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

I know - a lot of style guides that I see these days have hex now too.  I don't know if they track it at NHQ  or not.  The different symbols that I've downloaded from NHQ have had different colors and none seem to be as 900-2 specifies.

a2capt

Seeing as how when NHQ jumped onto the CMS bandwagon, they did it with such an awful solution ..  I wonder how bad HEX color referencing can be screwed up..  ;-)


(If there's something screwed up about it, they'll find it, given the track record)



BuckeyeDEJ

#62
Quote from: JC004 on May 14, 2010, 05:51:32 AM
BuckeyeDEJ - we need a graphics person.  Help?   :(

What we call "ultramarine blue" is Air Force Blue -- PMS Reflex Blue. Air Force Yellow is PMS 116.

Complete color specs (from the Institute of Heraldry) exist for the CAP seal, and hence, the MAJCOM shield and the disc emblem. They also exist for the Florida Wing emblem. The specs cover PMS, CMYK, thread, RGB and Web color.

I wasn't going to say anything, and I was kinda dancing around it, but at the risk of blowing my cover, I'll say it: Florida Wing is developing a document that details those standards. Hopefully, it'll be adopted across CAP. And vector (not raster, so it's infinitely scaleable) EPS files of all the renderings will be available on the FLWG Web site's public affairs pages (it might be password protected, but don't get too excited yet).

As for what someone said re: proportions of elements in the seal, just go back to the late-1980s version (not sure on the date, just dig for it) of either CAPR 10-1 or CAPR 900-2 and you'll see the official rendering -- it covers an entire page by itself, ideal for enlarging and reducing on a copier. (Of course, yes, that was before Illustrator and FreeHand.)

The EPS I rendered in 1993 comes from that very seal. A full-color variant took the outline off the eagle and added highlights to the wreath twists (though the colors aren't quite right). It's all over the place now, after I gave a copy in the late 1990s to the Air Force News Agency. You've probably seen it...



I updated the renderings a few months ago because the eagle and stars weren't rendering right in Illustrator 10, and I wanted to ensure the colors (especially the yellow vs. gold) are accurate. The shading on the feathers is different, and there's highlights around the cloud. One variant mimics Vanguard's serif type treatment.

Yeah, it's kinda neat to see my rendering all over the place.


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

#63
Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on May 14, 2010, 05:41:18 PM

Why are the blue line sizes on the outer ring so thick?  Shouldn't that ring be mostly yellow, as opposed to mostly blue?

The only statement I know of to reference this is from 900-2, which states:
QuoteThe wide encircling band will be white and surrounded by a small gold band edged in dark blue on the inside and two small gold bands edged in dark blue on the outside.
My interpretation of this statement is that the yellow/gold is the more dominant color, as opposed to the think blue lines.  Again, and I think we're all in agreement on this, the problem here is that the info we have is not sufficiently defined.

Also, when you remove the outline/definition around the eagle and cloud, you make the image problematic for production in monochrome/black and white.  It needs that definition.
"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

Quote from: A.Member on May 14, 2010, 06:07:59 PM
Why are the blue line sizes on the outer ring so thick?  Shouldn't that ring be mostly yellow, as opposed to mostly blue?

The only statement I know of to reference this is from 900-2, which states:
QuoteThe wide encircling band will be white and surrounded by a small gold band edged in dark blue on the inside and two small gold bands edged in dark blue on the outside.
My interpretation of this statement is that the yellow/gold is the more dominant color, as opposed to the think blue lines.  Again, and I think we're all in agreement on this, the problem here is that the info we have is not sufficiently defined.

Also, when you remove the outline/definition around the eagle and cloud, you make the image problematic for production in monochrome/black and white.  It needs that definition.

That's why you have a black-and-white line-art version and a full-color version.

As for the thick line: You'd think the gold/yellow would be more prominent, but this scheme is what the seal approved in 1985 or '86 had. At this point, it's been done so many different ways, the only way to know is go back and look at the original. I promise you, the black-and-white version of this file is indeed the original, digitized. The quote you cite from CAPR 900-2 actually is backward. The twin gold rings are on the inside.


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.

Chief2009

Quote from: WheelsUp on May 14, 2010, 02:21:47 PM

Someone at NHQ has to have those color codes; perhaps it just has not found its way to 900-2 yet.

