XnViewMP new icon

[JohnFredC]

Hi Thibuad,

I have been using XnView for so long, the continuity of its identity (via the icon) is very well etablished for me. Perhaps it is the same for other long-time users.

I'm not opposed to change. To be quite frank, I initially downloaded and tried XnView because of the attractiveness of its "little art works".. that is, the original logo and the original toolbar icons (the orange-themed ones, if you remember). The Mezich look (which I like and approve of) now dominates.

The Altap Salamander team went though this process a few years ago. They contemplated changing the name AND the icon, though fortunately they only changed the icon. From reading the forum over there, I could sense how difficult a design/decision it was.

A thing to keep in mind also is that some people care, some people notice but don't care, and some people don't even notice. I'm probably in the "care too much" group.

Here are some icons from my desktop toolbar.



IMO, the existing XnView icon is the least easy to recognize (as a control), though of course now that is the feature I use to identify it... XnView is the faded little thing that is "barely" there.

There are several dimensions of icon design... aesthetics, recognizability (as to product), recognizability (as to control placement and activation), uniqueness of form (so as to distinguish it from others), confusion factor (what is it?). If we made a scale for evaluating various proposals, I'd personally would score things (1-5 for positives, -5 to -1 for negatives) like this:

Current XnView icon

Aesthetics: 4 (nice looking)
Recognize as product: 4 (yup, that's XnView)
Recognize as control: 2 ("hard to see")
Uniqueness of form: 3 (vaguely similar to some other icons)
Confusion factor (negative): -1 (a little confusion, but not much: looks like an eye, but also a splash)

Score 14

Thibaud's latest version

Aesthetics: 4 (nice looking)
Recognize as product: 1 (no history yet, little visual connection to current product)
Recognize as control: 5 (easy to see and distinguish)
Uniqueness of form: 3 (vaguely similar to some other icons)
Confusion factor (negative): -5 (could be an bear paw, could be lips and tongue)

Score 8

Is this approach useful to the current topic?

[budz45]

Yes at 16x16 size and ONLY at this size Thibuad could make it more distinguishable, larger sizes are ok though.

[thibaud]

Thibaud != Thibuad
thanks

[JohnFredC]

PS. IMO, the current XnView logo is one of the most inspired logos on the internet.

It looks like a splash of paint that just happened to land in the form of an eye. How perfect is that for an image tool? Unity of form, unity of idea, unity of aesthetic: a poetic visual statement that will be very difficult to improve.

However, it does not translate easily into an icon.

Perhaps the logo can remain, and a different approach apply to the icon itself.

[thibaud]

PS. IMO, the current XnView logo is one of the most inspired logos on the internet.
It looks like a splash of paint that just happened to land in the form of an eye. How perfect is that for an image tool? Unity of form, unity of idea, unity of aesthetic: a poetic visual statement that will be very difficult to improve.

I don't want to offense anyone and I'll probably get flames for this but IMO the original XnView logo has to be most amateur logo i've seen ever.My little nephew that has just discovered illustrator would probably do just the same
I also think your imagination is working hard again here. this is definitely not how a splash of paint looks, I'm clearly seeing plain brushstrokes.

Perhaps the logo can remain, and a different approach apply to the icon itself.

You see that's exactly what I'm talking about when I'm saying that xnview has an undefined identity and inconsistent visual communication.
that's exactly what should be avoided.

[JohnFredC]

That was my recollection of the original XnView logo, before it was redone to look like brush strokes a few years back.

Perhaps I misremember. Powerful image, nevertheless.

[oops66]

...For me, at the final stable release of the XnViewMP's projects stage (the V1.00), the XnViewMP's projects should be renamed to the XnView v2.0 versions (For: Windows, Linux and MacOs) , so with the same excellent current icon:

see here too: http://newsgroup.xnview.com/viewtopic.p ... 568#p76568
PS: It's now my point of view !

[xnview]

Sorry but i don't understand anymore

You would like to keep the current icon?
You don't like this one?

For me, at the final stable release of the XnViewMP's projects stage (the V1.00), the XnViewMP's projects should be renamed to the XnView v2.0 versions (For: Windows, Linux and MacOs)

I don't think because xnview win will have a 2.0 before i finish the XnViewMP project...

[oops66]

Sorry but i don't understand anymore
You would like to keep the current icon?

Personally yes, but it's my opinion !

You don't like this one?

Yes the yellow one, or especially the last one is not too bad, but I prefer the current one

For me, at the final stable release of the XnViewMP's projects stage (the V1.00), the XnViewMP's projects should be renamed to the XnView v2.0 versions (For: Windows, Linux and MacOs)

I don't think because xnview win will have a 2.0 before i finish the XnViewMP project...

Not a problem, in this case: XnView V3.0

[JohnFredC]

Hi Pierre

Have changed my mind about all of this since the beginning of this thread.

Please don't change the icon or logo. After long thought I prefer the current one and hope it remains.

[Troken]

Look people, it aint strange that there is different opinions on this. All people have different taste, right? I wish people could express it nicely though, which is not always the case. Hmf... Maybe this thread should cool down some degrees now before we all get too excited.

Anyway, If you ask me, I'd like to see a new visual identity and welcome suggestions and discussion. Not sure I've seen a final result yet, but the suggestions so far are overall nice. But I dont own the question, and I will be completely fine if no logo/icon/visual changes are done.

[thibaud]

Indeed, I know from experience that exposing design direction in a user forum. is sure a good idea if you are looking for epic discussion. but may not be the best idea to make a designer's life easy.
there's a very funny formula famous among web designers expressing the quality of a design versus the number of people involved, but enough of that...

if my tone here appears sometimes to be too direct to some users, I'd like to apologize. I sure don't want to hurt anyone feelings.
and now that I'm re-reading my post, I do sound quite rude sometimes indeed , I'm sorry again.

The thing is, I'm not trying to sell anything here.
I strongly believe that XnViewMP arrival could be a great opportunity to try to strengthen XnView visual communication (with a coherent integrated identity: logo, website, icons, etc..)
After all, XnViewMp is a new program, that also needs to be communicated visually, don't you think some freshness would be appropriate ?

I wished that my pointing at the weakness in the current communication would be taken as a healthy exercise, rather than rude attacks at your beloved XnView.
I'm sorry, that exercise isn't solely a matter of arbitrary taste, but hopefully the outcome can only be beneficial for XnView.

[MaxSt]

At least it's not a roadkill cat.

[xnview]

After all, XnViewMp is a new program, that also needs to be communicated visually, don't you think some freshness would be appropriate ?

Yes, a new program. And i'll launch a website for it. So i think that we must keep the identity of current icon/logo but with a "better" visual to be able to identify clearer XnView win & XnView MP.

Like XnView Deluxe


vs XnView


But perhaps i'm wrong...

[oops66]

...In this case an other idea (RGB) for XnViewMP Windows, Linux, MacOs



...
see here too: http://newsgroup.xnview.com/viewtopic.p ... 568#p76568