design.vecreal.com / Workshop
Brand reference · workshop · in-progress mockups
Workshop
Active mockup-and-iteration pages live here. Operator picks a variant or asks for revisions; once a decision locks and propagates, the workshop moves to archive. Bookmark this page — new workshops appear at the top.
Active
No active workshops. Cover-treatment rev-1 lock (2026-05-13) closed out the LinkedIn cover
composition workshop — A (gap tightening) + C (tagline size bump) locked across corporate +
personal covers; D (hairline) dropped after live evaluation. Next workshop will appear here
when a new brand atom decision opens.
Open · awaiting final pick · rev-12 candidate (final r17)
Wordmark dot margin · r17 — match the "a-l" letter gap
Operator on r16's 0.24em pick: "Because we increased the spacing between the letters in
ecreal, I think we need to consider that and equally give a touch more space to the dot.
It should be the same space as between the a and the l. Only V is treated differently
because it is inherently different."
The dot is the final element in the [V][ecreal][.] sequence — it should sit at LETTER-LIKE distance from "l", not tighter-than-letters punctuation distance. Rev-7's tight margin was calibrated for Semibold + -0.05em; the system has since shifted to Bold + -0.04em + heavier V + bigger dot.
Three margin variants at locked 0.24em dot + r16 rules: A current calc(0.01em+2px), B ★ calc(0.02em+2px) [letter-like], C calc(0.03em+2px) [loose]. V-to-e -0.13em unchanged (operator note: V treated differently — designed mark uses interlock, dot-to-l uses gap).
The dot is the final element in the [V][ecreal][.] sequence — it should sit at LETTER-LIKE distance from "l", not tighter-than-letters punctuation distance. Rev-7's tight margin was calibrated for Semibold + -0.05em; the system has since shifted to Bold + -0.04em + heavier V + bigger dot.
Three margin variants at locked 0.24em dot + r16 rules: A current calc(0.01em+2px), B ★ calc(0.02em+2px) [letter-like], C calc(0.03em+2px) [loose]. V-to-e -0.13em unchanged (operator note: V treated differently — designed mark uses interlock, dot-to-l uses gap).
opened 2026-05-13 · rev-12 candidate (FINAL refinement)
variants 3 margins · locked 0.24em dot + scaled descent
scope dot margin-left only (final tuning before propagation)
status awaiting pick · recommendation B (0.02em + 2px)
r16 — operator picked 0.24em + new rules; refined dot margin in r17 for a-l letter-gap match
Wordmark dot size · r16 — fixed margin + diameter-scaled descent
Operator confirmed two rule changes from r15: fixed margin-left
(calc(0.01em + 2px) for ALL sizes, no proportional shift — constant gap from "l") and
diameter-scaled descent (translateY = 0.005em + diameter × 0.0435 to
maintain constant 4.35% descent/diameter ratio). Both replace rev-11's proportional
margin + fixed em descent.
Three sizes with new rules: A 0.23em + translateY 0.01500em, B ★ 0.24em + translateY 0.01544em, C 0.25em + translateY 0.01587em. Same dot-LEFT-edge position across all sizes; same proportional descent across all sizes. Bigger dot grows OUTWARD to the right only.
Plus separate flag (non-blocking): operator noticed favicon dot position reads "too far right" in tab favicon. Math confirms rev-6 H2 lock — V at x=30, dot at cx=46.5 (Δ=14.5 right of tile center). Worth a follow-up favicon composition revisit after this dot-size lock.
Three sizes with new rules: A 0.23em + translateY 0.01500em, B ★ 0.24em + translateY 0.01544em, C 0.25em + translateY 0.01587em. Same dot-LEFT-edge position across all sizes; same proportional descent across all sizes. Bigger dot grows OUTWARD to the right only.
Plus separate flag (non-blocking): operator noticed favicon dot position reads "too far right" in tab favicon. Math confirms rev-6 H2 lock — V at x=30, dot at cx=46.5 (Δ=14.5 right of tile center). Worth a follow-up favicon composition revisit after this dot-size lock.
opened 2026-05-13 · rev-12 candidate (final)
variants 3 dot sizes (0.23/0.24/0.25em) with new rules
scope dot size + new spacing/overshoot rules
status awaiting pick · recommendation B (0.24em)
r15 — operator confirmed new rules (fixed margin + scaled descent), refined in r16
Wordmark dot size revisit · r15 — initial proportional + fixed em (rev-11 default rules)
Initial dot size workshop using rev-7's proportional positioning rule + fixed em descent.
