Thanks all who replied, I have read your opinions and will be sharing them
with the directors in a meeting later today where they will be completely
ignored and a new, previously undisclosed, crap logo will be selected.
;-)
--
Jay
The time has come for our company to get a new logo.
I put
Thanks all who replied, I have read your opinions and will be sharing them
with the directors in a meeting later today where they will be completely
ignored and a new, previously undisclosed, crap logo will be selected.
Why is that? I see it all the time, you have 3 or 4 good
On 8/3/05, Paul Vernon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why is that? I see it all the time, you have 3 or 4 good
ideas/logos/business plans, no-one can decide which one out of those good
ones to choose so they compromise and pick the worst example they can
find. Then they spend the next few
I LIKE 2, 5, 13 19
~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48
Message:
Well my favourite is 2. 1 and 17 are nice too, although I'd change the
colour scheme on 1.
As for the other logos, read on!
Seeing as you aren't specialising in one type of disc (audio, dvd, games or
otherwise) I would steer clear of the logos that imply that you are an audio
based company only
11 and 12 are just abysmal. Sorry.
Please people don't appologise. I didn't design these and the person who
did is unlikely to be on this mailing list so I urge people to be blunt and
speak their mind. I have deliberately avoided telling you what my
preferences are so that you are not
You know, until I read that you specialize in dvds and such, I would
have said #3. But, since you don't specialize in audio - I have to
agree that you should avoid those that scream audio.
Of the remaining, I think I like #17 the best - it's simple and clean.
13-16 don't feel integrated at all. I
2 and 5, given what you're selling :)
~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48
Message:
1 and 3.
Jerry Johnson
~|
This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place
for dependable ColdFusion Hosting.
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=11
Message:
It an it depends -
- If your primary focus is the area that you cover, #9 and 15 are
relevant (though 9 is my preference)
- If you're looking for a logo that will work in print, web and
embrioidery #12, 19, and 2 would be better - #19 would be my
preference there (nice and simple).
- Being a B2B
Most of these are better than any logo I'll see here. So with that,
I'll say that I really don't like: 4, 9, 10, 15, 16, 19.
So who's idea was it to name the company discs suck?
-Kevin
On 8/2/05, James Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The time has come for our company to get a new logo.
I put
Tony, I think I agree with your client.
Not that #1 is not better looking/more attractive.
But the emphasis is on the tree not the state in #1, and vice versa in #3
Since the company name is MarylandReserve, and not TreesinMaryland, I like the
reversed emphasis even though it ain't as pretty.
thank ye
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 09:33:22 -0500, Jerry Johnson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tony, I think I agree with your client.
Not that #1 is not better looking/more attractive.
But the emphasis is on the tree not the state in #1, and vice versa in #3
Since the company name is
Why not try the tree-behind approach on the left side, where there's
more room for extra tree-weight?
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 09:33:22 -0500, Jerry Johnson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tony, I think I agree with your client.
Not that #1 is not better looking/more attractive.
But the emphasis is
YEAH! What she said!
Oh and by the way Tony - no need to defend why the logo was chosen. We
all understand client wishes.
You asked for feedback though - and you are getting it :)
--
##| -Original Message-
##| From: Deanna Schneider
##|
oh yeah... no problem, i love it!
tw
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 11:24:26 -0500, Erika L Walker-Arnold
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
YEAH! What she said!
Oh and by the way Tony - no need to defend why the logo was chosen. We
all understand client wishes.
You asked for feedback though - and you are
Tony,
I missed your logo link. Can you repost?
-Frank
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 18:14:47 -0500, Tony Weeg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.antiwrap.com/?34
can you see that site?
also, thats the final version, from what the client wants :)
tw
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 18:11:27 -0500,
frank...
here is the first try...
http://www.revolutionwebdesign.com/clients/marylandlandreserve/logoideas.jpg
here is the second go-round...
http://www.revolutionwebdesign.com/clients/marylandlandreserve/mlr_logoIdeas.jpg
and then this is what they ended up wanting... and like the layout
I like the layout in general, but the logo they chose is not what I
would have chosen. I really don't like the tree behind.
- Frank
On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 21:10:57 -0500, Tony Weeg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
frank...
here is the first try...
your sentiments are the same as just about everyone, funny, just goes
to show you that
no matter what cross section of people you take input from, your
client may think one way
and you have to go that way :(
whateve. as long as the checks come a rollin in... its their choice!
plus he is a good
I like that, the logo looks far better on the site than on a blank
page. If you are using CSS for the information box this article may be
useful: http://www.alistapart.com/articles/customcorners
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 00:32:28 -0500, Tony Weeg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
paul, the perspective shadow,
looks good.
~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48
Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:150173
appreciate it paul!
tw
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 07:22:17 -0500, Paul Ihrig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
looks good.
~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application
wayne... thank ya... ill toy with that one this weekend!
later
tw
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 09:47:55 +, Wayne Putterill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I like that, the logo looks far better on the site than on a blank
page. If you are using CSS for the information box this article may be
useful:
wayne, i forgot, i just did ALMOST the same
sorta thing on this site... that i just finished a coupla
months ago :)
http://www.ericdavisonline.com
although not CSS, the same look, and now, ill just learn how to
do it in css, rather than tabled :)
later.
tw
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 09:47:55
that's a real nice lookin site weegs
wayne, i forgot, i just did ALMOST the same
sorta thing on this site... that i just finished a coupla
months ago :)
http://www.ericdavisonline.com
although not CSS, the same look, and now, ill just learn how to
do it in css, rather than tabled :)
welll thanks ye...
g's
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 07:20:46 -0600, G [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
that's a real nice lookin site weegs
wayne, i forgot, i just did ALMOST the same
sorta thing on this site... that i just finished a coupla
months ago :)
http://www.ericdavisonline.com
gradient.
M!ke
-Original Message-
From: Tony Weeg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 11:32 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: logo critique.
paul, the perspective shadow, didnt work... needed to REALLY exemplify
Maryland more than anything, according to the client
the background gradient.
M!ke
-Original Message-
From: Tony Weeg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 11:32 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: logo critique.
paul, the perspective shadow, didnt work... needed to REALLY exemplify
Maryland more than anything
This looks good. I like the subtle drop-shadow.
thank you
What if you made the information header's gradient backgroud the same as
the nav bar? I would also remove the rounded corners to match.
the information area, is actually going to transform into something like this...
In the upper left marylandlandreserve does not seem to be either
centered, justified on left justified. Nor does it align with the
information box.
gotcha, this is a VERY rough layout, ill clean all that up, but yes, i agree
The list your land bar might be more effective if
moved up a tad
I was talking about the button bar. Don't you have two gradients on it?
oh, so no left pointing faded gradient next to list your land?
~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
nope. just one.
the same one that is the bottom bar :)
also, the client just emailed me...
THEY LIKE logo #3
:( whatever, its all good, they are writing the check!
tw
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 09:15:00 -0700, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was talking about the button bar. Don't you have two
#3 looks like the tree is try to hide behind the state.
The one on your mockup looks very good however.
larry
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 11:31:23 -0500, Tony Weeg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
nope. just one.
the same one that is the bottom bar :)
also, the client just emailed me...
THEY LIKE
larry
i thought so too, but the CLIENT wants #3
:( whatever.
tw
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 11:41:49 -0500, Larry C. Lyons
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
#3 looks like the tree is try to hide behind the state.
The one on your mockup looks very good however.
larry
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 11:31:23
I could understand if they were conserving cows and wanted one to hide
behind the state (cowhide) but #3 looks awkward and unbalanced.
larry
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 11:47:28 -0500, Tony Weeg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
larry
i thought so too, but the CLIENT wants #3
:( whatever.
tw
On
arent most clients awkward and unbalanced?
--
tony
Tony Weeg
macromedia certified coldfusion mx developer
email: tonyweeg [at] gmail [dot] com
blog: http://www.revolutionwebdesign.com/blog/
cool tool: http://www.antiwrap.com
...straight cash homey
- randy moss, now a raider
I so agree.
Dana
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 11:55:37 -0500, Larry C. Lyons
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I could understand if they were conserving cows and wanted one to hide
behind the state (cowhide) but #3 looks awkward and unbalanced.
larry
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 11:47:28 -0500, Tony Weeg
I couldnt get to your logos, server issues or somethin'.
Sometimes I got here for ideas, they do some really nice logo work.
http://logoworks.com/logo-design-recent-logos.html
Will
~|
Get help! RoboHelp
hmmm? thats strange, everyone else has...
try again...
anyway, that site, is KILLER, thank you!
tony
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 18:08:07 -0400, Will Tomlinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I couldnt get to your logos, server issues or somethin'.
