Re: GNOME colors

[Jeff Waugh <jdub aphid net>]

<quote who="Ryan Muldoon">

> 1. Pastels should go away - They appear nowhere in gnome artwork.  In my
> mind, they are almost the opposite of the general gnome aesthetic
> concept.


They appear on the Gnome website. :) I think the pastels got a tough review
- and for the wrong reasons. Can you remember the old site? Sure, it had
"coder's tables" and murky layout, but the colours?

Choosing colours for the website is essentially one of the steps in branding
Gnome. Do you want to be stuck with dreary, earthy, dank tones, or something
upbeat, sleek and futurey? (Terrible marketing words, I know...)


> 2. Reds, Browns, Yellows, dark green, and greyscale seem to be the most
> used colors in gnome artwork.  I think the website should reflect this.


Where is this "Gnome artwork"? The Foot? The icons? Stuff stuck in our minds
from days gone by? All those browns lead to murky, not perky (good god, now
I'm rhyming) - perhaps we should discuss wider branding ideas with the
Foundation.


> 3. I am partial to continuing in the Tigert tradition for artwork - it
> is the distinctive GNOME feel.


"What happens if Linus is run over by a bus?"  ==>  s/Linus/tigert/

The Gnome look'n'feel is already progressing - see the work on Red Carpet,
Helix Setup Tools, Evolution, Nautilus... Not much brown in there! :D All
the interfaces are going *funky*, not muddy. (My little brother asked if
Gnomes wiped their feet after putting their footprints in the website
background...)

Warm yellows (Helix bubble-buttons) and subtle use of burgundy, with the
light Gnome-feet off-whites as shading is looking interesting. I'll do a
colour comp in a minute.


> People should be immediately be able to tell that it is the GNOME
> website, and not something else.


That's defintely true - but we can 'remake tradition' at this point too. :)

- Jeff


-- jdub aphid net --------------------------------- http://linux.conf.au/ --

                  ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI.