New icon/logo

New icons, what do you think?  Better than the old one?

     

Full size 530x529 image for scaling down to custom sizes:
http://www.bitcoin.org/download/bitcoin530.png

The perspective shadow was too thick on the larger sizes.  I updated 32, 48 and the full size.

I release these images into the public domain (copyright-free).  I request that derivative works be made public domain.

I like them. Do they come in higher resolutions?

I still dislike the currency symbol ... But at least the logos look good and clean.

Good suggestion.  I made the B slightly lighter and the background slightly darker.  Very slightly.  The foreground is now exactly the same colour as the BC in the old one.

It's kind of OK if you can't easily read the B in the 16x16.  At that size, you just need to see that it's a coin.  It doesn't matter so much what's embossed on it, just that there be some detail there because it wouldn't look like a coin if it was a blank smooth circle.

It's slightly wider than tall because the dark perspective under it goes more to the right than down.

I finished and posted the 32x31 and 48x47 versions in the first message.  I like the 48 a lot.

How does everyone feel about the B symbol with the two lines through the outside?  Can we live with that as our logo?

How about an SVG version? That way we could automatically generate smaller and larger versions as needed, and storage in the Source Control Management is an option too.

When you use SVG or another vector-format, you don't have the problems you discribed when scaling the logo. Perhaps I'll give it a go in Illustrator.

Thank you. I have updated my "Accept Bitcoin" buttons and banner (version twos) to use your new coin.

After some toying, this one seems a bit more crisp.

http://www.shalhoon.com/bitcoin2.svg

Is this the "official" logo? I understand how difficult it can be to make something truly professional when you don't have the skills (which I don't) or the software (which I also don't) so I'm not trying to be rude, but wouldn't it be better if we adopted something...better? I really am not trying to be mean...I really have struggled trying to figure out how to do the stuff that a lot of the artists on deviant do.

There is at least one other thread with a set of logos and badges that are really, really promising here: http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1631.0 I promise I don't know this guy/gal (I didn't even check the username). Heck if someone else came up with another alternative that would be cool too. It seems important that we have a really nice logo with all the sizes, resolutions, and formats that might be needed.

Is there a reason we couldn't adopt something else before bitcoin gets too big and it's too late to change without hurting "brand" recognition? It seems silly to stick with something that is "ok" when we could have something great.

I hope I didn't step on anyone's toes to badly.

ArrowJ is right, image is everything, and its best left to the Pro's. (i.e. Not me.)

That said, the name "Bitcoin" is pretty uninspiring start for a Graphic Designer, IMO. (But that is a whole other discussion.)

Kudos to Bitboy on his contribution, this kind of simple smooth and sharp image instantly tells the viewer that we are in 2010.

I don't personally have the skills, but again, I think http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1631.0 is a great choice.


The most recent version isn't as bad as the original, but it is still not a crisp as could be desired, it doesn't scale well, has too many color shades, just has an overall "generic" look to it.


I'm not actually complaining...just voicing an alternative opinion related to the quality of the current logo that represents the bitcoin project to most of the outside world. I feel it has few of the aesthetic properties a good logo should have.

I don't see why this can't be discussed without being offensive (I'm trying not to attack anyone personally). I'm not saying anything about the qualities of the designer as a human being...he did after all come up with the cool idea of Bitcoin in the first place, but this does not mean his artwork should be the de facto face of the project IF the goal is to increase it's popularity. It seems to me that the better face we can put on the project the better. Is it bad to strive for fantastic?


I personally think less 3D is in order. It's ok for it to be "abstract" in that it doesn't look exactly like a coin...I would posit that it would be better if it doesn't try to look like a real coin...after all, we aren't dealing in real coins...we are dealing in BITcoins

I'll be honest with you, I thought I had offended with the suggestion.

I hadn't thought of the license issue, but of course your right, whatever logo is used it should probably be public domain. IF the community decided to adopt Bitboy's logo I'd contribute 5 btc to "buy out" his license and turn it over to the public domain.

Can this sort of thing be settled with a vote or does it not work that way? I mean we can say it's open source and whatever people use will win, but you have to admit Satoshi's logo has a little bit of an advantage...nobody wants to offend the originator of the awesome idea...I don't want to anyhow...hope I haven't!

Is that a requirement for an open source project though?

No its not...but you'd be more likely to get satoshi to support something we know he approves of!

Haha, I agree. Maybe it should be a holo-coin.

I'm happy if someone with artistic skill wants to contribute alternatives.  The icon/logo was meant to be good as an icon at the 16x16 and 20x20 pixel sizes.  I think it's the best program icon, but there's room for improvement at larger sizes for a graphic for use on websites.

It'll be a lot simpler if authors could make their graphics public domain.