Create a "powered by Jupyter" version of the logos?

[fperez]

This would be akin to what Python offers, and it would allow related projects to show that they use Jupyter in an essential manner, without trying to potentially create diluting logos.

What do folks think of this idea?

[takluyver]

I think we should certainly have some guidelines for projects that want to use our logo to indicate Jupyter integration or support. I don't think 'powered by' quite makes sense in the context where this came up, though maybe it does for something like Thebe which uses Jupyter internally.

[fperez]

Indeed, we may want to also have guidelines, but offering the logo itself in the first place, like the python.org folks do, was what I had in mind as a starting point. What do you think of that first step?

[takluyver]

I'm not convinced that we need a specific version of the logo - I don't see that many things using the 'Python powered' logos, and you're allowed to use the regular Python logo "to indicate suitability for use with Python or implementation in Python" (i.e. the regular logo is no more restricted than the 'powered' variant).

So I think clear guidelines on how to use the logo are more important to work out. E.g. as we're using a hollow shape as the main graphical logo, should we say people can't put their own logo in Chompy's mouth?

[ellisonbg]

@cameronoelsen want to tackle a version of the jupyter logo that includes something like "powered by"

[ellisonbg]

I agree that the most important thing would be to create a very clear trademark usage policy in the jupyter/governance repo that we can publicize.

But I do think it may be helpful for some 3rd parties to have a powered by jupyter logo.

On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 1:39 PM, Thomas Kluyver notifications@github.com wrote:

I'm not convinced that we need a specific version of the logo - I don't see that many things using the 'Python powered' logos, and you're allowed to use the regular Python logo "to indicate suitability for use with Python or implementation in Python" (i.e. the regular logo is no more restricted than the 'powered' variant).

So I think clear guidelines on how to use the logo are more important to work out. E.g. as we're using a hollow shape as the main graphical logo, should we say people can't put their own logo in Chompy's mouth?

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/jupyter/design/issues/21#issuecomment-170135417.

Brian E. Granger Associate Professor of Physics and Data Science Cal Poly State University, San Luis Obispo @ellisonbg on Twitter and GitHub bgranger@calpoly.edu and ellisonbg@gmail.com

[fperez]

I agree, I think we need both. I think the clear policy/guidelines are absolutely necessary, but I also think offering the logo can't hurt. It's one of those thing, if we don't offer it, we can't know if people aren't using it because we don't offer it or because it's useless :)

So I'd rather offer it and present it as an option, along with good guidelines for the rest, of course.

[parente]

Are there any guidelines to date on use of the Jupyter logo in jupyter-incubator projects? We're not using it yet, but it sure would be nice to have in the dashboard server project instead of the plain old text "Jupyter Dashboard".

Example:

This is not yet merged. I'm not sure if it fits the "powered by" case either.

[fperez]

I would be OK with incubation projects using the logo: they have been vetted by us and have explicit commitment and participation of the project members (if nothing else, as sponsors of the proposal).

Overall we want our policies to be inclusive and encouraging of participation, we just need to:

• prevent dilution from modified versions of the logo that add extra/different information to it, even when well-intentioned.
• prevent usage from unauthorized projects that appropriate even an unmodified logo and make it sound like a third-party has some formal affiliation with us, again creating confusion.
• have solid standing of this enforcement track record, in case we ever need to defend ourselves in a more formal manner. We obviously hope that never happens, but just in case, we need a clear record to pre-exist just in case.

[ellisonbg]

Assigning to @jupyter/io as part of the branding design work.

[spoorthyv]

Here are the two designs I made. What are everyones thoughts/suggestions?

[mattb-co]

Made a few iterations as well based on @spoorthyv's design:

(click image for a more detailed view)

[spoorthyv]

+1 I like matt's versions much more.

[fperez]

I'm not crazy about the all-orange background one, but I love the dark gray bg one. It won't fit everyone, and I think we should offer a few options, but for those where it works I think it looks awesome.

I also would drop the one with orange letters and white bg, it seems like more color than necessary to me...

From what I've seen so far, I'd like to offer:

1)

2) a version of (1) just above but with a border, like the one from @spoorthyv (color of the border TBD).

3)

I think that would be enough variations to satisfy various design contexts while remaining clean and minimal.

But this is just my personal taste/opinion, not a mandate :)

Great job, thanks!!

[faricacarroll]

@fperez @ellisonbg How about including these three versions of "Powered by Jupyter"? I've altered the colors slightly to follow our brand guide color palette.

1) White background

2) Dark background

3) White background + Dark border

[spoorthyv]

@faricacarroll I like those versions. Are those the new versions of the Jupyter logo?

[faricacarroll]

@spoorthyv

They were not. Here they are with the new versions of the logo.

