Blender and Cycles Logo Reimagined (and rant about Cycles Standalone)

Hey guys,
My name is Erel Herzog, and I am a VFX and 3D artist, a filmmaker and a graphic designer. I live in Tel Aviv, Israel, and I am 18 years old (just finished school :RocknRoll:)
I’ve been using Blender for about two years, and I absolutely freaking LOVE IT!

I recently took a challenge; To redesign the Blender logo, and create one for Cycles, using a flat, sleek and colorful design language. I wanted to hear what you think.

The compression is terrible, click the images for a slightly better version.

d=1404590053&thumb=1

d=1404587752&thumb=1

I would appreciate it if you can also check out my demoreel; feedback is welcome:

All 3D is Blender, mostly in Cycles. VFX is done in After Effects.

Why does Cycles need a logo?

Two words. Cycles Standalone.

I believe that development of a standalone version of Cycles is crucial to the evolution of the Blender platform (yes, i said PLATFORM), will greatly advance the Blender Project, and should be of high priority.

Why?

In the industry, Blender is mostly viewed as an unprofessional software that cannot generate realistic or stunning images. We (the Blender users) know that is completely wrong, but a big chunk of the industry is convinced otherwise. (This is a fact; When I showed Maya and Max users my Cycles renders, they were stunned, had trouble believing it was CG, and when convinced, didn’t believe it was done in Blender. They were even more stunned when I told them the render times, which are usually around one minute or less)

Cycles is a fast, robust, production ready render engine that is easy to use and learn, but gives the user infinite flexibility and creative freedom. If Cycles were published as a free, open source standalone render engine, many people and studios who use different 3D programs (Maya, Max, C4D, etc) will give it a try, and I’m confident many will be impressed. Most “professional” render engines today cost hundreds, if not thousands of dollars, and also charge for updates, whereas Cycles Standalone will be completely free for any kind of use.

What will Blender users benefit from this?

The average Blender user will benefit in many ways from the creation and distribution of a Cycles Standalone application:

  1. This will (probably) shatter the Blender stereotype; Which will bring more interest and users to Blender and increase the development fund; Meaning more developers; Leading to a better Blender, faster.

  2. More people will use Cycles; Many new Cycles materials and assets will be available to the Blender community.

  3. When more studios use Cycles for their productions, developers will get crucial feedback about how to improve cycles and what is missing, meaning a better Cycles for all.

  4. Many of those studios will customize Cycles with new shaders, features, tweaks or optimizations, some of which will be made available for the Blender Community (Another advantage Cycles would have on other render engines; It’s open source nature means the studios can modify it however they like to fit their own workflow).

  5. Studios which will use Cycles Standalone, will look to hire lighting or shading artists with experience in Blender, opening up Blender related jobs in the heart of the industry.

Thanks for reading!

Erel Herzog

Attachments


looks like image links are broken…

Also, cycles standalone is already planned and has been for some time, but … at least you are thinking along the right lines. Your enthusiasm is good but unfortunately you’re a bit late to the party.

Also, "In the industry, Blender is mostly viewed as an unprofessional software that cannot generate realistic or stunning images. " How do you know this, given that you just got out of school?

“When I showed Maya and Max users my Cycles renders, they were stunned, had trouble believing it was CG,” nice humblebrag, did you import these people from 1993 when CG was always obvious?

“developers will get crucial feedback about how to improve cycles and what is missing, meaning a better Cycles for all.”

knowing industry standards is not the limiting factor on cycles development. Do you think that Brecht et al were somehow able to create Cycles despite being ignorant of other renderers and professional pipelines? Brecht works on Arnold now. Not exactly an industry noob here.

When was the last time someone chose a product because it had a shiny logo, the shininess and newness of the logo by no means represents the quality of the software in question.

People will instead choose software based on what it can do and what it provides, if Cycles was to get its own logo, then it should be of a similar style to Blender’s current logo (it’s a common practice for companies to have the logo of every product contain the same main points in terms of styling).

some how after many edits it double posted… look below

Did no one else see it?


:edit :Oh man this might be my best ms painting ever


:edit: holy crap its a masterpiece


Isn’t that too much like the Blender logo? I get the gimmick with cutting it in half to make a C but eh… There were some logo suggestions i liked in the original “easter egg surprise” thread, years ago.

It’s just a bit of fun, lighten up.

What do you mean? I see them just fine…

The fact that I finished school does not mean that I am not updated with the industry. I was an intern at one of Israel’s leading VFX houses (Gravity, check them out here). True, most of the people I know are from the Israeli VFX industry, but they are professionals.

I was stating a fact. Many of the people I showed the image to actually had trouble believing it was CG. I was told things like “This is BLENDER?!” and “you made this in Maya, right?” They were also really impressed with the one minute render time. The image in question is this one:


What I meant, was that the more users Cycles will have, the more feedback the devs will get. The reason I wrote it in the first place is because I believe that Cycles is production ready and can actually succeed.

Of course not. I agree that a software is not to be judged by design or shininess, but I also believe that presentation is very important. Having a flatter logo doesn’t mean that Blender will become worse. It means that is give a better first impression to people who are considering to download it. It’s not a big difference, I agree, but I still think it’s something Blender can improve on.

That was precisely my thinking. You’ll notice that the Cycles logo IS the Blender logo, only slightly rotated, with inverted colors and a small arrow (represents speed, moving forward, etc)

Cool idea! Though I wouldn’t personally use it. Still, gave me a chuckle. Awesome out-side the box thinking!

Moved from “Latest News” to “Blender and CG Discussions”