Sometimes I got here for ideas, they do some really
http://www.antiwrap.com/?34
can you see that site?
also, thats the final version, from what the client wants :)
tw
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 18:11:27 -0500, Tony Weeg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hmmm? thats strange, everyone else has...
try again...
anyway, that site, is KILLER, thank you!
http://www.antiwrap.com/?34
can you see that site?
ahhh yes! Very nice!
~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49
danku
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 20:13:23 -0400, Will Tomlinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.antiwrap.com/?34
can you see that site?
ahhh yes! Very nice!
~|
Purchase Captivate from House of Fusion, a Macromedia
Still looks like the tree is trying to hide behind the state.
larry
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 21:00:20 -0500, Tony Weeg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
danku
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 20:13:23 -0400, Will Tomlinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.antiwrap.com/?34
can you see that site?
That's too bad. I think it looks crappy now.
Yours with the tree in front in the open space of the state looked
WAYY better.
Can't ya convince him that the people on community say put it back! :D
Cheers,
Erika
##| -Original Message-
##| From: Tony Weeg
##|
##| also, thats the
he could care less what we think...
again, clients are a twisted bunch!
tw
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 22:21:11 -0500, Erika L Walker-Arnold
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's too bad. I think it looks crappy now.
Yours with the tree in front in the open space of the state looked
WAYY better.
i like number one the most, number three the least.
-Original Message-
From: Tony Weeg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 1:51 AM
To: CF-Community
Subject: logo critique.
hi there.
building a site for a new client, and they need a logo.
its a land reclamation
i like 1,6 4
would be nice if you could subtaly change the shape of the state so it
apears to be the shadow of a lone tree...
~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble
Ticket application
or put a shadow across it?
Dana
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 07:53:57 -0500, Paul Ihrig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i like 1,6 4
would be nice if you could subtaly change the shape of the state so it
apears to be the shadow of a lone tree...
Best: 1
Worst: 3
Worst runner up: 5
Using initialisms in public marketing materials, particularly logos,
should be avoided as much as possible.
-Kevin
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 01:50:58 -0500, Tony Weeg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hi there.
building a site for a new client, and they need a logo.
8 websites waiting in the wings... about 16k in receivables gotta
get it done sometime :(
thanks for the input!
tw
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 23:58:45 -0700, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
what are you doing up? It's 2am your time. Of these I like 1 best
though 5 might be interesting if you put
thank you john!
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 07:40:13 -0500, John Stanley
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i like number one the most, number three the least.
-Original Message-
From: Tony Weeg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 1:51 AM
To: CF-Community
Subject: logo
Paul,
I LOVE THIS IDEA...
ill be tryin' that tonight (after we get back from seeing wynton)
tw
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 07:53:57 -0500, Paul Ihrig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i like 1,6 4
would be nice if you could subtaly change the shape of the state so it
apears to be the shadow of a lone
i agree fully kev.
just did it to show suck... so that good, looked better :)
tw
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 07:54:04 -0600, Kevin Graeme [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Best: 1
Worst: 3
Worst runner up: 5
Using initialisms in public marketing materials, particularly logos,
should be avoided as much
Good luck. I've been doing logos for long enough, and for state
agencies, though to know that they will never pick the good one. They
will almost always pick the not quite the worst but still sucky one.
This probability increases logarithmically with each additional person
reviewing the logo.
Number 1 is the best IMO#
I dislike the rest equally.
Cheers,
Erika
##| -Original Message-
##| From: Tony Weeg
##|
http://www.revolutionwebdesign.com/clients/marylandlandreserve/mlr_LogoI
deas.jpg
let me know what you think
which one do you like the most?
which one do you dislike the
1. The tree is too large. It overshadows the state.
2. The tree looks too nested in the convex shape of the state.
3. The three is too hidden by the state.
4. Too many trees.
5. The tree size and placement is nice. I don't know what MLR means.
6. This is my top choice. Even though the
you could always use mutiple states as the leaves, bushy part of a
stylized tree..
you know over lap about 3-5 marylands in differnt opacities.
