Giving PhotoLine icons some touch

Here everybody can post his problems with PhotoLine
Benutzeravatar
greenmorpher
Mitglied
Beiträge: 943
Registriert: Di 29 Mai 2007 14:42
Wohnort: Rabaul, Papua New Guinea

Re: Giving PhotoLine icons some touch

Beitrag von greenmorpher »

Hey Adam

First, please let's be very clear. I'm not putting down your art here -- I think it's terrific! I can’t do stuff like this. But I can do advertising and what I am doing is bringing decades of advertising and marketing focus to the task of what an icon or logo has to do. It must be totally focused to be really effective. There are a lot of awful examples out there -- but the best really hit the spot in every way. :)

First, about the 32/64 aspect of PL. Only about half of Mac users switched to OS X.7.x -- the others (like me) are sticking with OS X.6.8 or lower mostly because it allows them to continue to use Rosetta so they can use legacy programs. And that demands that they work in 32 bit. So the fact that PL can switch between 32 and 64 bit is important. In fact, I have PL set to 32 bit most of the time so I can use several older plug-ins, and I switch to 32 bit + Rosetta when I desperately need to use one particular really old plug-in which I believe has not been matched/replaced by anyone and has not been updated since about 2002 -- Focus Magic.

In Windows, the position is similar. Vast numbers of people are still making life difficult for themselves on XP3. Do they run 64 bit? I don’t even know whether XP3 does 64 bit (I am clueless about Windows pretty much) but you can bet that lots of them do not. Again, the 32/64 bit switch is important.

From an advertising perspective, any logo or icon must be able to be seen and be clear in its message. This is important in respect of two things. The numbers you show in the icon and the lack of color.

As I said earlier, the numbers are not relevant to PhotoLine. The zoom starting point is 18mm -- common in full frame and even APS-C sensor size cameras. But these cameras are by no means universal -- far and away the great majority of people do not use such cameras or are familiar with the figures on the lenses so the figures have no significance for them. But they all are familiar with some figures on their lens which are relevant to the use of the lens. In this case, for PhotoLine, the figures 32 and 64 are both relevant to PhotoLine. People will recognize that if they see the icon in an advertisement such as in the "About" box you produced. A good ad! So I really, seriously, suggested replacing the 18-120mm with 32/64-bit or perhaps 32~64-BIT.

Again, from the advertising POV -- and this is what icons and logos are all about -- color and movement are to die for. In a still image, we can’t have actual movement but you, as an accomplished artists, have introduced latent or virtual movement by having your icon lens tilted off vertical/square. Nice work. All that remains is color. The context and size of display always have to be taken into account in a commercial situation, and in a widely distributed one, there is no accounting for how big or in what context a logo/icon might be seen. Even in your "About" example, where you have control of the color within the box which enables you to set it up so the black and silver shows to maximum advantage (and very nice it looks too), you still don't have full control of the environment because you don’t know what wallpaper people are seeing it against. With a print ad, you never know what other illustrations are on the page -- and even if you take a full page ad, you don’t know what will be on the facing page. You can be done big time by more vibrant surroundings.

The fact is, color -- bright color -- attracts our eyes first, last, and all the time! That's part of the human evolutionary advantage.

Here's what your PL icon looks like in my dock. It is a good icon at dock size, clean, simple, indicative of what PL is about, and very importantly, different. BUT whether it stands out well depends on the background. I run EarthDesk as my wallpaper -- a complete picture of the earth with satellite feed updates of clouds plus day/night (including moonlight) every 20 minutes. Magic! As you can see, your PL icon is pretty dull against the Atlantic ocean as it is right now in daylight compared with nearby icons, but as night advances, it will get duller. With a really dark night, it still shows, but on a moonlight night it practically disappears! :)

So I would suggest introducing at least a bright band (red?) on the lens -- perhaps the band where the zoom numbers are, bring the switch on the lower band around to the center and have 32 on the left of it and 64 on the right, reduce the width of the black band and increase the width of the silver band at the top to about the width of the wider band at the bottom, and put PhotoLine 32~ 64 BIT in that, but much bigger.

As for introducing the four color underline in the "About" screen, that looks nice but it ignores the fact that PL outputs in RGB as well -- and that every user will output in RGB for Internet use and only those who go to print -- a minority, probably -- will use CMYK. The fact that PL is switchable in that respect needs to be incorporated into an "About' screen or ads. It does not have to be incorporated into the icon since it already shows the dual nature of PL with its subject and the way it is drawn.

