Hacker News Reader

Comment by dvt | Hacker News Reader

This might not be a popular opinion, but I think all the work OP put in here is probably worth more than 50-100 bucks (which is the price of a logo on something like Fiverr). And to make things worse, the logo itself still needs to be cleaned up[1] as it's way too blurry to be seriously used as an app icon, etc.

[1] https://raw.githubusercontent.com/cube2222/octosql/main/imag...

View on HN

That too can be solved with "AI".

https://imgur.com/a/m3hDMZq

The software used was Topaz Labs Sharpen AI. How they define "AI" I can't say for certain, but they're apparently using models so I'm assuming there's some kind of machine learning involved. Their software does a really good job on photos and videos well beyond what a standard sharpen filter does. The upscaling features are also pretty awesome. (no I don't work for them)

Jeremy Howard describes this as "Decrappification"[1]. This is one of the easiest deep learning models to train, in my opinion, as you can generate your own dataset easily. You just get good pictures for the target, programmatically make changes that make the image "crappy" for your source, and train until your network can convert from crappy to good. Then you pass it something it has never seen, and whabam, your picture is sharper than before.

[1] - https://www.fast.ai/2019/05/03/decrappify/

This still doesn’t work well as a logo IMO, no amount the sharpening. It probably needs to get redrawn with a proper vector editor, the lines cleaned up and colors simplified

It’s a good first draft and something to give to a designer, but can’t stand by it’s own as a serious app logo

Still not a vector and still not going to look good at small sizes. Also the more you "sharpen" the higher the file size will be

I might have not been too clear about it in the article, so if I haven't, I agree!

All of this was just me finding a practical purpose to go for while having fun with Dalle. If I was really serious about a logo, I would definitely go and pay an artist. Both for monetary, as well as esthetic, reasons.

Though as far as an app icon goes, I think it's actually sharp enough. It starts looking bad when you zoom in a bit.

> needs to be cleaned up[1] as it's way too blurry to be seriously used as an app icon

Seems to have been blurred after the fact. The version linked in the article before cropping looked fairly sharp: https://jacobmartins.com/images/dalle2/DALL%C2%B7E%202022-08...

Plus even that uncropped one is already jpeg'd, whereas DALL-E 2 downloads are pngs, so there should be an even sharper version.

I thought the hardest part about logos is the idea itself? Doesn't matter that it's blurry - the majority of the work has been done.

It's obviously not done, and unfortunately it won't ever get done.

They need a black and white variation, different sizes, and the underlying component assets.

So Dalle2 might actually be able to provide that in the future as well.

But for now - it's going go give you an 'image' which you have to get an artist to then clean up int a proper logo with assets.

I'm playing with DallE-mini on hugging face and am generally unimpressed, I'm not sure if its' the same Dalle.

I tried the main DallE website sadly don't have an 'invite'.

Dalle mini is not the same dalle and it's far worse.

Dalle from OpenAI, it's still in private beta, the quality of the model is much better but unfortunately the results are filtered (a lot)

80% of the work has been done. Now the remaining 20% will take 80% of the time.

It's a cute concept that can work well if done right.

In its current state it's not a viable logo because, for one thing, it won't look good in black & white.

> it won't look good in black & white

That sounds like a concern that stopped being relevant for many software companies a decade ago at least.

These days app icons and hero images are more important than whether you can fax or print the logo.

Maybe this isn't what the previous poster meant, but sometimes I will say black & white when really I mean monochrome. Monochrome logos show up all over the place especially with icons for web apps. And they are good for printing on apparel, accessories, etc. I really doubt they are concerned about faxing

Wrong. And it has nothing to do with what kind of company you have. A logo should always degrade to 1-bit (line art) representation gracefully, so it can be used in or on all kinds of media. It could be physical objects, prints on hats, silhouettes on glass... not to mention being recognizable at all sizes.

Ignoring this issue is the mark of an amateur.

You don't refute my point. In fact, you strengthen it by providing no evidence why this should be a requirement of modern logos for software companies. You list a bunch of things a logo should be useable for in your mind, otherwise its not a professional logo. However, you don't explain why it must "degrade to 1-bit" for those random things nor why the logos should support things like "silhouettes on glass". I can think of a handful of use cases but hardly a minimum requirement for a good logo for the majority of software companies.

I've run several different types of businesses and even those that required print work never required or even benefited from black and white, or even monochrome as another commenter mentioned. We _always_ had the means and preference for full color: emails, brochures, documents, websites, t-shirts—it didn't matter. There was _never_ a time we needed to degrade the logo so significantly. From talking with others that appears to be extremely common in modern businesses, especially software, since the majority of our presence and revenue stream is online, and not glass silhouettes in our office.

As I said, outside of a fairly narrow range of real world use cases, this comment is outdated: "Ignoring this issue is the mark of an amateur." If you have one of those rare use cases, check that box, but otherwise it shouldn't be the norm or a requirement.

Your point has been roundly refuted, with evidence that you yourself cited in your reply. Your limited imagination will limit what you do with logos. Enjoy.

> worth more than 50-100 bucks

Maybe in the US but not worldwide.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com