Please fix kerning in new logo

I've just forwarded link to this thread to the designer.

3 Likes

Thanks to @jefferyto for bringing this up. I guess I sent my thoughts regarding the new logo a couple months ago to the wrong venue. In particular, I was asking two questions about the new logo (#2 and #3 in my original note).

  • The text (the "wordmark") of the logo appears a bit too low to my eye. You can see the original logo, and compare it to the new by clicking between the links at: https://richb-hanover.github.io//LEDE_Download_Index_Page/origlogos.html

  • It would really be helpful to get advice from the designer re: the padding around the logo. As I noted in my original note:

    The logo usage guidelines (https://openwrt.org/_media/docs/guide-graphic-designer/openwrt-logo-usage-guidelines.pdf) are a little difficult to interpret. The recommendations for breathing room use 1/4 X for the padding, but the X dimension itself is awkward (that is, not easily measured). I wonder whether we could ask the logo designer to give advice for the padding based on an exterior dimension of each of the four variations shown on Page 4.

So, please, if we can get a bit of attention from the logo designer, would you ask these questions as well? Many thanks!

PS That repo also has samples of the download pages that incorporate the new logo. You can see the full set of proposed pages at: https://richb-hanover.github.io/LEDE_Download_Index_Page/files.html

2 Likes

As XKCD says, "If you really hate someone, teach them to recognize bad kerning". Have a wonderful day! :slight_smile:

2 Likes

Well, that daily chuckle was a good start :smile:
Sarcasm aside, and FWIW, I fully agree with both yourself and the OP’s assertions. Both of your suggestions improve the logo aesthetically.

@ynezz - any response from the designer? Thanks.

3 Likes

@richb-hanover-priv Thanks for your input - I haven't seen the logo usage guidelines before.

I see the wordmark is vertically aligned with the inner edge of the "Open 'O'", but this should be aligned with the bottom (flat) edge of the letters "n", "W" and "r" (the true baseline of the wordmark) not the bottom (round) edge of "O", "p", "e" and "t".

Regarding the tagline ("WIRELESS FREEDOM") kerning: Horizontally aligning the "I" with the outer edge of the above "p" is not my preferred choice, but if you want to do that you need to also adjust the kerning for the rest of the tagline to match.

2 Likes

@jefferyto Thanks for your thoughts.

As someone who's not involved in a lot of the "doing" in this volunteer open-source project, I am learning not to second-guess the experts who are making the decisions. (For example, I have no standing to ask for a change to the C compiler version.)

However, I do reserve the right to point out problems, and note possible solutions. That's why I am anxious to hear the designer's response to all of our comments.

@richb-hanover-priv I'm not sure if the designer will have answers for your questions so thought I would add my thoughts:

  • Bottom vs middle align for wordmark/tagline: This appears to be a deliberate design choice. It's up to the client (i.e. the OpenWrt project) to say whether they like it or not, and since the choice has stuck I would assume no one else in the project has objected to it.
  • Padding around logo: The "x" measurement for each variant is derived from the design itself. I don't think it would be reasonable to ask the designer to redefine it in a way that makes it easier to compute using a formula. It's also not necessary since the specified padding is only a minimum; make the actual padding at least a quarter of the full height of the logo variant and you have satisfied the minimum requirement.

Hope that helps :slightly_smiling_face:

1 Like

I'm asking for the graphic designer's response to our questions before deciding whether to ask the project to consider changes. Here is my understanding of the outstanding questions:

  • re: Your comments about kerning...
    I totally agree that you have detected a problem. If the designer says, "No, I purposely made this kerning choice." then the project admin's are free to make a choice for change or not.
  • Bottom vs middle align for wordmark/tagline: This appears to be a deliberate design choice. It's up to the client (i.e. the OpenWrt project) to say whether they like it or not, and since the choice has stuck I would assume no one else in the project has objected to it.
    I suspect no one in the project actually tried to put the logo into service. When I did, the "too-lowness" of the wordmark jumped out at me. That's why I want to get the designer's thoughts.
  • Padding around logo: The "x" measurement for each variant is derived from the design itself. I don't think it would be reasonable to ask the designer to redefine it in a way that makes it easier to compute using a formula. It's also not necessary since the specified padding is only a minimum; make the actual padding at least a quarter of the full height of the logo variant and you have satisfied the minimum requirement.
    "Just put more padding around it..." doesn't make a strong graphical design standard. To the contrary, I believe it is reasonable to ask the designer to come up with a simple rule such as, "Make the padding X% of the .svg's height." The fact that you and I (who are both fairly careful about graphical appearance) have spent so much time on this question means the designer is not being sensitive to their customer's (that is, our) time. See also [1] below.

In all these cases, I would like advice from the designer responding to our observations. Only then can the OpenWrt admins decide what to do. Thanks again.

[1] Here is my understanding of the measurements, based on a close reading of page 4 of the logo guidelines. I willingly accept any corrections if I have missed something:

  1. (logo over the wordmark) The X height is measured from the top of the "fan" to some indeterminate distance below the bottom of the "O" (or the top of the "OpenWrt" wordmark. But their spacing is not specified.
  2. (wordmark alone) The X height is measured from the baseline of the wordmark to the top of the ® symbol. The ® seems to be vertically centered on the top of the "O", but its font size seems to be considerably reduced from that of the rest of the wordmark, so its font size is unclear.
  3. (logo beside wordmark) The X height is measured from the baseline of the wordmark to the top of the "fan". It is uncertain how those objects relate to each other, or how to derive the X height.
  4. (logo alone) The X height is measured from the bottom of the "O" to its top. If that glyph is actually a circle (I think it is), it is straightforward to compute the X height using the width of the .svg.

TL;DR For this third question, I would be completely content if the designer would say, for each of the four, "Set the padding to a minimum of X% of the height of the .svg." That would eliminate any confusion.

3 Likes

Last time I got Oh! I'll fix it right away from him, so pinged one more time just now.

1 Like

Thank you!

here's what I've done on what I've read from the forum. Kernings might be a little bit difficult to understand. Last time I used volume kernings together with optical kerning. Where I thought it looked great. Right now I tried the other optical with somewhat mathematical. Hoping this fits what they wanted. Also, I changed the wireless freedom font so that I can put a balanced volume on each space.

4 Likes

Looking good! Little differences but more comfortable for the eye.

I also find the revision more pleasing to the eye, though I see multiple differences.

IMHO, typography is neither an art nor a science, though both are critical to the end product. Ultimately aesthetics will be the final arbiter to achieving the goals of the project. Even then, aesthetics are often subjective. You can please most of the people most of the time, but you’ll seldom please all of the people all of the time.

Some thoughts on the revision:

  • The kerning looks much better - thanks :smile:
  • Compressing the spacing in the wordmark ("OpenWrt") and extending the spacing in the tagline ("WIRELESS FREEDOM") so that they align on the right is a nice touch.
  • It's a little weird how the "I" in the tagline has serifs but the rest of the letters do not, but this is just my personal opinion. I like that the fonts for the wordmark and tagline are now a bit more differentiated.
  • I'm wondering if the descender of "p" in the wordmark was graphically extended to the tagline's baseline, or if the descender is naturally that long and the tagline was positioned to aligned with it. (I don't know which fonts were used here.) I think altering letterforms usually causes more issues than it solves, but again this is just my personal opinion.

I have used Galano Classic And Galano Classic Alt font family no
adjustments needed. I've just read their comments. The small p was not
extended also.

@ynezz I'm currently quite busy, and in order to avoid that I miss relevant info: Can you please send me the "GO" for implementing the new logo in the wiki, once everything is clarified (kerning, IP rights, ...)?

A short message either via the forum, email, or via openwrt-adm would be nice.

Thanks!

2 Likes

Final version of the logo manual, please let me know if it's OK, thanks.

6 Likes

@ynezz cool!
And I'm really grateful for removing the gradient variants!

This topic was automatically closed 10 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.