Heck, IL wing already has them in ILWG P1, our guide for creating unit insignia. Just pull it straight from there. http://ilcap.org/ilsups/ILWGP1.pdf

DN
"To some the sky is the limit. To others it is home" — Unknown
Dan Nelson, 1st Lt, CAP
Deputy Commander for Cadets
Illinois Valley Composite Squadron GLR-IL-284

A.Member

Quote from: BuckeyeDEJ on May 15, 2010, 12:38:46 AM
The quote you cite from CAPR 900-2 actually is backward. The twin gold rings are on the inside.
Agreed.  Like most of our documents, it's worded incredibly poorly.   
"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

I am very happy to report that after creating the Wing Website gallery, I've determined that NONE of our wings are using the Triangle Thingy as their logo in their websites.  THANK YOU.   :clap:

Support our cause.  Help end CAP's identity crisis.  Add the "Kill The Triangle Thingy" banner to your CAPTalk signature.  Together, we can preserve our identity, our heritage of our existing (official) logos, and our future marketing plans.

Capt Rivera

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!

Can you post a link to them? Thanks
//Signed//

Joshua Rivera, Capt, CAP
Squadron Commander
Grand Forks Composite Squadron
North Dakota Wing, Civil Air Patrol
http://www.grandforkscap.org

High Speed Low Drag

I agree with everyone here.  Definitely need standardization.  My squadron has used the AF Wings / CAP Seal cradle as part of the T-shirt. 

FRONT                                                                  BACK
 
( Size of this shirt is 2XL )                                                             Emblem is 12" tall

The cadet LOVE it - they can wear it under the BDU as well as the large white-on-black rear gives high-vis. (Sq has sold over 100 of these shirts to members)  Last year at encampment (it had just come out), they wore them every day as a measure of unit pride.  We also had positive feedback from several AF NCOs & Officers who saw them.

It is part of the required PT uniform (with dark blue or black shorts).  The SQ also sells sweatshirts identical to this they wear in the winter.  I think it is a good use of that particular emblem.
G. St. Pierre                             

"WIWAC, we marched 5 miles every meeting, uphill both ways!!"

JC004

but!  but!  they have a logo on the back!   :-[

High Speed Low Drag

#71
Quote from: JC004 on May 22, 2010, 03:27:23 PM
but!  but!  they have a logo on the back!   :-[

What's wrong with that??  The emblem on the front does not exceed 5" in diameter - and the back does not show through the BDU.  Wing Commander approved.
G. St. Pierre                             

"WIWAC, we marched 5 miles every meeting, uphill both ways!!"

A.Member

#72
Quote from: High Speed Low Drag on May 22, 2010, 02:42:35 PM

See, I'd argue that the image above ultimately contributes to the problem.

While the image probably adheres technically to 900-2, Section B (which incidentally does not reconcile 100% with the Air Force Trademark and Licensing Program), the regulation allows for too much discretion in it's use -- this, of course, is compounded by a lack of oversight on such matters.   

I'd argue that this should be the only allowed format and it should use the shield: 

"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."

a2capt

probably, technically?

That design is in fact used as an actual example of a permitted use, and to me, is a nice combination.

At least it's not a bunch of new stuff, never officially adopted.

JC004

Since the insignia is supposed to be on file with the AF folks...I wonder if either, both, neither are...   :o

High Speed Low Drag

#75
Quote from: JC004 on May 23, 2010, 10:03:36 AM
Since the insignia is supposed to be on file with the AF folks...I wonder if either, both, neither are...   :o

http://www.arwingcap.org/Docs/Policyltr2009-17.pdf

Here is another example of the same logo in use - as the official Wing letterhead. CAPR 900-2, Section, B, Para 6, Sub-para e: Commanders may use the symbol effective immediately on “perishable” products and those involving limited expense, such as printed material, clothing,
coins, etc. The symbol should not be applied at this time to other “nonperishable” uses such as aircraft and vehicles. Commanders retain discretion to decide how the symbol is used in their organizations, consistent with these guidelines.


As I stated eariler - "Last year at encampment (it had just come out), they wore them every day as a measure of unit pride.  We also had positive feedback from several AF NCOs & Officers who saw them."  The base commander even saw it and liked it.
G. St. Pierre                             

"WIWAC, we marched 5 miles every meeting, uphill both ways!!"

