405th Logo Update

[Art Andrews]

As with so many other things within this community, we are bringing a fresh approach to the look of the core logo.

Logo History

Now... I won't claim to know the entire history of the community's identity, but this is one of the earliest versions of the logo I could find from around August of 2007.



Which eventually appeared on the website around Oct of 2007.



I am not sure exactly when the current logo was first created (roughly ~2008) but Adam shared some of the very earliest versions of it with me:





This triskelion-styled design with three hexagons and the (Halo) ring eventually gave way to our current logo:




Updated Logo

In approaching the new logo, we hired Ever and Oak to help us. Douglas is a friend (and long time RPFer) and understands these type of communities, where a typical design company probably wouldn't truly get the nature of what we do. In talking with him I told him that I did not want a NEW logo as much as I wanted a new take on the existing logo as so many within the community identify with it. I asked him to keep the core elements of the logo:

• The ring - representing Earth.
• The three stars - representing the core values of our community: honor, armor and unity
• The three hexagons - represent you, the building blocks of our community, who hold our values at your core
• The eagle - which has long represented a fighting force, most notably in history, the Roman Legion, but more currently, the US Marine Corps
• The wreath - from the UN and UEG insignia, a symbol of the peace the UNSC are striving toward

I also asked that Douglas give us a design that didn't exactly mimic any specific Halo design, but had a feel that would fit into the Halo universe. I also asked him to limit the color palette to two, subdued colors (in addition to black and white) and make the logo something that we could easily break down into more simple forms for various uses. For anyone who knows anything about design, it is much harder to recreate something than to create something from scratch and my list of needs was no small task.

With that being said, Douglas brought back to me a stunning update to our logo that addressed EVERY concern I had and did so in a fantastic way!

I hate to start on a bad note, but before you scroll further (stop scrolling... stop!), PLEASE DO NOT USE THE NEW LOGO FOR ANY IMAGERY AT THIS TIME! Over the next few days, we will be setting up new logo usage guidelines and providing high-resolution artwork for approved usage. Again, please do not use this logo in part or whole at this point!

Here is our new full logo for the 405th Division:



Here is a horizontal variation:



And very importantly, the logo can be broken down into smaller components... such as ranks:



... or it could also be used to represent the progression that so many of us make from small and simply things to complex and difficult things:



And here is just an example of me playing around in Photoshop...


No matter how you look at it, this is a strong update to the community's identity, paying homage to what has come before, while giving us something more versatile and usable for what is ahead!

Here is a chance to see the evolution of the community identity, side by side:



I know I said it before, but I want to remind you again - DON'T SKIP THIS!
While I am confident you are excited about the new logo, PLEASE DO NOT USE IT FOR ANY IMAGERY AT THIS TIME! Over the next few days, we will be setting up new logo usage guidelines and providing high-resolution artwork for approved usage. Again, please do not use this logo in part or whole at this point!

So, where do we go from here? As we continue to update the site and social media venues, we will be adding in the new logo (as well as offering swag with the new logo). We will also be setting new guidelines so you too can use the logo in support of your community!

 

[Hobbyist]

This is an awesome logo. How cool would it be to see these logos on various armors at different cons, etc. I'd love to wear it on a shirt too!

 

[Master Builder]

Ohh Really liking these ideas.

Hey Im quite good at making stencils. I'll give it a try and see what I come up with. To make it the right way you would have to cut it out on your build or glue some of the pieces on du to the fact that they are inclosed. Or I could make the entire thing in a one step stencil, you would just have a few lines holding the inner parts in place.

I also have some textile paint. so I can paint a shirt.
I have been wanting to do another one and now I know just what to do. Nice!

 

[Art Andrews]

This is an awesome logo. How cool would it be to see these logos on various armors at different cons, etc. I'd love to wear it on a shirt too!

We will have shirts soon!

 

[vshore100]

We will have shirts soon!

I can't find the like button!!!!!

 

[Art Andrews]

I can't find the like button!!!!!

:lol I spent all our budget on the Logo redesign and the site work!

 

[CasualCosplayer]

Cool! :3 I´am sooo gonna put this on my I.M.C. Titan pilot!


Pat-

 

[vshore100]

:lol I spent all our budget on the Logo redesign and the site work!

Man...at least it was money well spent!

 

[Dagger06]

Absolutely love it! It fits in perfectly with the data terminals of Halo. Once you have everything finalized, the 405th Pacific reg will have to look into updating our logo to match

 

[Art Andrews]

Absolutely love it! It fits in perfectly with the data terminals of Halo. Once you have everything finalized, the 405th Pacific reg will have to look into updating our logo to match

I'd love to see that! Once we have a few more things nailed down, I will be able to provide you a few of the base components that are used in your logo that can be direct transfers from ours, such as the hexes, the stars and the 405th text.

 

[Zaff]

Something I'm a bit curious/concerned with. It has been a while since I last read the "rules" surrounding the use of the old logo, but as I recall it made it sound like the average member was not allowed to use it in any way. It was reserved only for a select few who "earned" the use of the logo as having something high-quality enough to be "officially" endorsed by the 405th's "higher ups." Again, this is only going off of rough memory from something I read over two years ago now, but stuff like painting the logo on our armor, stenciling it on a shirt, sewing it on as a patch, etc., basically any means of displaying the logo was forbidden unless thoroughly inspected, reviewed, and approved by the higher ups because "they" didn't want "their" logo on anything substandard or to be worn by anyone they felt did not completely and soulfully embody "their" definition of the 405th.

Perhaps it was the way it was written, perhaps it was merely my personal interpretation of it, but I remember coming away from it with the thought of "what a bunch of condescending pricks. Why would I even want to wear their logo now?" I am really hoping with the new logo, and especially with the new "regime change" there will not be any more of this alienation and segregation of having to "prove ourselves worthy" of showing support to a community WE helped build. A community needs a certain level of authority and direction, certainly, but it is the "common people" so to speak who actually MAKE it a community, and I really did not get that sense of communal openness with the way the old logo usage terms were laid out.

Ranting aside, I too find myself liking the more simplified logo. If we are allowed to add it to armor, props, or to advertise the community and our support of it by other means, a more simple design makes it easier to free-hand if necessary, as not everyone has the equipment to print out decals, nor does everyone have the extra wiggle room in their budget to order "official" stencils and would have to make their own form whatever leftover material they had on hand.

I, too, am also curious and excited about the potential the ranking system has. Perhaps a small badge/icon could be added to the "ID Card" (what I call the section to the left of a user's post that includes name, profile pic, and other information) in addition to or in lieu of the member, infantryman, etc. ranking. Obviously there would need to be a new set of parameters to determine how each rank is achieved, as before there were essentially only three "ranks:" new member, "infantryman" for those who had been around for a set amount of time and posted a certain number of times, and finally administrators, the ones running the site. The proposed recruit, enlisted, officer, and veteran not only adds a 4th level, but also does not make any of them sound "exclusive" (there can only be just so many administrators, for example, while there can be numerous veterans). Very curious to see how this plays out.

 

[Art Andrews]

Something I'm a bit curious/concerned with. It has been a while since I last read the "rules" surrounding the use of the old logo, but as I recall it made it sound like the average member was not allowed to use it in any way. It was reserved only for a select few who "earned" the use of the logo as having something high-quality enough to be "officially" endorsed by the 405th's "higher ups." Again, this is only going off of rough memory from something I read over two years ago now, but stuff like painting the logo on our armor, stenciling it on a shirt, sewing it on as a patch, etc., basically any means of displaying the logo was forbidden unless thoroughly inspected, reviewed, and approved by the higher ups because "they" didn't want "their" logo on anything substandard or to be worn by anyone they felt did not completely and soulfully embody "their" definition of the 405th.

Perhaps it was the way it was written, perhaps it was merely my personal interpretation of it, but I remember coming away from it with the thought of "what a bunch of condescending pricks. Why would I even want to wear their logo now?" I am really hoping with the new logo, and especially with the new "regime change" there will not be any more of this alienation and segregation of having to "prove ourselves worthy" of showing support to a community WE helped build. A community needs a certain level of authority and direction, certainly, but it is the "common people" so to speak who actually MAKE it a community, and I really did not get that sense of communal openness with the way the old logo usage terms were laid out.

Ranting aside, I too find myself liking the more simplified logo. If we are allowed to add it to armor, props, or to advertise the community and our support of it by other means, a more simple design makes it easier to free-hand if necessary, as not everyone has the equipment to print out decals, nor does everyone have the extra wiggle room in their budget to order "official" stencils and would have to make their own form whatever leftover material they had on hand.

I, too, am also curious and excited about the potential the ranking system has. Perhaps a small badge/icon could be added to the "ID Card" (what I call the section to the left of a user's post that includes name, profile pic, and other information) in addition to or in lieu of the member, infantryman, etc. ranking. Obviously there would need to be a new set of parameters to determine how each rank is achieved, as before there were essentially only three "ranks:" new member, "infantryman" for those who had been around for a set amount of time and posted a certain number of times, and finally administrators, the ones running the site. The proposed recruit, enlisted, officer, and veteran not only adds a 4th level, but also does not make any of them sound "exclusive" (there can only be just so many administrators, for example, while there can be numerous veterans). Very curious to see how this plays out.

What is the third, but perhaps most important of our core values? UNITY. And what is unity a part of? commUNITY. While we have primarily been focusing on technical things at the moment, this site lives and dies by one thing; the unity of the community. We paid good money to have the logo redesigned, so you (ALL OF YOU), the members of this community could have an identity to rally around and feel connected to. Will there be guidelines for the logo usage? Yes. Will there be things we ask you not to do with the logo? Yes. Will the logo be used to divide the community and destroy the community's sense of itself? Never! Most of the rules we will put in place about the logo will have to do with maintaining the integrity of the identity. We don't want you stretching the aspect ratios. We don't want you adding elements to it or taking away elements unless they are part of the progression we have provided. But, as a member of this site, are we going to ask you NOT to use the logo? Heck no! Just the opposite! We had this logo created FOR YOUR USE!

Now... before you go getting crazy, I want to be absolutely clear that we do not want anyone producing or selling ANY swag with our name or logo on it. But as far as using the logo for your own personal use; once we have the rules in place, absolutely!

Honestly, I don't know how or even if we will create ranks. Ranks can be great or they can be disastrous. Again, the question comes down to whether they will help build a sense of accomplishment and community, or will they create division and cliques. If the former, then we are all for it. If the latter, then it will be a no go.

 

[Art Andrews]

Absolutely love it! It fits in perfectly with the data terminals of Halo. Once you have everything finalized, the 405th Pacific reg will have to look into updating our logo to match

BTW, your signature is just cracking me up.

 

[Chernobyl]

Honestly, I don't know how or even if we will create ranks. Ranks can be great or they can be disastrous. Again, the question comes down to whether they will help build a sense of accomplishment and community, or will they create division and cliques. If the former, then we are all for it. If the latter, then it will be a no go.

I did a lot of thinking regarding this topic not too long ago myself. Ranks were suggested a long time ago, but with no clear forum structure, the idea was dropped. That said, here are my thoughts:

• Earning ranks based on post count is a bad idea - members will simply spam their way to a higher rank, with the rank holding no clear value
• Earning ranks based upon service length is reasonable, and perhaps a parallel system to the current Recruit/Infantryman system can be devised to show that long-standing members have earned their ranking
• Earning ranks based on con attendance gives incentive for members to attend conventions, but excludes those unable to attend events. It's a reasonable idea that COULD work, if, again, a parallel system was put in place to allow non-attending members to feel like a part of the community
• Earning ranks based on completion of a costume would be a really good idea - this gives members an incentive to actually complete their sets.

Personally, I feel that a mixture of the above could work well - the higher echelons are only available to those attending a deployment within the Division, while the mid-tier echelons would be open to all actually participating within the community and creating costumes, as well as to those obtaining full Membership. Meanwhile, the lowest tier non-ld be open to every member within the community -the 'basic' entry-level rank.

A separate, forum-based 'time rank' would work to help easily and visually distinguish veteran members, especially those who provide valuable services to the community. Consider this ranking system a form of non-privilege promotion, beneath actual active staff but still recognised as valued servicemen.

 

[Zaff]

What is the third, but perhaps most important of our core values? UNITY. And what is unity a part of? commUNITY. While we have primarily been focusing on technical things at the moment, this site lives and dies by one thing; the unity of the community. We paid good money to have the logo redesigned, so you (ALL OF YOU), the members of this community could have an identity to rally around and feel connected to. Will there be guidelines for the logo usage? Yes. Will there be things we ask you not to do with the logo? Yes. Will the logo be used to divide the community and destroy the community's sense of itself? Never! Most of the rules we will put in place about the logo will have to do with maintaining the integrity of the identity. We don't want you stretching the aspect ratios. We don't want you adding elements to it or taking away elements unless they are part of the progression we have provided. But, as a member of this site, are we going to ask you NOT to use the logo? Heck no! Just the opposite! We had this logo created FOR YOUR USE!

That is good to hear.

Now... before you go getting crazy, I want to be absolutely clear that we do not want anyone producing or selling ANY swag with our name or logo on it. But as far as using the logo for your own personal use; once we have the rules in place, absolutely!

Which already is a conspicuous difference between the old, and the new. I can certainly understand not wanting the logo to be misused strictly for personal gain, selling "official" rip-offs that detract from the genuine article. But the old rules made it sound like if you wanted the logo on your armor, you had to buy that armor from an officially endorsed 405th builder, which really took away from the feeling of "this is mine, something I made with my own hands and can take pride in." Not that these items were not of good quality to be proud of. Things like Justinians weapon kits, very high-quality and detailed stuff, would have been eligible to be stamped with a 405th logo if he had asked. But he would not have been allowed to put the logo on there without going through the official channels, first, and that lent a degree of disunity to the community that I am glad to see will not be continued. A simple rule to maintain the quality and appearance of the logo is perfectly understandable, as we want to maintain the sense of pride in who we are and what we do, and a skewed and distorted logo takes away from the "professional" feel of being a part of a massive community like this. I do hope certain allowances will be made for color schemes (as has been brought up, not every armor color will work well with the teal scheme) and minor detail "enhancements" (like if someone wanted to do an embossed/bas relief rendition rather than a simple flat overlay).

Honestly, I don't know how or even if we will create ranks. Ranks can be great or they can be disastrous. Again, the question comes down to whether they will help build a sense of accomplishment and community, or will they create division and cliques. If the former, then we are all for it. If the latter, then it will be a no go.

One possibility that comes to mind, using the ranks listed in the original post, would be obviously recruits are the new members, enlisted could be the equivalent of what "infantryman" is now, those who have been around a while and been active within the community. Building up from there, Officer could be earned upon completion of their first full suit. Conditions for Veteran status, that one I'm not too sure on, but could be anything form having built multiple suits/props or simply a rank achieved through community recognition, those members chosen by the community as outstanding examples of what we, as a community, can do (for example I, personally, would suggest members like Justinian, EVAkura, and liltyrant would be Veteran material).

It's all something that would have to be taken into careful consideration, not the least of which being the question of whether it is truly necessary to rehash the current system.

 

[Unity]

Awesome! I like the idea of "ranks" as well!

 

[BiGHARYSCOTSMiN]

Yeah I disagree with the post number rank too.

I think there could be some fun put into the rank making, but remembering not to add too many ranks or downright silly ones.

Here are some off-the-top-of-my-head ranks I can think of... (or call them badges or medals or something)

- Most Helpful
- Forum Addict
- Veteran (this would be for those guys from like 2007-2010)
- Gunsmith (for the guys like Tactonyx, Redshirt, L05T V1K1N6)

and then the regular ones like:
- Recruit
- Infantryman
- Elite (makes it sound like this guy built a Sangheili)

maybe we could even have dedication *badges* (still don't know what to call them)
- ODST
- Spartan 4
- Marine Sniper

I'm going too crazy here so I'm going to stop but these designations give builders character, and I dig diversity

EDIT: OOH and there could be ranks of *classes* (still don't know what to call them) so if somebody built a really kick ass MKIII Spartan their *title* can be MKIII 5 Star

There is plenty of room for this, just under the profile picture! There's a ton of room down there because even one-liner replies take up a lot of page room

 

[Art Andrews]

Which already is a conspicuous difference between the old, and the new. I can certainly understand not wanting the logo to be misused strictly for personal gain, selling "official" rip-offs that detract from the genuine article. But the old rules made it sound like if you wanted the logo on your armor, you had to buy that armor from an officially endorsed 405th builder, which really took away from the feeling of "this is mine, something I made with my own hands and can take pride in." Not that these items were not of good quality to be proud of. Things like Justinians weapon kits, very high-quality and detailed stuff, would have been eligible to be stamped with a 405th logo if he had asked. But he would not have been allowed to put the logo on there without going through the official channels, first, and that lent a degree of disunity to the community that I am glad to see will not be continued. A simple rule to maintain the quality and appearance of the logo is perfectly understandable, as we want to maintain the sense of pride in who we are and what we do, and a skewed and distorted logo takes away from the "professional" feel of being a part of a massive community like this. I do hope certain allowances will be made for color schemes (as has been brought up, not every armor color will work well with the teal scheme) and minor detail "enhancements" (like if someone wanted to do an embossed/bas relief rendition rather than a simple flat overlay).

Obviously I can't know the thought process behind every previous decision that was made, but on the surface of the matter, you will not see us take that approach. Again, I don't have all the answers to usage yet, but in regard to color, you probably won't see us allow color variations for the full color logo, but then, we don't really expect many people to use the full color logo on the costumes, which is why we made the deconstructed versions that can be ONE color and again, while I am just speaking off the top of my head and this isn't policy, I can't see any reason to disallow ANY color (no matter how ridiculous) when it comes to a one color variant of the logo.

For example:

One possibility that comes to mind, using the ranks listed in the original post, would be obviously recruits are the new members, enlisted could be the equivalent of what "infantryman" is now, those who have been around a while and been active within the community. Building up from there, Officer could be earned upon completion of their first full suit. Conditions for Veteran status, that one I'm not too sure on, but could be anything form having built multiple suits/props or simply a rank achieved through community recognition, those members chosen by the community as outstanding examples of what we, as a community, can do (for example I, personally, would suggest members like Justinian, EVAkura, and liltyrant would be Veteran material).

It's all something that would have to be taken into careful consideration, not the least of which being the question of whether it is truly necessary to rehash the current system.

That is actually VERY close to what we had in mind.

 

[WandererTJ]

Can I use a faded / battle damaged logo on my armor? I mean, if the rest of the armor looks like it has been through hell and back, it would be odd for the emblem to be *pristine*.

Can I put it on my cod piece?

Doesn't Enlisted and Recruit mean the same thing? When you get recruited you are enlisted, right?
Isn't Enlisted more of a Status than a Rank?
I don't see why we can't just continue using Infantryman.

---

Okay, how about something like this:

Veteran Status (Must have completed at least 5 of the following):
• 405th Member for 4+ Years,
• Must have completed an "Elite"/"Legendary" Build (Halo Related)
• Must show initiative in the community as a helpful source of information
• Has contributed things that have aided others in their builds (models, files, or some other free service)
• Has attended 3+ Conventions with other members of the 405th, and has posted pictures from the convention here on the forums
• Post Count: 400+ (and 90% of the posts can't just be saying "good job" every time someone posts a picture..........:behave)

Officer (Must have completed at least 3 (maybe 4?) of the following):
• 405th Member for 3+ Years
• Must have completed a Build (Halo Related)
• Must show initiative in the community as a helpful source of information and/or have contributed things that have aided others in their builds
• Has attended 1+ Conventions with other members of the 405th, and has posted pictures from the convention here on the forums
• Post Count: 300+

Enlisted/Infantryman:
• 405th Member for 0.5 Years
• Must show initiative in the community as a helpful source of information
• Must not be a Noob
• Post Count: 150+

Recruit Status:
• 405th Member for 30+ Days
• Has read through Forum Rules (ie. the threads must be marked as read)
• Post Count: 30+

Registered/Verified Member:
• Has registered and joined the 405th



EDIT: Dang. 4 Posts since I started typing this.

 

[Art Andrews]

In regard to ranks, what you are likely to see is a direct tie to the club aspect and also to the level of armor that a member has. Again, just off the top of my head (I keep saying this because if we change our mind later, I don't want someone tying to use these posts as statements of unchangeable law) I would think:

RECRUIT: Member of the forum.
ENLISTED: 1st build or simplistic build
OFFICER: More Complicated build
Spartan: Most Complicated build (equivalent to Elite today)


or, if we wanted more stratification:

RECRUIT: NEW Member of the forum (equivalent to New Recruit today).
ENLISTED: FULL Member of the forum (equivalent to Infantryman today).
OFFICER: 1st build or simplistic build
Spartan: More Complicated build
Elite/Titan/Centurion: Most Complicated build (equivalent to Elite today)

Some will argue against level of build, but we need to all be adults... there are levels of builds and not all builds are the same. With that being said, we want to include those with more simplistic builds while at the same time, giving them another level to strive towards.

Yeah I disagree with the post number rank too.

I think there could be some fun put into the rank making, but remembering not to add too many ranks or downright silly ones.

Here are some off-the-top-of-my-head ranks I can think of... (or call them badges or medals or something)

- Most Helpful
- Forum Addict
- Veteran (this would be for those guys from like 2007-2010)
- Gunsmith (for the guys like Tactonyx, Redshirt, L05T V1K1N6)

and then the regular ones like:
- Recruit
- Infantryman
- Elite (makes it sound like this guy built a Sangheili)

maybe we could even have dedication *badges* (still don't know what to call them)
- ODST
- Spartan 4
- Marine Sniper

I'm going too crazy here so I'm going to stop but these designations give builders character, and I dig diversity

EDIT: OOH and there could be ranks of *classes* (still don't know what to call them) so if somebody built a really kick ass MKIII Spartan their *title* can be MKIII 5 Star

There is plenty of room for this, just under the profile picture! There's a ton of room down there because even one-liner replies take up a lot of page room

 

[Art Andrews]

Can I use a faded / battle damaged logo on my armor? I mean, if the rest of the armor looks like it has been through hell and back, it would be odd for the emblem to be *pristine*.

Can I put it on my cod piece?

I can't see a reason why you couldn't do either or both.