The Logo Poll

Your favourite logo is...

  • Logo Nr. 1

    Votes: 56 17.2%
  • Logo Nr. 2

    Votes: 131 40.3%
  • Logo Nr. 3

    Votes: 7 2.2%
  • Logo Nr. 4

    Votes: 131 40.3%

  • Total voters
    325

Status
Not open for further replies.
I guess for the logo it will be the same as with the name... you'll get used to it. There was heavy opposition to the name but now it cooled down and allmost everybody got used to it.
 
All 4 logos are based on fire, which makes sense because the "pyr" in "Pyra" means "fire" in Greek, and because fire is the main link between Pyra and (Evil) Dragon (Box).

Logo number 2 somehow reminds me of the NVIDIA logo style:

500px-Nvidia_logo.svg.png
Nvidia-Geforce-GTX-Logo.jpg


nvidia-geforce-gtx-logo.jpg


I think something like proposal 4 or one of its variants would be more original.
 
I guess for the logo it will be the same as with the name... you'll get used to it. There was heavy opposition to the name but now it cooled down and allmost everybody got used to it.
You can get accostumed to everything. That's why I follow logic (that's why I'm against ABXY labelling). Also maybe you are accostumed to something but it produce something on you (for example n°4 is aggressive  to me).

And we are already convinced but we have to think about new users because appearance, especially logo because it shall represent the device, matter.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Number 4 without a doubt. The fire looks also like a "d" and a "p", suiting perfectly "Dragonbox Pyra". It has symmetry (I usually prefer symmetric stuff) and is pretty elegant.

What I dislike about number 4 is the typography. I think Font for logo 2 is better.
 
my new profile pic is my two cents on the venerable option number 2.

I like the angles of the original 2, and wanted to play with some negative space and pointiness.
 
I guess it's the font on #2 that I don't find appealing.. but like ED said the font type isn't set.
 
^ Agree, It doesn't look like it to me either.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Like Pyra mean fire.
Even other people are saying it has a connection to fire, so I'm not getting your point here.


How about I say, like the imagery of fire. Happy now?

Damn I am tired of nonsense discussions. Firstly there is nowhere written that I want it. I said that "I prefer" it because I already know that this logos look like others. Secondly, YOU talked about flipping logos, I NEVER talked about flipping logos on this topic, so you should open a topic about flipping where you would compile all the post on the forum where someone talked about flipping.
So,you want one over the other.


I like I said, I made the assumption base on that post and your obvious distaste of vertical logos on the Pyra shown on this thread.


Anyway, this is really making a mountain out of a molehill.

As I thought you don't know what "nonsense" mean, you have to know that "sense" isn't your opinion.
Link


Not sure where you getting this tribal sticker impression, vs all the other logos.

So in your opinion all the vertical logos does not fit on horizontal, well why do you support n°4?
I guess you miss the (""). I was trying to express that all of them are vertical logos, so you


really can't use that as an argument for n°4 specifically.

For the first time you respond something which could be interesting. This isn't the n°4, it looks like a polecat tail, less elegant than n°4 but it would fit the lid better than n°4.
Oh, please. That logo came from n°4.

Nvidia's clearly resembles an eye. There is no eye in no 2. IMO.
Well, clearly "Two". Not even one letter from eye is in there. :p


Seriously tho, I agree.


Although...

unique out of the lot to me.
It looks more like this. Link

How does it look more unique than number 4?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
IMHO, I'd prefer half of the earlier logo suggestions instead of #2. I don't understand why so many people like it. Although I do like the font for "Pyra" used below it.

-God Ginrai
 
Saber:

There is no neccecity in that the creator of the logo will let you change anything.

Also, as both font and artwork lisence is missing, a vote is at best vague idea of preference.

Nr 4 is for example a known trademark that is in use.

Changing anything also invalidates the decisiveness of a vote, and the integrity of the logo.

To talk of unsubstantiated change to a for case of argument final design is not fair to the creator.

My nevrotic inner being hurts when you do that. Respect the work at least enough to throw up a scetch of your proposed change.

Also what happens with that, is your idea might be shared by many, or not, and you run into mutual exclusiveness where i for example like ambigrams, but

would rather have the 2 than 4, whereas others think it can change into entirelly different designs.  Then you have to decipher what the bar means, who means what, which is a lossy process.

With design by commitee any holistic approach to making sense is lost.

Design by community can work, but this is not how.

ED:

If you go through management you get a watered down version of what could have been a good idea.

Changing the colour palette for example, makes nr 3 worthless based on what it was.  Who does that?

The guy whos money is on the line, is just as good an answer as it is terribly bad. Think about it.

There werent any design guidelines that restricted that logo to not work, for that reason alone one can not impose

those afterwards, because then it becomes something else.

Similarly, why the material, lighting and tooling and so on is important, is because an idea of something,

is not implementation. Moreso there is enough info missing to invalidate having an idea about it.

I have trouble seeing how design becomes better by _not_ taking things into account.

Info is needed beforehand and throughout to design something great. However great it may be, there is always a way to ruin it by changing something.

Many great designers adhere to the principle that good design exist when there isnt something left to change.

Imagine if some sound engineer said "just record it by singing into a microphone"  or a photographer had an idea

and was just given any camera to realize it.  Thats not how it works.

Think of this, you may have a designer house, if its made by someone who doesnt understand structural integrity its a gamble where it could be all junk.

Having a builder that says "I can build anything" is just as inept as the designer saying "build a vision" or effectivly trying to do so.

One can create a vision, and that is a relay, you are cutting it short at the implementation part.

Implying something can be just "done" without any continual feedback loop, is why it fails, even if not, that is not design, its accidental.

Bringing a design together is drawing on established ideas and the great randomness, that process is in no way impartial to the physical realm, which imposes a known set of restrictions.

edit: I still dont understand why the details cant be laid on the table and one can account for the accidents by voting on the greater set of logos, with first and second choice alternatives.

However, 2 was acceptible to me, and to answer

god ginrai:

I think people like it because its not easy to change into something better, I know this because ive tried.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top