Comments on: New Firefox Icon: Iterations 8 and 9

By: Nitin

Nitin — Thu, 28 May 2009 05:46:15 +0000

Mr Faaborg, you had previously stated that, the positive feeling towards Mr Horlander’s version was largely, “because people are afraid of change, and the icon is a little less of a departure from the previous shipping version”. I would say that the tail element on Horlander’s design is quite a departure from the current FF3 icon and it is this tail that people are liking.
I would not say that we should just ‘use Horlander’s tail’, with iteration #9 or #8. But the current iteration can adopt elements of Horlander’s tail, its texture and natural flow and perhaps even improve on it?
I am grateful to have had the opportunity to interact in this way. Its a very positive move…thank you Mr Faaborg!

By: Frank

Frank — Thu, 28 May 2009 01:01:35 +0000

I like Iteration 9 more than any other iteration, but I still like Horlander’s tail feathers more than the current one. Horlander is quite the designer

By: Qiller

Qiller — Thu, 28 May 2009 00:05:20 +0000

Agree, #9 globe, head and colors + Horlander’s tail.

By: Cato

Cato — Wed, 27 May 2009 23:12:50 +0000

Imo, if you really need the icon to be in 3D, then you should make a 3D model of the globe and the fox. Now it looks like it’s trying to be both 2D and 3D.

By: Gerv

Gerv — Wed, 27 May 2009 22:04:23 +0000

I think what bugs me about these renderings is that you can see “behind” some of the flames, and so it becomes clear that the tail isn’t actually that thick. In other words, half of the “body” of the Firefox is weirdly thin. I realise it’s a fictional creature, but I sort of expect it to have substance. In the current rendering, you can get that illusion.

The other thing is that I’d like to see what it looks like if we _don’t_ make the globe lighter as you go up, or at least not as much. Leave the icy “pole” there, sure, but remove some of the lightening. I think currently it looks like the sun is shining down vertically on the pole, which is odd. That’s not a way planets normally look.

Thanks for being so interactive about this

By: sryo

sryo — Wed, 27 May 2009 15:54:20 +0000

Definitely #8, the other one has too much volume. Although I do like how defined the tail edges look in #9.

By: David Naylor

David Naylor — Wed, 27 May 2009 15:23:01 +0000

These look awesome, esp. 9.

By: Gyrobo

Gyrobo — Wed, 27 May 2009 14:26:49 +0000

The tail really looks substantial in number 9.

It would be perfect if that one little tuft on the tail wasn’t pointing away from the planet. The brighter yellows nearly render that errant tuft invisible, though.

And that landmass at the bottom of the globe, right above the fox, looks a little out of place.

By: Alphab

Alphab — Wed, 27 May 2009 14:16:58 +0000

I personally like 8 better, 9 is too aggressive to my taste.

By: Kurt (supernova_00)

Kurt (supernova_00) — Wed, 27 May 2009 14:16:07 +0000

#9.

The tail in #8 looks washed out/blurry.