Adam, you can ignore all of what I’m saying of course. You have a graphic art perspective and you do it very well. I'm coming from a pragmatic advertising perspective -- as advertising manager and (low level) creative. I've commissioned and scores of logos and icons over the years, tested them, and introduced them. I'm long retired from the corporate stuff but still do advertising for small business along with photography and writing. That's the perspective I’m bringing to our discussion here.

For more information on that perspective, have a look at my ad site: http://www.ad-doctor-online.com. In particular, go to the "Get the Book" page to check out the free sample of my little book and the "Free Ad Tips" page for six more examples. Some of these ads are my own work, some are the work of others I've picked out of media to make a point - positive or negative. :mrgreen:

Best regards

Geoffrey Heard
The Ad-Doctor-Online
http://www.ad-doctor-online.com
Du hast keine ausreichende Berechtigung, um die Dateianhänge dieses Beitrags anzusehen.
bkh
Betatester
Beiträge: 3674
Registriert: Do 26 Nov 2009 22:59

Re: Giving PhotoLine icons some touch

Beitrag von bkh »

greenmorpher hat geschrieben:First, about the 32/64 aspect of PL. Only about half of Mac users switched to OS X.7.x -- the others (like me) are sticking with OS X.6.8 or lower mostly because it allows them to continue to use Rosetta so they can use legacy programs. And that demands that they work in 32 bit.
Sorry to contradict, but (like any other program), PL works perfectly in 64 bit mode under Mac OS 10.6. So the important point is that PL can run in 64 bit mode and make use of more of 4 GB of RAM. (Of course, you may be forced to go down to 32 bit and possibly Rosetta when you need old plugins.) It's understood that any Mac program will still run in 32 bit mode (because not all hardware out there supports 32 bit, and advertising that it still runs under Rosetta may be counter-productive. So the only relevant point here is, imo, that PL runs in 64 bit mode. Otoh, I think that the big marketing hype about programs being capable of running in 64 bit mode is more or less over, but I may be wrong here.

I don't know anything about the state of affairs in the Windows world.
greenmorpher hat geschrieben:The zoom starting point is 18mm -- common in full frame and even APS-C sensor size cameras.
So far, I thought that 18 was an allusion to the upcoming version number – and putting the version number there seems perfectly reasonable. I'd probably drop the – 120 and make the zoom ring a focus ring, given that this seems more like an 18 mm prime lens anyway (and an 18 – 120 zoom lens usually isn't associated with highest quality).

I'm also a bit worried about colour. On the one hand, all the more common DSLR lenses are matte black, so I'd vote for a black lens here, rather than white or silver. The only way to bring in some colour is via reflections on the front lens, so tilting that towards the viewer definitely is a good idea. This will probably work for a large icon, but I'm not sure when it comes to a 32 x 32 icon. Anyhow, I have tried a quick and dirty (in all senses) icon from a photograph of one of my lenses:
Icons.png
I'll attach Mac and Win icons files, in case anyone wants to try them.

Cheers

Burkhard.

P.S. The Mac icon is 256 x 256 px only because of the file size.
Du hast keine ausreichende Berechtigung, um die Dateianhänge dieses Beitrags anzusehen.
Benutzeravatar
greenmorpher
Mitglied
Beiträge: 943
Registriert: Di 29 Mai 2007 14:42
Wohnort: Rabaul, Papua New Guinea

Re: Giving PhotoLine icons some touch

Beitrag von greenmorpher »

Fair points, Burkhardt except…

64-bit, as you say, is now the expectation. That makes 32/64 bit marketable -- there are /a lot/ of people out there, mostly the people who have stayed with X.6.x, about half of all Mac users, who are now looking particularly for 32 bit with 64 bit switchable for when they have to move up in the future or for particular tasks now.

I like your introduction of color. We don’t have to worry what DSLR lenses look like -- this is an /icon/…/suggestive/ of a lens, /not/ an actual picture of an actual lens. In addition, some of the most obvious of DSLR lenses are white. Further, why must we be locked into the appearance of DSLR lenses? Are DSLR users the target market for PL?

To be frank, I like Adam's ikon very much in concept and general appearance, but simply say that for on/logo purposes, it needs color. Nobody's going to say it isodd because it has color; people understand it is an con, not an illustration of a real lens.