Operator observation: at bigger dots the proportional rule moved dot left edge closer to
"l", and fixed em descent made bigger dots look proportionally less anchored. Switched
to fixed margin-left + diameter-scaled descent in r16.
opened 2026-05-13
status superseded by r16 (new rules)
Open · awaiting final translateY pick · FINAL WORKSHOP
Wordmark V translateY decoupled · round 14 — V at 0.020em, dot stays at 0.015em
Operator from r13: locked V-to-e -0.13em + dot ml calc(0.01em+2px) (total -0.04em
tightening from rev-3 baseline).
Then noticed: "the V is a touch more floaty than the dot (especially after we increased the size). V needs translatey at 0.020em. The dot is fine at 0.015."
Decoupling translateY for V vs dot. The rev-8 "symmetric translateY" doctrine matched the VALUE but not the PERCEPTION — V's larger mass (~12× the dot's area) + pointed shape makes equal lift more pronounced visually. V gets more pull (0.020em), dot stays calibrated (0.015em).
5 V translateY values tested at 200/140/80/24-48 px with dot fixed at 0.015em. 0.020em ★ proposed: V apex ~1px above baseline at 200px hero (compensated floaty), dot 2px below (calibrated descent). Asymmetric translateY, balanced perception.
Then noticed: "the V is a touch more floaty than the dot (especially after we increased the size). V needs translatey at 0.020em. The dot is fine at 0.015."
Decoupling translateY for V vs dot. The rev-8 "symmetric translateY" doctrine matched the VALUE but not the PERCEPTION — V's larger mass (~12× the dot's area) + pointed shape makes equal lift more pronounced visually. V gets more pull (0.020em), dot stays calibrated (0.015em).
5 V translateY values tested at 200/140/80/24-48 px with dot fixed at 0.015em. 0.020em ★ proposed: V apex ~1px above baseline at 200px hero (compensated floaty), dot 2px below (calibrated descent). Asymmetric translateY, balanced perception.
opened 2026-05-12 · round 14 · FINAL
variants 5 V translateY values · dot constant
scope decouple V translateY from dot for shape-specific calibration
status awaiting confirmation · recommendation V 0.020em + dot 0.015em
Round 13 — operator locked V-to-e -0.13em + dot ml calc(0.01em+2px); surfaced V-too-floaty perception in r14
Wordmark V-to-e tightening · round 13 — R4-Bw needs more compression to match Bhm interlock
Operator from r12: locked V+dot translateY 0.015em (symmetric V-lift + dot-descent pattern).
Then noticed: "going back to R4-Bw undid some of the tightening we had on the V to the e."
The math confirms: R4-Bw and R4-Bhm share identical outer geometry, but R4-Bw has wider inner V at top (inner top x=21 vs Bhm's x=21.14 = 0.28u wider). Wider inner opening makes the V's right-side mass feel less dense, so same -0.12em margin reads spacier with R4-Bw than it did with R4-Bhm.
Three variants tested at 80 / 140 / 200 px with proportional dot ml per r11 symmetric-compression precedent:
A · -0.11em + calc(0.03em+2px) — rev-3 baseline (loose)
B · -0.12em + calc(0.02em+2px) — r11 lock (current)
C ★ -0.13em + calc(0.01em+2px) — r13 proposed (tighter symmetric)
C brings R4-Bw's interlock back to the perception you had with R4-Bhm at -0.12em.
The math confirms: R4-Bw and R4-Bhm share identical outer geometry, but R4-Bw has wider inner V at top (inner top x=21 vs Bhm's x=21.14 = 0.28u wider). Wider inner opening makes the V's right-side mass feel less dense, so same -0.12em margin reads spacier with R4-Bw than it did with R4-Bhm.
Three variants tested at 80 / 140 / 200 px with proportional dot ml per r11 symmetric-compression precedent:
A · -0.11em + calc(0.03em+2px) — rev-3 baseline (loose)
B · -0.12em + calc(0.02em+2px) — r11 lock (current)
C ★ -0.13em + calc(0.01em+2px) — r13 proposed (tighter symmetric)
C brings R4-Bw's interlock back to the perception you had with R4-Bhm at -0.12em.
opened 2026-05-12 · round 13 · FINAL
variants 3 V-to-e + proportional dot ml at 80/140/200 px
scope compensate for R4-Bw's wider inner V with tighter V-to-e
status awaiting pick · recommendation C
Round 12 — operator picked translateY 0.015em coupled; surfaced V-to-e regression in r13
Wordmark V overshoot revisit · round 12 — coupled V+dot across all display sizes
Operator locked from r11: R4-Bw @ y=33 + dot margin-left calc(0.02em+2px). Now drilling
overshoot since the historical rev-5→rev-8 issue ("feels too low at 72-96 px") was
size-dependent, and R4-Bw's different viewBox geometry shifts V apex 0.01em closer to
baseline at the same translateY than R4-A.