~|
Purchase Captivate from House of Fusion, a Macromedia Authorized Affiliate and
interesting... ill be whippin some new versions up tonight...
hopefully ill get some
jazzy inspiration... :)
keep the ideas coming, these are good!
later.
tw
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 10:35:05 -0500, Paul Ihrig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
you could always use mutiple states as the leaves, bushy part
paul, the perspective shadow, didnt work... needed to REALLY exemplify
Maryland more
than anything, according to the client...
anyway, based off of peoples input, and my wifes liking too, i think
this is what ill prolly work with to start...
not too intricate of a design... but, what do y'alls
what are you doing up? It's 2am your time. Of these I like 1 best
though 5 might be interesting if you put the tree next to the acronym.
Or alternately resize the tree a little smaller and put the text
closer to the state. I dislike 3 the most but four is a close second.
Dana
On Thu, 10 Mar
I agree.
From: S. Isaac Dealey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Fri 2/25/2005 9:08 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Logo Critique - Round 2
We've taken into consideration all your feedback. Here is
round 2:
http://pages.videotron.com/frankm/
Number 5
Me too!
At 08:30 AM 2/26/2005, you wrote:
I agree.
From: S. Isaac Dealey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Fri 2/25/2005 9:08 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Logo Critique - Round 2
We've taken into consideration all your feedback. Here is
round 2:
http
4 or 5
##| -Original Message-
##| From: Frank Mamone
##|
##| We've taken into consideration all your feedback. Here is round 2:
##|
##| http://pages.videotron.com/frankm/
#
~|
Save $10 Download ZoneAlarm Security
We've taken into consideration all your feedback. Here is
round 2:
http://pages.videotron.com/frankm/
Number 5 definately -- VERY nice. :)
s. isaac dealey 954.927.5117
new epoch : isn't it time for a change?
add features without fixtures with
the onTap open source framework
I like 5 also. Might like 7 a tad better, but it's a weak tad if so
and hmm come to think of it 5 draws the eye more to the spot which is
the point, right?
Quick reality check, these colors are different, right? Just making
sure it isn't me, cause this is the same laptop and I am seeing navy
and
Frank wrote:
We've taken into consideration all your feedback. Here is round 2:
http://pages.videotron.com/frankm/
Definitely #5 - both my wife and I picked it right away and stuck with it.
~|
Save $10 Download ZoneAlarm
I just looked and the other colors are also now looking orange and
navy to me. Hmm. Since I am also in the same location I was when I
looked at the other ones, the fact that it is now night and the
lighting is artificial is the only difference I can see. I had no idea
that this could make so much
Dana wrote:
I just looked and the other colors are also now looking orange and
navy to me. Hmm. Since I am also in the same location I was when I
looked at the other ones, the fact that it is now night and the
lighting is artificial is the only difference I can see. I had no idea
that this
Depending on the audience you're trying to get I'd say #2 (fun, informal
audience) or #5 (more serious, professional audience).
I actually like #1 as well... but I've got a soft spot for the juxtaposition
of traditional and new media. ;^) Still, #2 or #5 is the way I'd go.
Jim Davis
You're right. I had the window set kind of small the second time I
looked. It's actually the same link.
Dana
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 22:09:50 -0600, Gruss Gott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dana wrote:
I just looked and the other colors are also now looking orange and
navy to me. Hmm. Since I am
Very helpful Dana! Thanks I like number 5 too. I prefer the small caps too.
-Frank
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 21:38:55 -0600, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I like 5 also. Might like 7 a tad better, but it's a weak tad if so
and hmm come to think of it 5 draws the eye more to the spot which is
Tony wrote:
whats wrong with the colors? and how does the GBP come into play in
that discussion? i dont get it.
The colors in the logo are the GBP team colors. Normally this
wouldn't matter but Green Bay fans are REALLY into their colors and
have them everywhere: jackets, hats, cars,
Gruss, are ya color blind? no offense... but that looks like dull
blue, and some sort of orange?
am i color blind?
tw
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 10:36:24 -0600, Gruss Gott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tony wrote:
whats wrong with the colors? and how does the GBP come into play in
that discussion?
Tony wrote:
Gruss, are ya color blind? no offense... but that looks like dull
blue, and some sort of orange?
LOL! Could be ..., no, I've looked at it on 2 monitors (21 HP and
Dell) and they both look green and gold to me, but maybe I'm just
paranoid 8-D
Nope, I was wondering the same thing.
Green and yellow - not even close to those colors!