Cheers, geoff
bkh
Betatester
Beiträge: 3674
Registriert: Do 26 Nov 2009 22:59

Re: Giving PhotoLine icons some touch

Beitrag von bkh »

greenmorpher hat geschrieben:64-bit, as you say, is now the expectation. That makes 32/64 bit marketable -- there are /a lot/ of people out there, mostly the people who have stayed with X.6.x, about half of all Mac users, who are now looking particularly for 32 bit with 64 bit switchable for when they have to move up in the future or for particular tasks now.
But the 32 bit/64 bit issue is totally irrelevant when it comes to Mac OS 10.6/10.7. Both run both architectures (only ppc support is gone in 10.7). 64 bit was a big topic when Mac OS 10.6 introduced real 64 bit support, and when everybody proudly announced 64 bit versions (or remained silent), but emphasizing 64 bit too much these days might seem a bit ridiculous, and mentioning 32 bit too prominently even sounds a bit negative in my ears. PhotoLine 64 would be fine with me, and moving to www.pl64.de instead of redirecting to www.pl32.de might be a good idea as well.
greenmorpher hat geschrieben:I like your introduction of color. We don’t have to worry what DSLR lenses look like -- this is an /icon/…/suggestive/ of a lens, /not/ an actual picture of an actual lens. In addition, some of the most obvious of DSLR lenses are white. Further, why must we be locked into the appearance of DSLR lenses? Are DSLR users the target market for PL?
Of course, an icon should be an idealised lens, not an actual one (I just used a photo because drawing one takes so much more time and I just wanted to try colour and perspective). BUT: an icon should show a typical lens, one which even non-DSLR users will recognise as one (because they have seen similar lenses before). I'm assuming a DSLR lens because that's the most common kind of detachable lens and thus the easiest to recognise when shown separate from the camera. I also expect that users of compact cameras won't mind using a program showing a DSLR lens but I doubt the converse.

The only white (with some black) lenses I'm aware of are big telephoto lenses. Most people will recognise them because you frequently see them on TV, but maybe they will not associate them with their own photography. Which lenses do you have in mind?
greenmorpher hat geschrieben:To be frank, I like Adam's ikon very much in concept and general appearance, but simply say that for on/logo purposes, it needs color. Nobody's going to say it isodd because it has color; people understand it is an con, not an illustration of a real lens.
Colour is also important for recognising objects. It's much easier to recognise a banana when it's yellow than when it's green or dark brown because in our culture, an ideal banana is yellow (although everybody has seen the other variants before).


Cheers

Burkhard.
Benutzeravatar
ono
Mitglied
Beiträge: 148
Registriert: Mi 21 Jul 2010 23:50
Wohnort: Baden, Switzerland

Re: Giving PhotoLine icons some touch

Beitrag von ono »

Here's another iteration/alternative of my icon imitating Canon Pro (L) lens style. Okay it isn't as colorful as Windows logo ;) but it has greater contrast than previous one. WDYT?

Bild

Together with older version:
Bild

New one with some other icons on Windows (small size):
Bild

Download:
http://www.nanoant.com/download/photoli ... oLine.icns
http://www.nanoant.com/download/photoli ... toLine.ico
Adam Strzelecki | nanoant.com | CBCT/PET tomography engineer
Benutzeravatar
greenmorpher
Mitglied
Beiträge: 943
Registriert: Di 29 Mai 2007 14:42
Wohnort: Rabaul, Papua New Guinea

Re: Giving PhotoLine icons some touch

Beitrag von greenmorpher »

My last contribution to this thread.

Burkhardt I respect your knowledge and technical stuff, but I/m talking marketing. On the question of 32/64, you are totally ignoring what I have said about the market. At last 50% of the market -- that is, all owners of Macs and PCs -- are running systems that either run 32 bit or they want to run 32 bit. 32 bit is important to them. I have two reasons for running 32 bit -- I want to run 32 bit + Rosetta on occasion and I want to run just straight 32 bit most of the time so I have access to in both cases to older plug-ins.

One reason we ALL run PhotoLine is because of its cost -- it is very economical but packs lots of power for the price. Lots of others would buy PhotoLine for the same reason. Will these people all buy PhotoLine because it is 64? No, lots of them will want to run PL at 32 bit because they will have 32 bit plug-ins which continue to do everything they want those plug-ins to do. They don’t want to upgrade their plug-ins just to go to 64 bit.

Look at the market.