5 coupled translateY values (V + dot): 0.015 / 0.020 / 0.025 (current) / 0.030 / 0.035em rendered at 5 display sizes (32 / 48 / 80 / 140 / 200 px). Matrix view in section A; hero (200 px) and small (32 px) close inspections in sections B/D with baseline indicator.
Pixel math at the boundaries: 0.025em scales linearly with font size: 0.8 px shift at 32 px, 2 px at 80 px, 5 px at 200 px. The V apex at locked geometry + 0.025em sits essentially AT baseline across all sizes; dot descent grows 0.6 → 4 px below baseline as size grows.
Verdict: keep 0.025em coupled. The new viewBox geometry naturally lands the V apex where rev-8 was reaching for. No size-specific adjustment needed.
5 coupled translateY values (V + dot): 0.015 / 0.020 / 0.025 (current) / 0.030 / 0.035em rendered at 5 display sizes (32 / 48 / 80 / 140 / 200 px). Matrix view in section A; hero (200 px) and small (32 px) close inspections in sections B/D with baseline indicator.
Pixel math at the boundaries: 0.025em scales linearly with font size: 0.8 px shift at 32 px, 2 px at 80 px, 5 px at 200 px. The V apex at locked geometry + 0.025em sits essentially AT baseline across all sizes; dot descent grows 0.6 → 4 px below baseline as size grows.
Verdict: keep 0.025em coupled. The new viewBox geometry naturally lands the V apex where rev-8 was reaching for. No size-specific adjustment needed.
opened 2026-05-12 · round 12
variants 5 translateY × 5 sizes (25 cells) + hero/small close inspections
scope validate locked 0.025em coupled overshoot at all display sizes
status verdict: keep 0.025em · awaiting operator confirmation
Round 11 — operator locked R4-Bw + dot calc(0.02em+2px); now drilling overshoot at all sizes
Wordmark V valley · round 11 — valley depth clarify + dot-to-l + coupled overshoot
Three corrections from operator on round 10:
1. Valley depth math: Operator perceived R4-Bhm @ y=32.75 as deeper than R4-Bw @ y=33 in round 10's render. Math is unambiguous — R4-Bw curve dips to y=32.35 (deeper); R4-Bhm @ y=32.75 dips to y=32.10 (shallower by 0.25u). Surface with annotated depth indicators. Visual perception of "Bhm deeper" likely comes from Bhm's narrower inner-V at top (inner top x=21.14 vs Bw's x=21.00 = 0.28u pinch) creating optical illusion of deeper valley.
2. Dot-to-l proportional: V-to-e tightened -0.01em. Should dot margin-left tighten proportionally? Operator caught I dismissed this in round 9 without strong reasoning. Revised verdict: YES, tighten dot to
3. Coupled V+dot overshoot: Round 10 only tested V translateY in isolation. Rev-8 intent is COUPLED V+dot movement. Round 11 redoes with proportional V+dot pairs at 0.015 / 0.025 / 0.035em. Verdict: 0.025em coupled stays correct.
1. Valley depth math: Operator perceived R4-Bhm @ y=32.75 as deeper than R4-Bw @ y=33 in round 10's render. Math is unambiguous — R4-Bw curve dips to y=32.35 (deeper); R4-Bhm @ y=32.75 dips to y=32.10 (shallower by 0.25u). Surface with annotated depth indicators. Visual perception of "Bhm deeper" likely comes from Bhm's narrower inner-V at top (inner top x=21.14 vs Bw's x=21.00 = 0.28u pinch) creating optical illusion of deeper valley.
2. Dot-to-l proportional: V-to-e tightened -0.01em. Should dot margin-left tighten proportionally? Operator caught I dismissed this in round 9 without strong reasoning. Revised verdict: YES, tighten dot to
calc(0.02em + 2px) for
symmetric wordmark compression.
3. Coupled V+dot overshoot: Round 10 only tested V translateY in isolation. Rev-8 intent is COUPLED V+dot movement. Round 11 redoes with proportional V+dot pairs at 0.015 / 0.025 / 0.035em. Verdict: 0.025em coupled stays correct.
opened 2026-05-12 · round 11
scope valley depth math clarify + dot-to-l proportional + coupled overshoot
recommendation Bhm @ 32.75 OR Bw + dot calc(0.02em+2px) + V/dot 0.025em coupled
status awaiting final pick
Round 10 — operator caught valley math confusion, dot-to-l miss, overshoot uncoupled. Round 11 fixes all three.
Wordmark V valley · round 10 — final showdown + V overshoot review
Two finalists at the operator-locked spacing: R4-Bw @ y=33 (stroke 12,
valley dips to y=32.35) vs R4-Bhm @ y=32.75 (stroke 12.14, valley dips
to y=32.10). Both at V-to-e
V overshoot reviewed. Math: R4-Bhm at translateY(0.025em) sits V apex right at baseline (vs R4-A's 0.01em-above). The rev-8 history shows operator preference for "above or at baseline" — R4-Bhm's at-baseline position naturally lands where the calibration tried to be. Plus rounder R4-Bhm apex needs less optical compensation than R4-A's sharper apex. Verdict: keep
Spacing decisions held: dot-to-l unchanged (different semantic relationship from V-to-e). Dot independently overshoots 0.02em below baseline (unchanged). V translateY 0.025em locked. Once V geometry locks, rev-11 SVG regen runs.
-0.12em (tightened from -0.11) + dot 0.23em
unchanged.
V overshoot reviewed. Math: R4-Bhm at translateY(0.025em) sits V apex right at baseline (vs R4-A's 0.01em-above). The rev-8 history shows operator preference for "above or at baseline" — R4-Bhm's at-baseline position naturally lands where the calibration tried to be. Plus rounder R4-Bhm apex needs less optical compensation than R4-A's sharper apex. Verdict: keep
translateY(0.025em) locked.
Spacing decisions held: dot-to-l unchanged (different semantic relationship from V-to-e). Dot independently overshoots 0.02em below baseline (unchanged). V translateY 0.025em locked. Once V geometry locks, rev-11 SVG regen runs.
opened 2026-05-12 · round 10 FINAL
variants 2 finalists + 3 overshoot tests
scope final showdown + V overshoot validation
status awaiting final pick · R4-Bw or R4-Bhm @ y=32.75
Round 9 — operator picked V-to-e -0.12em, surfaced overshoot question, finals in round 10
Wordmark V valley · round 9 — y=32.75 split + spacing review
Operator confirmed "stocky" read at y=32, between y=32.5 and y=33. Round 9 tests y=32.75
(the split) — stroke 12.14 (just barely above R4-A's 12), curve dips to y=32.10.
The legs are essentially R4-A-thick (institutional substance, no chunky read) with the
deepest valley curve in the Bhm family short of becoming R4-Bw itself.
Spacing health check: V-to-e margin (-0.11em locked rev-3) and dot size (0.23em locked rev-7) re-evaluated for R4-Bhm. Math says differences from R4-A are below perception threshold (~0.009em more V/e interlock; dot/V ratio drifted from 35% to 33%). My honest verdict: keep both at current — over-tuning risks reopening resolved decisions. Workshop shows 6 spacing combinations at 80 and 140 px so operator can verify.
Spacing health check: V-to-e margin (-0.11em locked rev-3) and dot size (0.23em locked rev-7) re-evaluated for R4-Bhm. Math says differences from R4-A are below perception threshold (~0.009em more V/e interlock; dot/V ratio drifted from 35% to 33%). My honest verdict: keep both at current — over-tuning risks reopening resolved decisions. Workshop shows 6 spacing combinations at 80 and 140 px so operator can verify.
opened 2026-05-12 · round 9
variants 3 valley depths + 6 spacing combinations
scope y=32.75 split + V-to-e × dot spacing review
status awaiting pick · recommendation R4-Bhm @ y=32.75 + current spacing
Round 8 — operator between y=32.5 and y=33, surfaced split at y=32.75 in round 9
Wordmark V valley · round 8 — R4-Bhm valley lowered to y=32.5 (preserving proportions)
Operator picked R4-Bhm at round 7 then asked to lower the valley "a touch, like one
pixel, while preserving proportions." V silhouette stays identical (outer x=9,
apex y=50.27, aspect 1.171 matching R4-Bw exactly). Valley vertex moves from y=32 → y=32.5.
The parametric trade-off: with parallel legs locked at outer slope 1.7273, deeper valley → thinner stroke. Stroke goes from 12.58 → 12.29 at y=32.5 (still 0.29 thicker than R4-A's 12, still parallel). 0.5 viewBox units of valley shift = ~0.67 px at 80 px display, ~1.18 px at 140 px — "a touch."
Workshop shows the progression: R4-Bhm @ y=32 (round 7) → y=32.5 (★ round 8) → y=33 (= R4-Bw). Math is continuous; intermediate depths (y=32.3, y=32.7) available on request.
The parametric trade-off: with parallel legs locked at outer slope 1.7273, deeper valley → thinner stroke. Stroke goes from 12.58 → 12.29 at y=32.5 (still 0.29 thicker than R4-A's 12, still parallel). 0.5 viewBox units of valley shift = ~0.67 px at 80 px display, ~1.18 px at 140 px — "a touch."
Workshop shows the progression: R4-Bhm @ y=32 (round 7) → y=32.5 (★ round 8) → y=33 (= R4-Bw). Math is continuous; intermediate depths (y=32.3, y=32.7) available on request.
opened 2026-05-12 · round 8
variants 4 (R4-A baseline + R4-Bhm @ 32 + R4-Bhm @ 32.5 + R4-Bw @ 33)
scope valley vertex shift while preserving V silhouette + parallel legs
status awaiting pick · recommendation R4-Bhm @ y=32.5
Round 7 — operator picked R4-Bhm, requested valley shift in round 8
Wordmark V valley · round 7 — hybrid silhouette correction (Bhf vs Bhm)
Operator caught: "R4-Bh seems wider than R4-Bw but you say it's the same silhouette." Correct.
Round 6's R4-Bh had outer x=9 but kept apex y=49 (unchanged from R4-A) — viewBox aspect
1.211 vs R4-Bw's 1.171, rendering 3.4% wider at the same em-height.
Round 7 introduces R4-Bhm (Match) — apex extended to y=50.27 so the V silhouette matches R4-Bw exactly (46 × 39.27, aspect 1.171). To get parallel legs at valley y=32 with this outer geometry, inner top sits at x=21.58 giving stroke 12.58 — ~5% thicker than R4-A's 12. Trade-off: legs are chunkier but parallel (zero taper) and silhouette is now properly Bw-matching.
Round 6's R4-Bh renamed R4-Bhf (Flat) and kept as one option for operators who'd prefer "wider V silhouette than Bw" over "Bw silhouette + thicker legs."
Round 7 introduces R4-Bhm (Match) — apex extended to y=50.27 so the V silhouette matches R4-Bw exactly (46 × 39.27, aspect 1.171). To get parallel legs at valley y=32 with this outer geometry, inner top sits at x=21.58 giving stroke 12.58 — ~5% thicker than R4-A's 12. Trade-off: legs are chunkier but parallel (zero taper) and silhouette is now properly Bw-matching.
Round 6's R4-Bh renamed R4-Bhf (Flat) and kept as one option for operators who'd prefer "wider V silhouette than Bw" over "Bw silhouette + thicker legs."
opened 2026-05-12 · round 7
variants 5 (R4-A · R4-B · R4-Bw · R4-Bhf flat · R4-Bhm match)
scope hybrid silhouette correction · aspect-ratio matching
status awaiting pick · recommendation R4-Bhm
Round 6 — operator caught silhouette inconsistency, surfaced Bhf vs Bhm distinction in round 7
Wordmark V valley · round 6 — hybrid R4-Bh (wider outer + valley y=32 + stroke 12)
Operator narrowed to R4-A baseline + R4-B + R4-Bp1 + R4-Bw and asked for a hybrid:
"I like the wider V outer from Bw, and I like that the V valley bottom is not quite as
shallow on R4-B compared to Bp1." The three finalists differ on three independent axes
(valley depth, outer silhouette, stroke). The operator's preferences land on a diagonal
none of the finalists hit — hence the hybrid.
R4-Bh: outer x=9 (wider, R4-Bw character) + apex y=49 unchanged (V height preserved) + inner top (21, 43) for stroke 12 at top + valley y=32 (R4-B character). Slope difference: outer 1.667 vs inner 1.636 = 1.9% taper (invisible). Stroke 12 at top → 12.20 at valley (1.7% INVERSE — legs settle slightly wider, reads grounded). V silhouette 46 × 38: same height as R4-A, ~4.5% wider; slightly more "open" institutional embrace.
Plus brand-audit context: rounder/wider V is consistent with "institutional intelligence FOR construction, not OF construction" positioning. Hybrid finishes that move.
R4-Bh: outer x=9 (wider, R4-Bw character) + apex y=49 unchanged (V height preserved) + inner top (21, 43) for stroke 12 at top + valley y=32 (R4-B character). Slope difference: outer 1.667 vs inner 1.636 = 1.9% taper (invisible). Stroke 12 at top → 12.20 at valley (1.7% INVERSE — legs settle slightly wider, reads grounded). V silhouette 46 × 38: same height as R4-A, ~4.5% wider; slightly more "open" institutional embrace.
Plus brand-audit context: rounder/wider V is consistent with "institutional intelligence FOR construction, not OF construction" positioning. Hybrid finishes that move.
opened 2026-05-12 · round 6
variants 5 (R4-A baseline + R4-B + R4-Bp1 + R4-Bw + R4-Bh hybrid)
scope hybrid combining wider outer + R4-B valley + preserved stroke
status awaiting pick · recommendation R4-Bh
Round 5 — narrowed in round 6; finalists R4-B, R4-Bp1, R4-Bw + hybrid surfaced
Wordmark V valley · round 5 — inner top corners rounded (cohesion all five vertices)
Operator caught the miss: "we rounded the outside of the legs and valley and bottom, but
the inside corner of legs (descending to valley) is not rounded, this is a big miss."
Round 5 applies r=2 Q-curve rounding at each inner top vertex across all five rounded
variants, matching the outer top corner radius. The V's full outline now reads with
consistent curve language at every vertex: outer top corners, outer apex, inner valley,
AND inner top corners.
Variants: R4-A (production reference, sharp inner everything), R4-B (rounded valley y=32 + corners), R4-Bp0 (parallel y=32 + corners), R4-Bp1 (parallel y=33 + corners, recommended), R4-Bp2 (parallel y=34 + corners), R4-Bw (Path B wider V + corners).
Operator pair-pick recommendation: R4-Bp1. Full cohesion + mild valley extension + parallel uniform legs. Pick locks the V and triggers single clean regeneration of
Variants: R4-A (production reference, sharp inner everything), R4-B (rounded valley y=32 + corners), R4-Bp0 (parallel y=32 + corners), R4-Bp1 (parallel y=33 + corners, recommended), R4-Bp2 (parallel y=34 + corners), R4-Bw (Path B wider V + corners).
Operator pair-pick recommendation: R4-Bp1. Full cohesion + mild valley extension + parallel uniform legs. Pick locks the V and triggers single clean regeneration of
assets/wordmark.svg with Inter Bold text-as-paths.
opened 2026-05-12 · round 5
variants 6 (1 reference + 5 with inner top corners rounded)
scope r=2 corner rounding at inner top vertices
status awaiting pick · recommendation R4-Bp1
Round 4 — superseded by round 5 above (inner top corners now rounded)
Wordmark V valley · round 4 — parallel legs (constant stroke top to valley)
R4-Bv's taper (legs wider at top than valley) threw the eye off. Round 4 fixes by going
to parallel inner/outer slopes — stroke stays constant top-to-valley. With the V's locked
outer silhouette, that creates a fixed trade between valley depth and leg width: deeper
valley → thinner constant stroke. R4-D at y=36 (stroke 9.43) was operator-rejected as
"too skinny," so round 4 stays well above that.
Path A (parallel, accept thinner stroke): R4-Bp0 at y=32 (stroke 11.71), R4-Bp1 at y=33 (stroke 11.14, recommended), R4-Bp2 at y=34 (stroke 10.57). All have ZERO taper, constant stroke top to valley.
Path B (modify silhouette to preserve stroke 12): R4-Bw — widens V outer to x=9 and extends apex to y=50.27. V silhouette becomes ~4.5% wider and ~3.3% taller. One comparison row for completeness.
Plus R4-A and R4-B as references (slight inherent taper 2.4% — vs R4-Bv's 14.6% which threw the eye off).
Path A (parallel, accept thinner stroke): R4-Bp0 at y=32 (stroke 11.71), R4-Bp1 at y=33 (stroke 11.14, recommended), R4-Bp2 at y=34 (stroke 10.57). All have ZERO taper, constant stroke top to valley.
Path B (modify silhouette to preserve stroke 12): R4-Bw — widens V outer to x=9 and extends apex to y=50.27. V silhouette becomes ~4.5% wider and ~3.3% taller. One comparison row for completeness.
Plus R4-A and R4-B as references (slight inherent taper 2.4% — vs R4-Bv's 14.6% which threw the eye off).
opened 2026-05-12 · round 4
variants 6 (2 references + 3 parallel + 1 Path B silhouette)
scope parallel-leg geometry; constant stroke top to valley
status awaiting pick · recommendation R4-Bp1
Round 3 — superseded by round 4 above (R4-Bv leg taper rejected)
Wordmark V valley · round 3 — R4-Bv (slight valley + widened legs) + V-height analysis
Letter-spacing -0.04em + Bold 700 locked in rev-10 (just propagated across consumers).
R4-D abandoned — "pull inner-top outward to keep slope parallel" approach made legs too
skinny. New R4-Bv variant addresses the same valley-extension goal by
pulling inner top INWARD (widening leg stroke from 12 to 13 at top) while only lowering
the valley a few pixels (y=32 → y=33). Plus R4-Bv+ at y=34 for a more aggressive
comparison. All five variants (R1, R4-A, R4-B, R4-Bv, R4-Bv+) rendered at both 0.66em
and 0.69em heights. V-height analysis embedded — recommendation: hold 0.66em (just-locked
Bold already shifted mass toward institutional; taller V would over-correct).
Operator pair-pick recommendation: R4-Bv + 0.66em.
Operator pair-pick recommendation: R4-Bv + 0.66em.
opened 2026-05-12 · round 3
variants 5 V × 2 heights = 10 combinations
scope valley geometry + leg width + V-height analysis
status awaiting pick · recommendation R4-Bv + 0.66em
Round 2 — superseded by round 3 above (R4-D dropped, R4-Bv proposed)
Wordmark V valley · round 2 — smooth tangent, consistent legs, 0.69em option
Round 1 had two rendering bugs the operator caught — the rounded-valley Q-curve
wasn't tangent to the incoming legs (visible notch), and dropping the valley to y=36
tapered the legs (slope mismatch with outer). Both fixed. Also bumped letter-spacing
from -0.05em to -0.04em (S2 Bold felt cramped) and added a V-height variant at 0.69em
alongside locked 0.66em.
Variant set: R1 sharp baseline, R4-A current rounded apex/top with sharp valley, R4-B rounded valley at y=32 with smooth-tangent geometry, R4-D lowered to y=36 with smooth tangent + parallel inner legs. Rendered at both 0.66em and 0.69em V-height. Sections: letter-spacing context, full wordmarks at both heights, isolated V geometry (no markers), 140 px direct compare of front-runners, 140 px compare of fixed rounded variants, small-size readability 24/32/48 px.
Operator front-runners so far: R1 and R4-A. Round 2 makes the rounded variants fair to judge.
Variant set: R1 sharp baseline, R4-A current rounded apex/top with sharp valley, R4-B rounded valley at y=32 with smooth-tangent geometry, R4-D lowered to y=36 with smooth tangent + parallel inner legs. Rendered at both 0.66em and 0.69em V-height. Sections: letter-spacing context, full wordmarks at both heights, isolated V geometry (no markers), 140 px direct compare of front-runners, 140 px compare of fixed rounded variants, small-size readability 24/32/48 px.
Operator front-runners so far: R1 and R4-A. Round 2 makes the rounded variants fair to judge.
opened 2026-05-12 · round 2
variants 4 V × 2 heights = 8 combinations
scope valley geometry + leg slope + V height + tracking
status awaiting pick
Round 1 — superseded by round 2 above (valley curve + leg taper fixes)
Wordmark V valley — inner-vertex polish on R4 (curve cohesion + wedge mass)
From system rebalance: operator picked S2 Bold + dot 0.23em locked, R4 V (rounded apex
+ rounded top corners) as the working V direction. Two critiques of R4: sharp
inside valley (inconsistent curve language with rounded outside) and
dense bottom block (the wedge from valley to apex looks ink-heavy).
5 refinements applied to R4's inside vertex with the apex/top untouched — R4-A current baseline; R4-B rounded valley only; R4-C lowered valley (y=32 → y=36, wedge ~32% lighter, still sharp); R4-D lowered + rounded (recommended); R4-E lowered to y=37 + rounded (more aggressive). R1 sharp baseline carried as sanity reference. System held at S2 Bold + dot 0.23em throughout. Dot decision deferred until V locks.
5 refinements applied to R4's inside vertex with the apex/top untouched — R4-A current baseline; R4-B rounded valley only; R4-C lowered valley (y=32 → y=36, wedge ~32% lighter, still sharp); R4-D lowered + rounded (recommended); R4-E lowered to y=37 + rounded (more aggressive). R1 sharp baseline carried as sanity reference. System held at S2 Bold + dot 0.23em throughout. Dot decision deferred until V locks.
opened 2026-05-12
variants 5 R4 valley refinements + R1 reference
scope inside-vertex cohesion + wedge mass reduction
status awaiting pick · recommendation R4-D
S2 Bold + dot 0.23em locked · V valley refinement above
Wordmark system rebalance — V refinement × text-weight × dot, refined together
Operator: "Lets run a workshop with both the refined V options from before, and also
these S1-S5 variants. I'd like to refine both together since its all going to work
together." Two-axis exploration on the wordmark as a system rather than V in isolation.
