New logo for julia editor support?


#1

The current logo for the Julia Editor Support github org is kinda bad.
It was a quick thing I put together because I was tired of the default gravatar

I put some effort in, and had a play with Luxor.jl (thanks @cormullion)
This is what I came up with.
The background code is mostly from JuliaEditorSupport/deoplete-julia/,
and a couple of other projects of mine.

Normal display size (200x200px)

Bigger (apparently should upload at 500x500px):

One thing I like about the logo is that it looks like it is shining a spotlight on the code – illuminating it.
Something a good editor should do.

Code is at


if anyone wants to have a tinker.

CCing all other members/owners of JuliaEditorSupport:
@carlobaldassi, @davidanthoff, @femtotrader, @jeff.bezanson, @sglyon, @tkelman, @yuyichao,

(epitron, ViktorQvarfordt, and Wilfred, do not appear to be on Discourse however.)

If noone objects, I’ll make the change in the next week or so.


#2

might look a bit better on a transparent background than black


#3

On transparent, for comparison.

200x200

500x500

I prefer black, I think.
it gives that spotlight feeling


#4

Nice! Try a bold font as well to see if it makes the image stronger.


#5

I attempted just the simplest bit of shadowing on the text, maybe a bit better?

EDIT: I tried adding a simple gradient mask to give back the “spotlight look” (major caveat, in case it wasn’t obvious: I AM NOT A GRAPHIC DESIGNER! :stuck_out_tongue:)


#6

I like the white background better. It blends in well with e.g. Github. The concept with Julia circles on code is really good imo.


#7

I’d prefer the one without shadows, but perhaps the font in bold New logo for julia editor support?


#8

I really like the concept! Thanks for getting this started.

If we’re counting, my vote would be white background, no shadows


#9

Nice concepts. I’d personally choose @jballanc 's shadow.


#10

Has anybody tried white background, with the backgrounds of each circle being the Julia color, and white bold letters?
(I’m still trying to figure out how to coerce Luxor to give me just that - it’s such a fun package!)
@jballanc - where is the source for your version with shadowing?


#11

@ScottPJones Um…actually, I don’t have any source beyond the image that I uploaded to discourse. I just took the PNG that @oxinabox posted, duplicated the layer, converted to BW, added 0.5 px Guasian blur, offset it 1px down and to the right, and then rendered it back to PNG.

I was more going for a quick-n-dirty concept. If people like the concept I’d suggest going back to the original text source and adding in a proper text shadow from that.


#12

Maybe it should be discussed in https://github.com/JuliaEditorSupport/roadmap/issues/4


#13

With no intentions of raining on anyone’s parade, I don’t see the point of the proliferation of logos for “Julia everything”.

There are only so many variations for themes with these 3 colors. I think that we are quickly reaching the point where even members of the Julia community would fail to identify many logos in a blind test.

I think it is definitely OK not to have a logo for a subproject, and sometimes it may be the preferred choice.

Just my 2 cents; again, not intending to disparage the efforts of people who designed various logos.


#14

I get we are really down to personal perference here.
Mine disagrees with yours and that is ok.

I don’t see the point of the proliferation of logos for “Julia everything”.

I think it is definitely OK not to have a logo for a subproject, and sometimes it may be the preferred choice.

Github default logos to me always say “This organization is unmaintained. Possibly it only holds mirror repos. Or is is just one person.”

There are only so many variations for themes with these 3 colors.

I don’t think we are. (Plenty of art is done using just black and white, and we have 1 more color than that)

I think that we are quickly reaching the point where even members of the Julia community would fail to identify many logos in a blind test.

Sure, and that is fine.
Logo isn’t really about identification of the repo to strangers,
it is about identifying the repo to people who already know what it is.
And really though see point one, I just don’t like gravitars.

Further to that, what repos you are a part of show up on your github profile.
Which is something employers and your various associates look at.
So a nice row of julia logos like @tkelman’s definately says a particular message.

|

Sure I only recognize 1/2 of them by sight, (proving your own point) but I can mouse over to get names.
And from sight I immediately know that this person is a real central part of the julia ecosystem/community.

Just my 2 cents; again, not intending to disparage the efforts of people who designed various logos.

yeah, no worries.
In the end it is all just a bit of fun. :smiley:


#15

In another news, change has been made


#16

I think this is the larger point. No, I don’t think every project and sub-project should feel they need to have a logo, but I rather enjoy how the Julia community has organized around “variations on 3 colored circles” because it is so immediately recognizable.

For example, I don’t think it’s immediately clear that this project:

and this project:

not only have a programming language in common, but also a significant overlap of community. (Those are the logos for SciPy and NumPy, respectively.)

As a final point, logos are less for community members who already know where to go to find a project and more for outsiders. This is where the recognizability of Julia’s brand could be a major advantage. It’s not just, as @oxinabox mentioned, about employers. Imagine a first year graduate student looking for help getting started with scientific programming. They’re going to start seeing those “3 colored circles” all over the place and get curious, potentially leading them to discover the most useful tool for their future career. :wink: