3DCoat 3.0 needs new logo and name?

[SonK]

Lots of talk about this in the interface thread but i think that topic does deserve its own thread. I have to be honest i do not like the current logo going forward i would love to see a new one. I personally never like the name 3DCoat(but i can live with it i guess). If your interested in suggesting new names post them...im sure we can do better than "3DCoat".

ideas for possible name(lol):

Clay (nope taken by rocket3D)

ClayBox (sounds like a rip off of Mudbox)

ClayPit(sounds like someone scupting in hell lol)

HyperClay (hmm not bad)

ClayBrush (hmm..sounds lovely, don't worry you cant get sue by Zbrush developers, and it does have clay= 3D, brush = 2D which describe 3DC will).

[philnolan3d]

Problem with using "clay" is that it can do so much more.

[SonK]

Problem with using "clay" is that it can do so much more.

truth but thats' what Voxel sculpting is for , it much closer to digital clay then anything else on the market?

[philnolan3d]

Yeah, I just meant when this topic came up before I think Andrew wanted something that could describe painting and modeling. I don't know what name could possibly describe retopology. Of course it could be something completely unrelated, look at Maya. At least LightWave implies something about visuals.

[SonK]

Ah i see i think general purpose DCC apps can get away with that but ZBrush/Mudbox/ClayBrush has to have something related to its focus(2D/3D paint/sculpt).

[Tony Nemo]

truth but thats' what Voxel sculpting is for , it much closer to digital clay then anything else on the market?

I really believe in my gut that the name (and most likely, the logo) are here to stay. The fortunes of this enterprise will not rise or fall from these issues but rather performance and user satisfaction. The logo/name is embedded in the thousands of hours that have gone into 3D Coat's development and Andrew and associates will likely look askance at changing horses in mid stream.

The GUI goes to the heart of performance/satisfaction and is of the utmost importance that it be done right, but "3DC" (trips off the tongue) and a bilious green are here to stay.

[Pimpmymonkey]

I really believe in my gut that the name (and most likely, the logo) are here to stay. The fortunes of this enterprise will not rise or fall from these issues but rather performance and user satisfaction. The logo/name is embedded in the thousands of hours that have gone into 3D Coat's development and Andrew and associates will likely look askance at changing horses in mid stream.

The GUI goes to the heart of performance/satisfaction and is of the utmost importance that it be done right, but "3DC" (trips off the tongue) and a bilious green are here to stay.

+1

We went through this last year. I still think that 3D-Brush was the best name but here we are.

You can't build a brand if you are changing names and logos every year.

Besides, in the end, only the most retarded people are going to make a decision to purchase a software based on name or logo.

P. Monk

[Javis]

I could see a logo change now and again, but a new name? I'm entirely happy with 3DCoat. It's descriptive and it works very well.

[philnolan3d]

The only problem I have with the name is that people keep thinking that I'm saying "3D Code", then I have to correct them with "No no, Coat, like a jacket".

[SonK]

I could see a logo change now and again, but a new name? I'm entirely happy with 3DCoat. It's descriptive and it works very well.

I dont like the name since the last time we voted but i can live with it..but the Logo..has to be change it could be done better. BTW when i say 3DCoat people think "3D Cult" so it's abit weird in real life lol

With Zbrush,Mudbox,ClayBrush you dont run into that problem.

edit:just read phil's comment, so im not the only one running into that issue lol

The logo/name is embedded in the thousands of hours that have gone into 3D Coat's development and Andrew and associates will likely look askance at changing horses in mid stream.

y.

I actually disagree with that because Mudbox 1.0 logo while cool got change once Autodesk bought them out now it's a fox, no one is complaining about the new logo or of losing the old logo, and it never took away from the hardwork the Skymatter guys did in Mudbox nor will changing the logo/name take away from the hardwork Andrew put into 3DBrush. It just sounds too obvious to put "3D" as part of the 3D app naming convention i don't think there alot of mainstream 3D that uses "3D" in its naming convention..because it amateurish. Changing logo and or name should be discuss now, since we have a new GUI...

Stick to square logo design, its common and can fit nicely into the rectangular title bar. not circle. Just as an example painting dripping off a cube inside of sphere.

[THARSO]

I dont like the name and the logo ..continue with discussion..maybe Andrew can change! maybe HyperCoat ^^

[Jokermax]

Thanks for bringing this up again SonK. We want a new name because we care Looks like it's not just my English - it is is almost impossible to get someone to understand and remember the name - "goat", "boat", "code", "3d what?" - "no, no! it's like jacket - coat". 3dcoat is still young, you would not want your baby to be growing up with name like this

Some ideas below:

3d matter - 3DM

3d blast(er) - 3DB

Matter blaster - MB

Digital matter - DM

4matter - 4M (stands for 3d+color functions)

[philnolan3d]

Maybe something to do with pottery or ceramics, that deals with clay and also gets painted with glaze.

[nathan]

3DClay?

could stick with the 3DC initials that way, but I don't know if the name really describes everything it does. although I guess 3DCoat doesn't really convey that too well either.

how bout a simple one word name that describes pretty much everything it does to a certain extent...

Maquette

[kay_Eva]

Let's call it ZBox 3d

[lc8b105]

I prefer 3D-Coat.

[sgiff]

How about Hyperbrush, Polybrush, Polypaint, Softbrush or Supersculpt. or Hypersculpt DX, or HyperSculpt GL. I don't personally like the name 3D-Coat either although I agree that it shouldn't matter what you call a program as fantastic as this but truth is that in advertising a sexy name goes a lot further than a non sexy name. You know it the minute you try to tell someone about this awesome program that is comparable to some of the top sculpting apps out there and you realize the second after you tell them "yeah it's called 3D-Coat" how lackluster it sounds and how it sounds as if it's some rinky-dink little program that some shareware author has cooked up overnight. No offense to the author intended as I think Andrew has to be one of the most brilliant coders on the planet.

[AbnRanger]

truth but thats' what Voxel sculpting is for , it much closer to digital clay then anything else on the market?

Why not stay with 3DC?...I like it. "C" could stand for Coat or Clay

Or

Clay Worx

Clay Studio

3D Clay Shop

3D Clay Studio

3DC Studio (C for Clay and/or Coat)

3D 4Clay?

By the way, I can see why Andrew would be reluctant to change the name again, but the point could be made that product as been largely in it's formative stage prior to this release and hasn't really had a market identity. I still think 3DC is good

[Andrew Shpagin]

I don't think name should be changed. Half year ago we started registering trademark with 3D-Coat logo and it is very long and not very cheap procedure. So I don't want to start it again

[AbnRanger]

How about Hyperbrush, Polybrush, Polypaint, Softbrush or Supersculpt. or Hypersculpt DX, or HyperSculpt GL. I don't personally like the name 3D-Coat either although I agree that it shouldn't matter what you call a program as fantastic as this but truth is that in advertising a sexy name goes a lot further than a non sexy name. You know it the minute you try to tell someone about this awesome program that is comparable to some of the top sculpting apps out there and you realize the second after you tell them "yeah it's called 3D-Coat" how lackluster it sounds and how it sounds as if it's some rinky-dink little program that some shareware author has cooked up overnight. No offense to the author intended as I think Andrew has to be one of the most brilliant coders on the planet.

I agree...it doesn't sound like a professional application even if it does reflect the application's purpose. It's hard to name an application like this that does both (sculpt and paint) equally well.

here's some more brainstorming:

ClayPaint Studio

CP Studio

CPX (ClayPaint Xtreme or Xtended)

CPXtreme

ClayShop Studio

SpeedPaint

3daVinci

3D da Vinci

DaVinci 3D

Da Vinci Studio

SpeedSculpt

Hyper CP

HyperCX

SpeedShop

SpeedCX (CX=Clay Xtreme)

[AbnRanger]

I don't think name should be changed. Half year ago we started registering trademark with 3D-Coat logo and it is very long and not very cheap procedure. So I don't want to start it again

That's cool. Using the acronym could help even though the full name remains the same. Plenty of businesses use and acronym for their name...since it's more marketable than having to pronounce the full name each time.

IBM, NEC, AIG, 3ds Max, XSI, etc

There is no other software product in the CG marketplace to which it can be confused....3DC

I think it sounds better than Mudbox

[BluEgo]

Hey guys, if I think to other applications, they don't have so nice names

Z Brush ? Photoshop ? Naaah, they don't sound so well IMO

Here in the studio I am working, we all love 3D coat, and we are trying to convince our leads to adopt it in the pipeline.

We don't want the name to change, in our hearth it is 3D coat !

[paulrus]

This was discussed and discussed last year. I had even offered to consult an ad agency in my building that specializes in logos and product names. Back then the 2 names being considered were 3D Coat and 3D Gem. Both sound cheap and confusing in English and the ad agency people agreed. I firmly believe a product name and logo does affect a certain percentage of sales - calling it 3D Coat was not a good decision for the American market because a coat is something you wear or it's how you describe what cough medicine does (coat's your throat) - it does not sound like a high-end, high-quality 3D software package at all.

BUT - I also agree that changing the name every year or two is a terrible idea. IMHO the best thing to do is leave it as 3DC and make the best of the situation.

PG

[BluEgo]

This was discussed and discussed last year. I had even offered to consult an ad agency in my building that specializes in logos and product names. Back then the 2 names being considered were 3D Coat and 3D Gem. Both sound cheap and confusing in English and the ad agency people agreed. I firmly believe a product name and logo does affect a certain percentage of sales - calling it 3D Coat was not a good decision for the American market because a coat is something you wear or it's how you describe what cough medicine does (coat's your throat) - it does not sound like a high-end, high-quality 3D software package at all.

BUT - I also agree that changing the name every year or two is a terrible idea. IMHO the best thing to do is leave it as 3DC and make the best of the situation.

PG

I think that 3DC is not bad at all... something like ABC which becomes 3DC, is really a important name.

I totally like it

[parel]

Agreed- 3DC is good.

[kay_Eva]

This was discussed and discussed last year. I had even offered to consult an ad agency in my building that specializes in logos and product names. Back then the 2 names being considered were 3D Coat and 3D Gem. Both sound cheap and confusing in English and the ad agency people agreed. I firmly believe a product name and logo does affect a certain percentage of sales - calling it 3D Coat was not a good decision for the American market because a coat is something you wear or it's how you describe what cough medicine does (coat's your throat) - it does not sound like a high-end, high-quality 3D software package at all.

BUT - I also agree that changing the name every year or two is a terrible idea. IMHO the best thing to do is leave it as 3DC and make the best of the situation.

PG

yeah I never liked the name much either, it's not the Coat part though, it's the 3d. You just shouldn't name anything '3d' anymore.

Its like...Shrek 3d!!

Final Fantasy 3d!!

Digital Coat would sound a bit better if you ask me

I still think that they should change the name to

ZBox or MudBrush lolz

No, they should name it "ZBox: the MudBrush Coat"

[otsoa]

Why change the name and logo ? The logo is funny and orginal.

[Paint Guy]

From what I understand Andrew is the owner of 3DCoat (nice name BTW) and so it's up to him not anyone else to decide if a name change is appropriate. Andrew says they registered the name and it was costly and further more he doesn't want to change the name so end of discussion IMO

[Javis]

This was discussed and discussed last year. I had even offered to consult an ad agency in my building that specializes in logos and product names. Back then the 2 names being considered were 3D Coat and 3D Gem. Both sound cheap and confusing in English and the ad agency people agreed. I firmly believe a product name and logo does affect a certain percentage of sales - calling it 3D Coat was not a good decision for the American market because a coat is something you wear or it's how you describe what cough medicine does (coat's your throat) - it does not sound like a high-end, high-quality 3D software package at all.

BUT - I also agree that changing the name every year or two is a terrible idea. IMHO the best thing to do is leave it as 3DC and make the best of the situation.

PG

That's quite a ways off there chap. As an ACTUAL painter, we also use the term for "coats of paint", "coat of paint", "Put a new coat of paint on that".

I'm not sure where you're from but, in Oregon here where I am from, using the word "coat" in the painting world is a common practice. So it makes complete sense to me.

[AbnRanger]

For what it's worth, I did some work on a proposed logo, and started a thread to gauge community sentiment:

http://www.3d-coat.com/forum/index.php?sho...st=0#entry18506

Let me know what you guys think