V axis (4 refinements): R1 current, R2 true point, R3 refined apex curve, R4 = R3 + outer top corners rounded (cohesive curve language top + bottom). S axis (5 system variants): S1 Semibold + dot 0.23em (current), S2 Bold text, S3 Bold + larger dot 0.26em, S4 Medium text, S5 Bold + tighter tracking -0.07em. Display: V axis at fixed S1, S axis at fixed R1, 5 key integrated pairings, R1+S1 vs R4+S2 close inspection at 120 px, plus full 4×5 matrix at 48 px.
V axis (4 refinements): R1 current, R2 true point, R3 refined apex curve, R4 = R3 + outer top corners rounded (cohesive curve language top + bottom). S axis (5 system variants): S1 Semibold + dot 0.23em (current), S2 Bold text, S3 Bold + larger dot 0.26em, S4 Medium text, S5 Bold + tighter tracking -0.07em. Display: V axis at fixed S1, S axis at fixed R1, 5 key integrated pairings, R1+S1 vs R4+S2 close inspection at 120 px, plus full 4×5 matrix at 48 px.
opened 2026-05-12
variants 20 (4 V × 5 S)
scope V geometry + text weight + dot size + tracking
status awaiting pick · recommendation R4 + S2
Folded into system rebalance workshop above
Wordmark V1 refinement — subtle moves that polish without disrupting
5 single-axis precision moves around V1's pointed-apex wide-stance geometry:
true point (R2), refined curve (R3), thinner legs (R4), combined (R5), plus R1
baseline. Operator response: R4/R5 leg-thinning dropped; R3 flagged as incohesive
(sharp top, rounded bottom). The refined V options (R1, R2, R3, plus a new R4 that
adds rounded top corners) are carried forward into the system rebalance workshop
above, where they're refined alongside text-weight / dot / tracking variants.
opened 2026-05-12
variants 5 (R1 baseline + R2/R3/R4/R5 refinements)
scope V apex precision + leg thinning
status superseded — refined options carried forward
V1 reaffirmed as base · refinement workshop above
Wordmark V character — 5 geometries with per-variant cohesion tuning
Operator: "we need to consider more than just size but also spacing, and style of chevron
V. Do some more deep thinking here as a branding expert in our context (institutional
intelligence) — blending next gen tech but instilling trust and institutional tonality."
5 V geometries explored — pointed chevron (current), architectural (taper + flat apex), typographic narrow (letter-V proportions), rounded apex (rhymes with dot), flat apex (buttressed). Each tuned for maximum cohesion: V-e margin and dot size adjusted per V character so the bookend composition feels designed-for, not swap-and-paste. Rendered with full wordmark at 5 display sizes + stacked A/B at 48 / 96 px.
5 V geometries explored — pointed chevron (current), architectural (taper + flat apex), typographic narrow (letter-V proportions), rounded apex (rhymes with dot), flat apex (buttressed). Each tuned for maximum cohesion: V-e margin and dot size adjusted per V character so the bookend composition feels designed-for, not swap-and-paste. Rendered with full wordmark at 5 display sizes + stacked A/B at 48 / 96 px.
opened 2026-05-12
variants 5 V characters with per-variant tuning
scope V geometry + V-e margin + dot proportions
status awaiting pick
Expanded into V character workshop above
Wordmark V size revisit — 5 sizes around 0.66em
Initial size-only exploration. Operator flagged that size alone wasn't enough — V
character (geometry / apex / leg shape / spacing) also matters. Subsequent V character
workshop above expands the scope. Kept here as audit trail; can be revisited if
operator picks current V geometry (V1) and just wants to refine size.
opened 2026-05-12
variants 5 V sizes (0.60-0.72em)
status superseded by character workshop
Closed workshops
Browse archive →Workshop process
- Spin up a workshop when a brand atom needs visual exploration — new mockup HTML drops into
projects/vecreal/drafts/brand-atoms/workshop/and an entry appears at the top of "Active" above. - Operator picks a variant or requests revisions. Iterations happen on the same workshop page or as new rounds (e.g.
…-round2.html). - On lock, the decision propagates across sources of truth + consumers (single atomic commit), and the workshop file is moved to
workshop/archive/. CHANGELOG.md records the locked outcome. - Archived workshops stay searchable as audit trail for why brand decisions look the way they do.