(06-07-2015, 02:08 AM)DiamondToaster Wrote: [ -> ]How about this logo I just made? 
I have a slightly larger 300x300 variant as well.
It's a cool logo and I love the cartoon style, but I thought we wanted a logo not completely related to Minecraft. And I think it would be better with slightly thinner edges
Thanks! Glad to see that a whole 30 minutes of effort wasn't totally wasted.
I'll trim down the edges if needed.
[
attachment=580]
You were right, the trimmed edges do look better IMO.
Where did you get the textures for the blocks from? They need to the Public Domain, otherwise we can't use them.
Also, can it look good scaled down to 16x16? That's a requirement for a logo also.
But otherwise, it's a sortof ok logo.
I made the stuff from scratch, and 16x16 is a bit iffy, but somewhat recognizable.
Great for the textures, could you confirm that you're releasing them into the public domain?
And could you post the 16x16?
Public domain is legally iffy. It would be much better to use something like CC0, but most of the Creative commons licenses would do.
I think 32x32 is sufficient, do we really need a 16x16 logo ?
16x16 is necessary because it's used for website favicons, so it's essential that it look ok when shrunk down, but normal presentation would be larger.
(06-07-2015, 04:27 AM)worktycho Wrote: [ -> ]Public domain is legally iffy. It would be much better to use something like CC0, but most of the Creative commons licenses would do.
Problem with CC (not CC0) is that it requires attribution. Attribution
everywhere a logo is used is a bit silly.
I don't like 's logo much, it's too "meh" - nothing special, nothing eye-catching.