Didn't comradekingu already point out in the previous topic that #2 is just as similar to other company logos as #1 is?...the fact that #1 has been used by other companies already makes this not worth considering imo. Someone linked another instance of that design used for some company, and I've seen it on the side of a van myself, though at a 90degree angle, but still.
I do like that #1 comprises the device make and model initials, just think the logo used has to be unique
-God Ginrai
I pointed out the chance of getting sued in relation to what exists. It seems smaller companies are using 1 in various varieties. Stealing that knowingly, no matter how original the idea, doesnt make the writing on the wall any different. Imo thats immoral.Well, now I'm set on voting for 2 just because it seems to get under your skin.
That's your perogative. But that's still letting things other than design and aesthetics guide your decision for a logo.
generic.jpg
OH MAN! How am I supposed to help a certain someone understand a perfectly reasonable concern when they are being snarky and exaggerating beyond belief!
You have no room to speak. You reiterated twice that it looked like "tribal art" but never explained your reasoning for why it looked like it even when asked. edgex004 ended up making an argument for you.
Didn't comradekingu already point out in the previous topic that #2 is just as similar to other company logos as #1 is?...the fact that #1 has been used by other companies already makes this not worth considering imo. Someone linked another instance of that design used for some company, and I've seen it on the side of a van myself, though at a 90degree angle, but still.
I do like that #1 comprises the device make and model initials, just think the logo used has to be unique
-God Ginrai
yeah...you see, the thing with that is.....I WAS IN THE MIDDLE OF A RATHER BIG MATH TEST. I didn't exactly have the time to post a well composed, well reasoned argument against your willful obliviousness/ignorance. edgex004 happened to write up a post that quite effectively summed up most of what I was feeling about this thing about the logo. It was quicker at the time to agree with someone who essentially said about what I would have said.edgex004 ended up making an argument for you.
No, #1 was also similar, not the same. It was not the same logo as any other logo.But, #2 was similar, and personally I didn't think it was that similar anyway, whereas #1 is not similar to other logos, it is other logos. I forget where it was posted now, but someone put up a link to a page which had that logo and I'm sure it was exactly the same, not just similar.
Having an influence or similarity is one thing, straight copy is another, and probably not what we'd want to go with, not just for lack of originality purposes, but there might be some copywrong permissions even or the likes eh
There's a flame in #2?I don't really see a flame in #2, only some kind of pyramid -- which is not that bad for a pyra logo, but it's not quite the right etymological connection.
I don't care if you were drowning in quicksand at the time. That does not give you an excuse to say that you tried to help me understand something when you did not.yeah...you see, the thing with that is.....I WAS IN THE MIDDLE OF A RATHER BIG MATH TEST. I didn't exactly have the time to post a well composed, well reasoned argument against your willful obliviousness/ignorance. edgex004 happened to write up a post that quite effectively summed up most of what I was feeling about this thing about the logo. It was quicker at the time to agree with someone who essentially said about what I would have said.
Mix them together and see what happens.I personally also like Nr. 2 better.
Has a bit of a simple look, a plain and simple flame.
Nr. 1 needs a bit more tweaking to give it an elegant look, but I'm up for that as well
Not many would think that. Besides, are you going to think that every time you look at the letters in DragonBox Pyra?After someone linking the "double penetration" article, I can't unsee the connection between that and logo 1
If there is one, I don't see it either.There's a flame in #2?
lolI don't care if you were drowning in quicksand at the time.
-God Ginrai
Fix'dFuse them together and see what happens.
You're right, I had to just dig and check it again as wasn't completely sure.But, #2 was similar, and personally I didn't think it was that similar anyway, whereas #1 is not similar to other logos, it is other logos. I forget where it was posted now, but someone put up a link to a page which had that logo and I'm sure it was exactly the same, not just similar.
Having an influence or similarity is one thing, straight copy is another, and probably not what we'd want to go with, not just for lack of originality purposes, but there might be some copywrong permissions even or the likes eh
No, #1 was also similar, not the same. It was not the same logo as any other logo.
edit: also I modified the #2 logo as I think it needed more balancing...When I was a teenager, I definitely wanted a tribal tattoo. I later learned that, at least where I am from, tribal tattoos where assimilated by a subculture known around here as "douche."
That might actually work.Looks less dp, more flame like, and for those who really want to they can still see d ragonbox p yra if the really wish.
In my opinion this variation is more balanced and elegant. Did I mention it looks more like a flame?