SF.com Logo Contest

My molecules are shiny clean, and pygmy flannel fresh! I entreat the reader to imaginings of horrible ecstasy, as provided by Mr Anonymous's appreciation!

Damn right!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

heh

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Probably not doing your image any justice but:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

hehehe

 

Oh, y'mean this?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Actually, in answer to you're original question - frankly, no.

For a start off, there's really nothing in the design rule book which dictates a logo has to be in anyway either illustrative, descriptive or else in anyway particularly representational - think for a moment of a can of baked beans. Chances are the image that pops immediately into your head is that of a can of Heinz Baked Beans. By anyones standards the label on a can of Heinz baked beans has to be amongst the dullest conceivable designs anyone could ever have come up with - but excitement was never the point. It was all about establishing an immediately recognisable look associated with a given and specific brand.

Cruise any supermarket anywhere in the world, you can spot a can of Heinz baked beans immediately and without having to look.

It's kind of the approach, personally speaking, I believe works best for Sciforums.

When you think on it, ever since that alien head logo first appeared, practically everyone's been responding to the idea of the logo as being representations of what Sciforums means to them - the problems with that is, everyone has the tendency to see it from their particular field of interest. Those who are math orientated favour the notion of something representational of mathematics. The generally philosophical, something to represent thinking. Those with an interest in Astronomy, more to do with the cosmological and so on and so forth.

Actually, the entire time, the perfect visual representation for what Sciforums is all about has been staring everyone in the face since the new re-design came online - the background image of the Earth, viewed from space, set in the context of the wider, larger Universe.

It's perfection.

As a forum, we ponder pretty much the nature of everything here at Sciforums - everything under the Sun, everything in Heaven and Earth. Life, the Universe and Everything. The fact that such an image can exist implies the appreciation of Science and Technology without having to state a single word - and as to the larger, broader issues - they're all there present in that one single image when you think about it - and if we're not a collection of people who may possibly take for granted our ability's to be able to ponder and grasp the implications of things - the fact that as such remains plainly present but unstated, simply implied, serves to speak of us as community better than a thousand words...

Rather than attempt to in anyway distract from that, as a design proposition, I personally feel it's best to work with it.

The Sf logo has always been a primary feature of the boards visual identity - the name Sciforums, it's brand mark if you like. Already long established, it seems silly just to throw it out - rather, exemplify it - embolden it a little bit. The idea being not to exemplify change so much as maintain continuity. The abstract, hexagonal elements to the design, as shapes, represent forms actually common and familiar throughout most of the scientific and technical sciences - you'll find these exact kind of shapes common and associated with Biology, Chemistry, Engineering, Mathematics, etc. The idea of individual shapes forming a cohesive pattern, representative of both the idea of comunity and things coming together.

The idea's are there, it's just that it's designed not to draw any particular attention to them in the specific but work as an overall, cohesive look.

Granted, from a design point of view, visually it's not terribly cleaver or adventurous - but it really isn't a designers job to be particularly cleaver - a designers job is to produce whatever they feel works the best and it's down to the client to fuck things up entirely if they so choose....

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

The last criteria of course is that of the needs of our new Administrator. Basically, we're all looking at the issue from the point of view of concerns regarding us having a new broom and so forth and the possible difference that may possibly make - whist all the time basically, in electing to take on a place like this in the first instance, whatever the future of the site may be one thing - first and foremost though the chap elected, specifically, to take on Sciforums. That's the site he wanted to take on, that's site he bought as opposed to, conceivably, any other.

At the end of the day I should imagine what our new Admin wants to see is exactly the thing he set out to own in the first place - a little sharper looking, perhaps, a little cleaner, a little more spruced-up perhaps - but still, first, last and always - the site that appealed to him so much so that he actually wanted to take it on and keep it running.

The one, the only, the original, accept no substitutes - Sciforums...

Of course, I could conceivably have just made that all up. With me it's somewhat hard to tell. Nevertheless, bar the odd bit of tweaking here or there, the design as put forward would be about the best I could recommend given the circumstances. So no. Really, in this instance, it's about as good as I'm going to get it.

Yes, well.... I'm rampantly engorged to hear it. Now, please. Can we never speak of this again? My mother nay be reading....

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I think people just get used to what is there. After a while I probably would have grown to like the ET dude, and would have complained after a few months if it changed into something else (like BigFoot...).

I actually like the existing logo, I've grown to like it more. If the people or admin can't make up their mind I think they should just stick to the one that's up there at the moment.

 

http://www.reallifecomics.com/archive/060814.html

 

I think the current logo is fine.

 

Does anybody have a pic of the old logo? How it was 2 days ago before the huge hostile takeover?

 

Archive of sciforums April 1st 2005

list of archives of sciforums

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Here y'go.

Personally, I couldn't agree more.

 

It's alright, but all the options underneath make it look too busy.

 

Looks great man. Maybe it's not such a good idea though, it might make the site look too chemistry orientated dont you think?
Cheers though.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

How do we know that doesn't say "baby rape forum"?

 

Sorry I have a sick sense of humour. It says "Kamikaze".

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

This is the best i've seen so far, seems original