better if we could get the design to have a more visible vertical split, by introducing an explicit or implicit vertical line. One way to do this could be to shape and position the characters back-to-back, to create vertical symmetry, or partially obscure one character behind the other's vertical stroke. These examples illustrate what I mean:

mirrored obscuring

The one in the middle left position is intriguing -- I get the visual connection of the j's leg and the character on the left, but I'm not sure it can be called a d (I'm not even sure it's meant to be a d -- please confirm).

In any case, considering that the project may be renamed (#10), it might be better not to make this depend on the particular letters d and j (although hopefully @jeromeetienne can make a decision on that soon).


Some additional ideas that may inspire you:

Using a symbolic logo, like the top right one, but with a non-vertical separation. Something like this:

Using the < /> construct of the bottom left one, and using a writing tool for the slash (perhaps a fountain pen or even a feather pen, to make the distinction clearer). I'm thinking of something similar to this:


Let me know in which direction you'd like to move forward :)

@andrewbash
Copy link

Good thoughts! Appreciate the feedback and inspiration. I love the fountain pen idea. I'll work on this and create iterations of the fountain pen, top right, and middle right.

The character in the middle left is actually an 'o' ;)

@andrewbash
Copy link

andrewbash commented Oct 10, 2017

screen shot 2017-10-10 at 7 28 09 pm

Here are some expansions on the ideas we talked about. Take a look - if any of them stand out we can refine further/add color.

P.S. ignore the blue box in the top left - screenshot glitch.

@waldyrious
Copy link
Collaborator Author

waldyrious commented Oct 18, 2017

Sorry for the delay. I think the pencil version is promising. The fountain pen might be too complex to work at smaller scales (e.g. favicon), and I can't see it replacing the slash easily. The quill could do that, so between it and the pencil version, I guess it ends up being a choice of whether we want a more consistent style for all elements (i.e. both the braces and the pencil drawn with similar-width, straight lines), or whether it would make more sense to evidence the style difference (softer curves in the quill contrasting more rigid shapes in the braces). Which option do you think makes more sense?

That said, I must admit I'm still wondering about the vertical split idea. I don't think the blocks convey the right message, and the small text saying function(){} makes it way too busy. I made a small test at favicon size (16x16 px), and came up with this: favicon. It may not be very imaginative, but I don't think it works badly at all :) Thoughts?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants