Subject:
|
Re: Spaceworld v. 1.0
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Tue, 25 Jul 2000 19:30:56 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
850 times
|
| |
|
|
> From: "richard marchetti" <blueofnoon@aol.com>
> Organization: none
> Newsgroups: lugnet.space
> Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 19:06:18 GMT
> Subject: Re: Spaceworld v. 1.0
>
> In lugnet.space, Mark Sandlin writes:
> > http://www.nwlink.com/~sandlin/lego/spaceworld.jpg
>
> In terms of sticking to the old image motifs and lettering styles, etc -- it
> looks great! But here are my point of contention:
>
> 1. Rather than a blue field, I would have preferred a starfield of some
> kind. If it must a blue field, go much darker with it -- towards indigo.
We have discussed placing it on a starfield for the front page. The blue I
selected only because it simulates the blue 3x6 slope that I have with the
logo on it.
>
> 2. There are ripples of some sort in both the yellow planet and in the red
> streaking rocket parts -- if this was a scan, you may wish to remove these
> original source artifacts.
Actually, that's supposed to look like they're "shiny" or have a brushed
metal appearance
>
> 3. Given my first point, I would have preferred the reflection of a starfield
> in the chrome, or just a simple chrome look without reflection. What you have
> now presumes reflections from other sources -- like a desert covered planet,
> and a blue sky? Blue/brown chrome reflection only works (or makes sense) if
> you have these two other elements in your design as well. If you look at the
> Star Wars packaging, as an example, they have just hinted at a golden surface
> without reflections of any particular sort.
The chrome isn't actually supposed to be a literal interpretation of the
logo floating in space. I put it on there mainly to make it a bit flashier.
That's still being decided on.
> 4. It should certainly be "Space Worlds" in the plural form.
That's still undecided.
~Mark
--
Mark's Lego Creations
http://www.nwlink.com/~sandlin/lego
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Spaceworld v. 1.0
|
| (...) looks great! But here are my point of contention: 1. Rather than a blue field, I would have preferred a starfield of some kind. If it must a blue field, go much darker with it -- towards indigo. 2. There are ripples of some sort in both the (...) (24 years ago, 25-Jul-00, to lugnet.space)
|
18 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
