Re: GNOME colors

[Ryan Muldoon <rpmuldoon students wisc edu>]

> <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?
> 
Right, but they shouldn't have been there.  See my reply to Joakim about
the current website vs. the old ones.

> 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...)
> 
Where in the GNOME desktop do you find sleek and futurey looking
design/colors?  I don't see much metallic sheen in my desktop.  I rather
like the calm, muted tones - and I know a great deal of others do as
well.  The website should reflect how the desktop is.  


> > 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.
> 
Do we want the KDE-style "perky" icons (that some might call overly
bright and childish)?  I don't know what you mean here.  The "days gone
by" are the foundation of what GNOME is today.  They were a big reason
why I started using GNOME in the .30 days (2 or 3 websites ago).  I
think we should keep on with the subtle and sophisticated look that
GNOME has.


> > 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/
> 
Lots of people can and have made artwork in the tigert style.  A friend
of mine made a dozen or so, and I can't tell who made which ones.  I
think that a style shouldn't be dictated by more than one or two
people........otherwise it isn't consistent.  

> 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...)
> 
Nautilus' Eazel theme definitely clashes with the rest of GNOME, and I
think that is a mistake.  Thankfully there are many other themes to use,
some of which match rather nicely.  I don't think that brown sums up the
GNOME look....there are a lot of other colors that GNOME uses
currently.  I don't see how anything is muddy currently.  But I would
strongly advise against "funky."

> 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.
> 
we'll see......the bubble-buttons seem gratuitus to me, I was hoping
that they wouldn't be there in the final version of Red Carpet. 

> > 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. :)

Well, to remake tradition, we would have to redo all of the existing
artwork.  Personally, I'm not up to the task.  I'm sure that people
would like to see your (or others') effort in this direction.  I don't
see how we can brand something when promotional material doesn't match
the actual product.


    --Ryan