As for recognizing a lens --well, it’s pretty obvious it is a lens whether it is colored or not. You would recognize your name above, but putting it in red makes it an eye magnet. The important thing is that this is an ICON, it is lens-like but it is not an illustration of a lens. In fact, look at the shape. Is that actually any lens you know? No it is not. It is lens-like. Likewise, it doesn't have to be the color of an actual lens. BUT we need color to catch our eye and identify it quickly and easily in the dock or on the desktop -- or in an ad. Color is the thing.

Adam (oh look, blue on blue -- red does stand out much better, doesn’t it?) another clever graphic, although I have to say I actually prefer the first one's shape overall. The new one moves forward with its wider silver band at the top. It moves backwards with the addition of the PL version number -- rule of thumb never tie a logo or icon or trademark to a version number (although software companies do it all the time, the idiots) -- and the addition of the letters A and M to the switch, and it makes no progress with the retention of the focal length numbers. As I said before, these numbers (and now the A and M) are irrelevant to PL and have no place on an icon. The thin red line is an improvement in adding color but it goes nowhere in that it is not thick enough. An icon or logo or trademark needs its to show all its elements at all sizes in all situations. I would like to see a wider red band top and bottom. And as I said before, bring the switch around and put 32 one side and 64 the other.

I'll retain your sharper, more contrasty tool box, Adam, thank you very much, that's great, but I am returning to the old PL icon for the dock because I can identify it instantly without having to really look at it -- while it means nothing much so far as I can see (like TextMate's flower), it is colorful and my eye doesn’t have to search for it as the dull spot between two colorful icons (the one above it, with the pen, is Canvas, the one below it is iPhoto Manager).

And that's all I have to say. :D

Cheers, geoff
Juan
Mitglied
Beiträge: 611
Registriert: Do 06 Okt 2011 08:08

Re: Giving PhotoLine icons some touch

Beitrag von Juan »

Just a little contribution from my side :)

What if you add the CMYK as a lens reflections? (I guess there is no need to make a photorealistic lens) :)
I like the idea of having 32/64 numbers, for commoners like me is good to see that Photoline comes in to flavors 32 bits and 64 bits.

Maybe this is way to drastic change, but worth to try.
I made a really awfull example of what could be interesting as a general idea not to make it as a copy... what about changing the angle of the lens more to the viewers than pointing up? in that way you can grow a little more the icon because the "cage" that is contained.

Great job and really apreciated for your time and effort :D

Cheers
Juan
Du hast keine ausreichende Berechtigung, um die Dateianhänge dieses Beitrags anzusehen.
bkh
Betatester
Beiträge: 3674
Registriert: Do 26 Nov 2009 22:59

Re: Giving PhotoLine icons some touch

Beitrag von bkh »

greenmorpher hat geschrieben:My last contribution to this thread.
Sorry to hear that. I really appreciate your comments, even if we don't always reach agreement.
greenmorpher hat geschrieben:Burkhardt I respect your knowledge and technical stuff, but I/m talking marketing. On the question of 32/64, you are totally ignoring what I have said about the market.
Maybe this is my ignorance about marketing, but shouldn't marketing advertise those points which distinguish a product from its competitors? Stating that PL does 32 bit seems to me just like saying that it can edit 8 bit jpegs.
greenmorpher hat geschrieben:As for recognizing a lens --well, it’s pretty obvious it is a lens whether it is colored or not. You would recognize your name above, but putting it in red makes it an eye magnet. The important thing is that this is an ICON, it is lens-like but it is not an illustration of a lens. In fact, look at the shape. Is that actually any lens you know? No it is not. It is lens-like. Likewise, it doesn't have to be the color of an actual lens. BUT we need color to catch our eye and identify it quickly and easily in the dock or on the desktop -- or in an ad. Color is the thing.
Yes, I totally agree on what you say about "lens-like". But the dock/desktop isn't a market place, and I don't like to see eye-catcher icons there which distract me from the rest. Easy recognition is the key point, imo, and similarity both in shape and colour contribute to recognising objects.

Cheers

Burkhard.
Benutzeravatar
ono
Mitglied
Beiträge: 148
Registriert: Mi 21 Jul 2010 23:50
Wohnort: Baden, Switzerland

Re: Giving PhotoLine icons some touch

Beitrag von ono »

It is colorful, it is CMYK, it is lens, but it is flower...

