Posts: 7404 |
Turtleneck Posted Sun 21 Sep, 2008 5:13 PM |
Number 6 seems the most sophisticated and developed, but my worry is that the bottom part gets so thin that it breaks. When the logo is reduced, it will be even thinner.
Number 2 is my second choice, but consider left justifying it because it leaves an awkward space when it is centered. |
|
|
Posts: 501 |
iraida Posted Sun 21 Sep, 2008 6:56 PM |
| Me gusta el nº 2 :) |
|
|
Posts: 3258 |
mili Posted Mon 22 Sep, 2008 7:20 AM |
Turtleneck wrote: Number 6 seems the most sophisticated and developed, but my worry is that the bottom part gets so thin that it breaks. When the logo is reduced, it will be even thinner.
Number 2 is my second choice, but consider left justifying it because it leaves an awkward space when it is centered.
True, but it might not matter, if the bottom vanishes a bit. I think the new no. 6 is a bit clumsy somehow, it's lost some of its elegance.
Totally agree with the flush left on number 2.
The second patch gets a bit dark in my opinion. |
|
|
Posts: 906 |
spid Posted Mon 22 Sep, 2008 8:43 AM |
| 6 or twelve in the old colour |
|
|
Posts: 64 |
vampire_lover Posted Mon 22 Sep, 2008 2:31 PM |
| I like 1 and 12 :D |
|
|
Posts: 1382 |
jesusaremus Posted Mon 22 Sep, 2008 2:35 PM |
| hey everyone, thanks a lot! you're helping a lot. Today i need to present the whole work, so, let's hope it's good. |
|
|
Posts: 3778 |
megg_inc Posted Mon 22 Sep, 2008 4:01 PM |
| Fingers crossed! |
|
|
