The Beginnings of a Style Guide

Started by JC004, May 12, 2010, 10:22:47 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

JC004

On the whole, I agree except that I'm not sure about which vehicle/aircraft symbol I support and while I like/miss the "U.S. Air Force Auxiliary"-style patch, it doesn't say our legal, primary name, which is a marketing problem, identification problem, and kinda silly.  So for PRIMARY use, I couldn't really support that unless we figured out how to fix it.  Ideas?  The advantage of the emblem is that it displays both.

BuckeyeDEJ

Quote from: JC004 on May 13, 2010, 07:59:19 PM
On the whole, I agree except that I'm not sure about which vehicle/aircraft symbol I support and while I like/miss the "U.S. Air Force Auxiliary"-style patch, it doesn't say our legal, primary name, which is a marketing problem, identification problem, and kinda silly.  So for PRIMARY use, I couldn't really support that unless we figured out how to fix it.  Ideas?  The advantage of the emblem is that it displays both.

The MAJCOM emblem as it is now works just fine. Horse dead, bats put away.


CAP since 1984: Lt Col; former C/Lt Col; MO, MRO, MS, IO; former sq CC/CD/PA; group, wing, region PA, natl cmte mbr, nat'l staff member.
REAL LIFE: Working journalist in SPG, DTW (News), SRQ, PIT (Trib), 2D1, WVI, W22; editor, desk chief, designer, photog, columnist, reporter, graphics guy, visual editor, but not all at once. Now a communications manager for an international multisport venue.

pixelwonk

This thread reminds me of this shirt:

A.Member

#43
I agree with the basic premise of this thread.

The issue on emblems can simply end here:
http://www.af.mil/art/mediagallery.asp?galleryID=5187

(of course, I'll pile on with the fact that I still think this should be our command patch, but I digress.)

There is no need for any other emblems/symbols, with the exception of the aircraft roundel:


Now have National legal enforce it as vigorously as they enforce the other trademark issues.
"For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

WheelsUp

A. Member: You nailed it. I'm with you on that.
ES Training Officer/Mission Scanner

BuckeyeDEJ

Quote from: A.Member on May 13, 2010, 10:49:17 PM
I agree with the basic premise of this thread.

The issue on emblems can simply end here:
http://www.af.mil/art/mediagallery.asp?galleryID=5187

(of course, I'll pile on with the fact that I still think this should be our command patch, but I digress.)


It would end there if the emblems on that site were of better quality. And better quality versions exist!


CAP since 1984: Lt Col; former C/Lt Col; MO, MRO, MS, IO; former sq CC/CD/PA; group, wing, region PA, natl cmte mbr, nat'l staff member.
REAL LIFE: Working journalist in SPG, DTW (News), SRQ, PIT (Trib), 2D1, WVI, W22; editor, desk chief, designer, photog, columnist, reporter, graphics guy, visual editor, but not all at once. Now a communications manager for an international multisport venue.

A.Member

Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on May 13, 2010, 11:16:50 PM
It would end there if the emblems on that site were of better quality. And better quality versions exist!
That's humor, right?!
"For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

BuckeyeDEJ

No, that's not humor. More accurate renderings of the seal and MAJCOM emblem ("shield") do indeed exist. Stay tuned and you'll see them....

The seal NHQ gave AFNS is poorly out of proportion and the type is contorted, but to know that, you have to go back to the CAPR 10-1 and 900-2 from the mid-to-late 1980s to get the large-size, printed rendering to use for clip art.

Also, get this: Vanguard has a new version of the seal that uses serif type. Yes, serif type. I'd actually prefer it for tradition's sake, but the seal uses a Swiss sans serif unless the Powers That Be decide otherwise.

As for the MAJCOM emblem, there is a variant that not only has the accurate colors, but the type in the scroll's not screwed up. I can tell you Florida Wing has it, as well as a precise version of its new emblem as vector EPS files (you'll see the latter in the Web site's banner, though not the background).


CAP since 1984: Lt Col; former C/Lt Col; MO, MRO, MS, IO; former sq CC/CD/PA; group, wing, region PA, natl cmte mbr, nat'l staff member.
REAL LIFE: Working journalist in SPG, DTW (News), SRQ, PIT (Trib), 2D1, WVI, W22; editor, desk chief, designer, photog, columnist, reporter, graphics guy, visual editor, but not all at once. Now a communications manager for an international multisport venue.

A.Member

Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on May 13, 2010, 11:55:09 PM
No, that's not humor. More accurate renderings of the seal and MAJCOM emblem ("shield") do indeed exist. Stay tuned and you'll see them....

