Meryl's Notes Blog
Things wordy, geeky, and webbyLogo Update
Friday, September 24th, 2004 at 1:47 PM | 8 commentsThanks for all your input into my logo. I’ve gone with sample #1 and had it tweaked. Before this latest iteration, I experimented with two different fonts and that didn’t go well. So, back to the original font.
The difference is the shade of the name and title. The first one matches the graphic. The second one stands out. I am flip-flopping as usual (that’s me when it comes to making decisions impacting me). I’m concerned about whether it is bright enough for printing, but I don’t want the make the image darker. What do you think? two logo samples.
Subscribe:
RSS or 
E-mail
Newsletter
Search and archives
-
Popular site tags
-
Categories
Other stops
Recommended
Sponsors
All Content © Copyright 2008 Meryl.net. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Privacy Policy | Thanks to Blue Flavor | Valid XHTML and CSS
8 comments
I really like the lighter tone.
Meryl, I liked #2. It stands out - That’s what a logo is supposed to do! Grab your attention like nothing else. I’d also think anbout a brighter red (just a little. It would balance just a tad better!
I agree that #2 stands out more, however #1 is a tighter design.. the colors sync much better with the text and the iconography/illustation. If I may make a small suggestion.. use the blue in the text of #2 but also change the baby blue in the illustration to match the darker blue.
I like design number 1 best, although the higher contrast version may serve as a “rollover” effect later on.
I still don’t like the spacing of “Meryl.net”. How about turning the dot into a bullet dot, just like the ones you use below?
I prefer #1.
Hi Meryl,
They both look good. On paper I personally like No.1. If you are like me, you can analyze something like this to death..
So just pick one..!!
Cheers..
Love # 2, the darker font makes things stand out.
I prefer #2, but it’s a close call.
Post a comment (or leave a trackback)