Bild

Together with older version:
Bild

New one with some other icons on Windows (small size):
Bild

Download:
http://www.nanoant.com/download/photoli ... oLine.icns
http://www.nanoant.com/download/photoli ... toLine.ico
Adam Strzelecki | nanoant.com | CBCT/PET tomography engineer
Torsten
Mitglied
Beiträge: 551
Registriert: Mo 28 Nov 2011 09:27

Re: Giving PhotoLine icons some touch

Beitrag von Torsten »

I love this colorful cmyk-lens-flower-icon :)

Great job „ono“ - thanks for giving this icon & the Pictures.pld, its rocking :mrgreen:
Du hast keine ausreichende Berechtigung, um die Dateianhänge dieses Beitrags anzusehen.
Benutzeravatar
ono
Mitglied
Beiträge: 148
Registriert: Mi 21 Jul 2010 23:50
Wohnort: Baden, Switzerland

Re: Giving PhotoLine icons some touch

Beitrag von ono »

FYI I've shrunk Mac CMYK-flower icon to match average icon size on Dock (was bit too large before), also fixed bit icon's shadow. Just re-download it from link above.

This is how it looks here on my Dock:
Bild

Cheers,
Adam Strzelecki | nanoant.com | CBCT/PET tomography engineer
Argonaut
Mitglied
Beiträge: 44
Registriert: Sa 29 Okt 2011 13:12

Re: Giving PhotoLine icons some touch

Beitrag von Argonaut »

Hi ono,
ono hat geschrieben:It is colorful, it is CMYK, it is lens, but it is flower...
let me just cite Burkhard:
bkh hat geschrieben:Easy recognition is the key point, imo, and similarity both in shape and colour contribute to recognising objects.
A b s o l u t e l y spot on and well done! :D

OMG, once I was a Windows champ, but now :mrgreen: : I have to change the icons on the level of individual links, right?


Argonaut
Torsten
Mitglied
Beiträge: 551
Registriert: Mo 28 Nov 2011 09:27

Re: Giving PhotoLine icons some touch

Beitrag von Torsten »

YES :mrgreen:
Du hast keine ausreichende Berechtigung, um die Dateianhänge dieses Beitrags anzusehen.
akeller
Mitglied
Beiträge: 1000
Registriert: Fr 03 Apr 2009 19:10

Re: Giving PhotoLine icons some touch

Beitrag von akeller »

Hi ono,

I like your work, especially the first 2 attempts. Very well done! :D
But why PhotoLine is best represented by a lens?
Further I don't understand, why to point out the ability of CMYK - others do have also CMYK ... and 32/64 and Lab* and ... there are other things which are unique.
Anyways here is the icon I use, I'm not claiming that it is clever or nice but I made and use it - why not to share.
I copied the style from some other company... hopefully they will not complain :lol:
PL17_64.png
For those who want to improve something or change the number to 32 here the PLD-File:
PL17.pld
Cheers,
Andreas

BTW: I do like the original icon of PL
Du hast keine ausreichende Berechtigung, um die Dateianhänge dieses Beitrags anzusehen.
Benutzeravatar
greenmorpher
Mitglied
Beiträge: 943
Registriert: Di 29 Mai 2007 14:42
Wohnort: Rabaul, Papua New Guinea

Re: Giving PhotoLine icons some touch

Beitrag von greenmorpher »

Well, I said I wouldn't say anything more but let's face it, I lied! 8)

Adam, that tulip hooded lens is a knock out. Great icon. Stands out beautifully. Congratulations! I would like to size the size of the yellow petal reduced a tad -- it seems out of proportion to the gray once and the gray one looks right compared with the magenta and cyan ones. The yellow one doesn’t have to connect with the cyan and magenta petals -- I've seen lots f lenses where there are gaps between petals.

Oh boy -- does that stand up in the dock and on the desk top! Beautiful. And, of course, that's exactly where I can’t go on any sort of frequent basis in graphics. I can say what the requirements for the outcome are in words, but most of the time (just sometimes it works!) I can’t turn those words into graphics. You can, Adam, and I admire that. Wish I could do it.

Andreas, the fact PhotoLine does CMYK is important in the greater scheme of things. Lots of the little Mac raster apps do not. or at least, did not. I haven't looked at any of them for the past couple of years -- even the most hyped ones seem so limited next to PhotoLine as to be not worth even spending one minute investigating them. And coming from me, that's an awful condemnation since I swim only in the shallow end of PhotoLine! :D

Cheers, geoff

PS: By the way, Adam, your name has special meaning for us Australians. We're possibly the only Anglophones who can faultlessly spell Strzelecki. Thank you Pawel Edmund! And Kosciusko! Thank you again, Pawel! :)

Actually, I don’t know about the current younger generation. We were drilled on these spellings in school; kids today can’t seem to spell anything much. :(