The seal NHQ gave AFNS is poorly out of proportion and the type is contorted, but to know that, you have to go back to the CAPR 10-1 and 900-2 from the mid-to-late 1980s to get the large-size, printed rendering to use for clip art.

Also, get this: Vanguard has a new version of the seal that uses serif type. Yes, serif type. I'd actually prefer it for tradition's sake, but the seal uses a Swiss sans serif unless the Powers That Be decide otherwise.

As for the MAJCOM emblem, there is a variant that not only has the accurate colors, but the type in the scroll's not screwed up. I can tell you Florida Wing has it, as well as a precise version of its new emblem as vector EPS files (you'll see the latter in the Web site's banner, though not the background).
You know that .jpg images are 2100 x 2100, right?  And the EPS image is also available.  Not sure what more you're really looking for.
"For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

BuckeyeDEJ

That's not what I mean, A. On the seal, the rings around the white band are out of proportion and scale. The coat of arms (which the stars encircle) is too small and placed too high. The type sits wrong and is ill-proportioned.

On the emblem, the type is horribly set, and I'm not sure the colors are right, but I haven't sampled them.

Doesn't matter the size of the JPEG if the file content's not right.


CAP since 1984: Lt Col; former C/Lt Col; MO, MRO, MS, IO; former sq CC/CD/PA; group, wing, region PA, natl cmte mbr, nat'l staff member.
REAL LIFE: Working journalist in SPG, DTW (News), SRQ, PIT (Trib), 2D1, WVI, W22; editor, desk chief, designer, photog, columnist, reporter, graphics guy, visual editor, but not all at once. Now a communications manager for an international multisport venue.

A.Member

#50
Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on May 14, 2010, 12:56:08 AM
That's not what I mean, A. On the seal, the rings around the white band are out of proportion and scale. The coat of arms (which the stars encircle) is too small and placed too high. The type sits wrong and is ill-proportioned.

On the emblem, the type is horribly set, and I'm not sure the colors are right, but I haven't sampled them.

Doesn't matter the size of the JPEG if the file content's not right.
OK, I understand what you're saying.  Your concern is not really with the quality (ie resolution) but rather the accuracy of the images.

However, without a more detailed style sheet or specification document, how do we know these are inaccurate?  The answer is we don't...and that's one of the OP's points.  900-2 is not specific enough to address your concerns.   From what is stated in 900-2, it appears accurate.  You may not like the way it looks but that doesn't make it incorrect.  The seal's design is consistent with the design of the other Air Force seals on the official U.S. Air Force site...just sayin'.

That aside, do you agree the emblems listed are the only ones that should be used?
"For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

JC004

A. - the stuff we haven't doesn't technically comply with 900-2.  It isn't ultramarine blue:



BuckeyeDEJ - we need a graphics person.  Help?   :(

SarDragon

Not meaning to be snarky, but where's the official definition of ultramarine? I see that being as uncertain as answering the Q - What color is Navajo White?
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

JC004

Doesn't seem snarky...Are you talking about ultramarine or ultramarine blue?

Ultramarine (Hex: #120A8F)
Ultramarine Blue (Hex: #4166F5)

900-2 specifies ultramarine blue, which is that paint sample that I put up there^^^

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultramarine

It's our nametapes.   :)

SarDragon

Vewy, vewy intewesting.

Dave gets an 'F' in Wiki-foo today!
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

JC004

It is far past time for this to come to an end.  I cannot imagine running an organization of this size without a mean, comprehensive, kick-butt marketing plan like I would put into place, let alone BASIC branding guidelines and standard marketing practices.  We can get this done.  We have the resources.  We don't need to spend millions and we DON'T need to hire that woman who prepared the PowerPoint presentation on why we should BLOG.

jimmydeanno

If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law. - Winston Churchill

SarDragon

But Glidden's is darker.



Back to square A!
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

JC004

That is why we will use Pantone and not Benjamin Moore.  Why Pantone and hex were not specified in 900-2 is totally beyond me. 

WheelsUp

Quote from: JC004 on May 14, 2010, 08:48:04 AM
That is why we will use Pantone and not Benjamin Moore.  Why Pantone and hex were not specified in 900-2 is totally beyond me. 

JC004, you beat me to it. Yes, we need to use the Pantone colors (sometimes called PMS, Pantone Matching System), which is pretty much the universal standard for anything printed these days. (Web color codes are a different system altogether) All the services have very specific color codes - I've had to research them for my job in the newspaper business. Someone at NHQ has to have those color codes; perhaps it just has not found its way to 900-2 yet.

Relying on paint company codes ain't gonna cut it - each has their own color criteria and codes, as we have seen on this thread.
ES Training Officer/Mission Scanner