A.Member

Quote from: High Speed Low Drag on May 23, 2010, 01:55:08 PM
Here is another example of the same logo in use - as the official Wing letterhead...

...The base commander even saw it and liked it.
The fact that it's being used or that someone "likes" it does not mean that it's been approved.

Quote from: Air Force Trademark & Licensing OfficeIt's not uncommon to find internal misuse of the Air Force Symbol. If you are unsure if you or your organization's use of the Air Force Symbol meets the established guidelines, please don't hesitate to contact the Air Force Trademark & Licensing Office.

Quote from: a2captprobably, technically?

That design is in fact used as an actual example of a permitted use, and to me, is a nice combination.
I wouldn't necessarily make that conclusion.  It's not listed on the Air Force Historical Research Agency site as required by U.S. Air Force regulation - which owns the trademark rights - nor is it listed in any of the art work on the U.S. Air Force site.  At best, I'd say it's use needs to be clarified.
"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."

High Speed Low Drag

Quote from: A.Member on May 23, 2010, 03:53:29 PM
Quote from: High Speed Low Drag on May 23, 2010, 01:55:08 PM
Here is another example of the same logo in use - as the official Wing letterhead...

...The base commander even saw it and liked it.
The fact that it's being used or that someone "likes" it does not mean that it's been approved.

Quote from: Air Force Trademark & Licensing OfficeIt's not uncommon to find internal misuse of the Air Force Symbol. If you are unsure if you or your organization's use of the Air Force Symbol meets the established guidelines, please don't hesitate to contact the Air Force Trademark & Licensing Office.

Quote from: a2captprobably, technically?

That design is in fact used as an actual example of a permitted use, and to me, is a nice combination.
I wouldn't necessarily make that conclusion.  It's not listed on the Air Force Historical Research Agency site as required by U.S. Air Force regulation - which owns the trademark rights - nor is it listed in any of the art work on the U.S. Air Force site.  At best, I'd say it's use needs to be clarified.

This symbol is in CAPR 900-2 (as quoted above), so it is approved.  All CAP regulations are reviewed by CAP-USAF, so it HAS been approved by USAF.
G. St. Pierre                             

"WIWAC, we marched 5 miles every meeting, uphill both ways!!"

JC004

Quote from: High Speed Low Drag on May 23, 2010, 01:55:08 PM
Quote from: JC004 on May 23, 2010, 10:03:36 AM
Since the insignia is supposed to be on file with the AF folks...I wonder if either, both, neither are...   :o

http://www.arwingcap.org/Docs/Policyltr2009-17.pdf

Here is another example of the same logo in use - as the official Wing letterhead. CAPR 900-2, Section, B, Para 6, Sub-para e: Commanders may use the symbol effective immediately on "perishable" products and those involving limited expense, such as printed material, clothing,
coins, etc. The symbol should not be applied at this time to other "nonperishable" uses such as aircraft and vehicles. Commanders retain discretion to decide how the symbol is used in their organizations, consistent with these guidelines.

...

I was just wondering if we actually met the requirement...I don't know that we'll find that out.  I'm not sure that it's the biggest priority with it either.

I think it looks nice.  I designed a similar shirt once (non-uniform).  I was just wondering if NHQ did what they were supposed to.

On a side note, the wing letterhead violates 900-2 and the Air Force policy in terms of spacing/proportion.  *shrug*

A.Member

#79
Quote from: High Speed Low Drag on May 23, 2010, 04:25:17 PM
This symbol is in CAPR 900-2 (as quoted above), so it is approved.  All CAP regulations are reviewed by CAP-USAF, so it HAS been approved by USAF.
Again, that is an assumption, not fact.  Our regulations do not trump that of the Air Force or it's trademark rights. 

There are clearly discrepancies between statements in 900-2 and those by the Air Force Trademark & Licensing Office.

As JC004, indicates the other problems as well.   Just because something is used does not mean it's being used correctly or that it was ever reviewed and approved by the correct authority.

This specific issue was just an example to further illustrate the need.   I doubt we'll see resolution and it's not worth belaboring the point.
"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."