Our designer has been working on this for quite a while. Please enjoy!
24 Likes
That is very nice, love it!
(ps it’s looking a bit pixelated on the blog post site in the nav bar).
1 Like
Great work. I think it actually fits very well. There are a couple things that I believe might be good to address.
- That dark red “shadow” that the white shapes have is too thin even for the retina screen. It creates a moire effect when the logo is small. The circle’s shadow is not as bad as it’s blurred. But the stem’s one is not. This problem can be solved by shifting it a bit more so its presence is obvious. Right now it’s more of a “is there a darker line there or is my vision failing me” effect. If it doesn’t serve any artistic purpose it could also be removed completely but this is more of a taste thing and it’s 100% Bettina’s domain.
- The “r” in the logomark are not balanced as horizontal and vertical stokes have the same “thickness”. Normally to work around the way our perception works the horizontal strokes are thinner (see Futura’s “t”). Right now the horizontal strokes seem thicker.
- Following the bauhaus’ idea of a lowercase only typeface and using “ReScript” in text seems a bit weird
5 Likes
Well, at that point I don’t think it would be hard to adopt “reScript” or “rescript” or even “reSCRIPT” (to further differentiate from “OCaml” 
).
And, since we’re bikeshedding, “ReScript” looks like a module, while “reScript” looks like a type. Which of these is a bigger ReScript advantage? 
1 Like
I think just “rescript” works the best to be honest
1 Like