At 11:53 AM 2/23/2005, you wrote:
Gruss, are ya color blind? no offense... but that looks like dull
blue, and some sort of orange?
am i color blind?
tw
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 10:36:24 -0600, Gruss Gott
Ray wrote:
Nope, I was wondering the same thing.
Green and yellow - not even close to those colors!
I am using a Mac, but I just checked it on a PC and it still looks
like Packers colors to me but more orange like you said.
-Original Message-
From: Gruss Gott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 12:15 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Logo Critique
Ray wrote:
Nope, I was wondering the same thing.
Green and yellow - not even close to those colors!
I am using a Mac
OK well, remember that you asked for this.
Personally I dislike them both, mostly because of the colors. I am
looking at this on an elderly Thinkpad and the colors look dull
marigold and teal-ish blue to me and they just don't go together.
I agree with those who are saying bring the left
Top one, IMHO.
--- On Monday, February 21, 2005 10:50 PM, Frank Mamone scribed: ---
If you have a minute, can you please take a look at these two logos
and let me know which one you like best, or if you dislike both.
Any and all comments will be appreciated.
Not just what kind of business, but what is the target market, what
is the market placement?
I agree with Jim that the circle-box is only needed once. You actually
have a logo and a wordmark with an embedded logo. And that's actually
great since you can use either as appropriate.
-Kevin
On
Isaac wrote:
I have to be brutally honest and say -- I have to strain my eyes to
read either of them (although the 2nd one less so)... so... for
I agree. The second one is better for me if the business has a
serious nature, but the redundancy isn't good and I'd lose the 2nd
logo in the O and
Looks like everyone agrees about the redundancy!
This is for a Bloggers site. The target market is professional bloggers.
- Frank
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 08:13:17 -0600, Kevin Graeme [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not just what kind of business, but what is the target market, what
is the market
remove it inside the o leave it on the left... the top one is better...
and i would like to see some more iterations... any other ideas in your head?
tw
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 13:03:38 -0500, Frank Mamone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Looks like everyone agrees about the redundancy!
This is for a
yeah we have a different one with different colors too. I will put it
up tonight if you want to see it.
- Frank
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 13:22:54 -0500, Tony Weeg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
remove it inside the o leave it on the left... the top one is better...
and i would like to see some more
sure...
if there is one thing i have... is an opinion, and im a stickler for
artistic goodness.
:)
--
tony
Tony Weeg
macromedia certified coldfusion mx developer
email: tonyweeg [at] gmail [dot] com
blog: http://www.revolutionwebdesign.com/blog/
cool tool: http://www.antiwrap.com
He who
I also have to say that I don't like the colors - anybody
that's
anti-Green Bay Packers will be put off.
Hey, maybe it's designed to appeal just to Packers fans. :P
s. isaac dealey 954.927.5117
new epoch : isn't it time for a change?
add features without fixtures with
the onTap open source
whats wrong with the colors? and how does the GBP come into play in
that discussion? i dont get it.
tw
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 16:03:52 -0500, S. Isaac Dealey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I also have to say that I don't like the colors - anybody
that's
anti-Green Bay Packers will be put off.
Whilst the first is fun, I like the second better. It's easier to ready.
Perhaps it's the dark dot in the middle of the O in the first one ...
Draws my eye right to it and I see nothing else ... Whereas in the
second, everything is all lined up and orderly and my eye sees it as a
whole.
You might
I'm not a fan of all-caps. It makes things harder to read. The first logo is
happy-go-lucky. The second logo reminds me of Red Spot paint for some reason.
I would pick the first over the second, but I'm wondering about the duplicate
icon. What if you have the full icon to the left, but the
If you have a minute, can you please take a look at these
two logos
and let me know which one you like best, or if you
dislike both.
Any and all comments will be appreciated.
http://pages.videotron.com/frankm/
I have to be brutally honest and say -- I have to strain my eyes to
read
From: Frank Mamone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Mon 2/21/2005 9:50 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Logo Critique
If you have a minute, can you please take a look at these two logos
and let me know which one you like best, or if you dislike both.
Any and all comments will be
you took the words right outta me mouth... good questions...
what kinda business is this?
tw
On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 23:26:43 -0500, Jim Davis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Frank Mamone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Mon 2/21/2005 9:50 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Logo Critique
93 matches
Mail list logo