[ellisonbg]

Great, thanks! For now, I think we can use language such as follows to go along with these logos:

If you have a product, service or open-source project that uses Jupyter's open-source software or relies on its architecture, we recommend using the phrase "Powered by Jupyter" and/or the corresponding logo shown below:

[cameronoelsen]

@faricacarroll & @spoorthyv, I think all three of these variations look great as well! A few questions though:

1.) On the two variants that have background colors and borders, to fit the "POWERED BY" text above the lettering, try grouping together the "POWERED BY" text along with the "Jupyter" wording and center them within the box. Right now it seems as if there is a small amount of space underneath the logo that is not symmetric with the top. Example:

2.) For companies that are using Jupyter, I am just wondering how readability will be when placing this logo in the size that we are specifying (rather small). We may want to reduce the amount of white space around the logo, but overall I think they look great 👍

[faricacarroll]

Thanks @cameronoelsen! Great points. Here's an updated version with centering and a smaller surrounding white space of 16px. I also thickened "Powered by" to bold for better legibility at smaller sizes.

[fperez]

I'm happy moving forward with this last iteration. Even if months from now we decide to do a revision, I think they are good enough for usage now that we should put them out (and we have folks asking for them).

If our first users have serious concerns (size, contrast, whatever), we can always do a quick early iteration based on real-world feedback.

So unless anyone objects, my vote is to go ahead.

[faricacarroll]

One of the feedbacks from presenting the Brand Guide Book was to create a square version of the Powered by Jupyter logo.

I also wanted to get input on whether we should allow these logo variations to change colors according to the document? For example, in the O'Reilly book we made the logo the O'Reilly brand color.

Here are the designs Cameron made for the O'Reilly book:

I mocked up a design to look more consistent with the rectangle ones above. What do you guys think?

[damianavila]

What do you guys think?

Nice! Quick thing... if the last one (with dark background) a little bit de-centralized?

[faricacarroll]

@damianavila Yes, thanks for pointing that out!

I've adjusted it slightly:

[cameronoelsen]

@faricacarroll For readability, try changing the "Powered by" on the last variation on the right to be white. Also, wondering what the icon would look like without the border radius on the square

[faricacarroll]

Good point, I've changed it to white. Here is a version without the border radius on the square:

I'd like to keep the borders consistent for the square version and rectangle version. If we decide to go with the square edge, then we should see how it looks on the longer rectangle version.

[cameronoelsen]

@faricacarroll I think that the square variation looks great with the white text, not sure how I like it without the border radius though. Try adding back the border radius that is seen in your previous mockup with the white "powered by" text from the latest mockup. Let's see how that looks!

[faricacarroll]

@cameronoelsen I like it! What do you think?

1)

I'm considering making the border smaller so that logo itself can be slightly larger.

2)

[damianavila]

:+1: to the border radius IMHO.

[cameronoelsen]

@faricacarroll I really like the version you posted last, try posting the variation with less of a border radius and we can see. I'm just scared that if we make the border radius too thin, it may look very thin at the small size that it will most likely be used at. Nonetheless, test it out and we can see!

[faricacarroll]

@cameronoelsen Sorry, I misexplained it. By making the border smaller I meant the size of it in proportion to the logo, not the thickness of the border.

The second screenshot is what I'd like to have the final logo be and is what I meant by a smaller outside border size. If you compare 1 and 2 you can see a slight difference in the border size. Is that the version that you like?

[ViralBShah]

These are great. We would love to use these in Julia Computing's JuliaPro distribution. Are these final?

[ddavidebor]

Would love for one of these to be made official :smile:

[ellisonbg]

Yep!

On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 4:35 AM, Davide Bortolami notifications@github.com wrote:

Would love for one of these to be made official 😄

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/jupyter/design/issues/21#issuecomment-312622865, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABr0KpLGtjB1QFRje4LKyM9IuQmTLx3ks5sKNILgaJpZM4HBasc .

-- Brian E. Granger Associate Professor of Physics and Data Science Cal Poly State University, San Luis Obispo @ellisonbg on Twitter and GitHub bgranger@calpoly.edu and ellisonbg@gmail.com

[fperez]

I think we've converged here, should we close the issue and make them official? We're getting more and more of these requests, so having them finalized (in particular before JupyterCon 2017 would be great.

I think these are good enough... @faricacarroll, @cameronoelsen @ellisonbg: thoughts?

My vote is for #1 from @faricacarroll's last image above, the ones with a bit wider margins. But the difference is small enough that I don't really care, I just think we should make a call and make them official :)

[Carreau]

Reminded me of another logo from the 90s.

[dhirschfeld]

Is there an official Powered By Jupyter logo available somewhere? I can't seem to find one in this repo?

It seems it's already being use in Wes's new book:

[Carreau]

I think there is a dropbox folder with some resources, but I can't find it; I may be imagining things. We should get this finalized and commited to this repository (as well as have a section on the website) with a brand-guide.

[Ruv7]

I'm not sure if there was still more discussion happening about the use of the logo or if we were ready to make it official. @ellisonbg - is there something blocking this or should we go ahead and upload the logos to this repo?

[ellisonbg]

We are working on organizing our design files and part of that will be uploading them to github. In the meantime, we should upload this particular logo so others can use it.

[ellisonbg]

Here is a png though:

[JolandaS]

Is there any news on this? I could not find any official logo or guidelines on the website or here on Github. Thanks in advance.