This is a logo I made on a whim. My own rendition of the current 64Digits logo.
I - as in ME - Anthony LoPrimo, aka avl1991 here on this website made THIS rendition. I did not make the original logo design - however I made this rendition. I enhanced it. I altered it - whatever the term you want to use - that's it.
I am looking to use this in a portfolio to show additional skills in photoshop - the things I used were rather basic - but it shows I can alter an existing logo (something that a few people seemed to be unable to realize when I explained this to them). I also would have several original works in there. Now if the admins would rather I not, then I won't include it. It'll be disappointing, but not a big deal.
Now let me re-show that image, above in case you forgot:
In super tiny, super light text - as small as I could make it for you guys to read - or anyone for that matter is a signature/credit line/whatever. Okay, it might be worded wrong, giving the impression that I made the logo - and I understand that. While I didn't upload the changed version, I did say I'd change it.
Now when i posted that image here - I did it as if it were posted to deviantART - which means it was posted as a "hey look what I did". I didn't intend for it to be used. When I added the final two versions of the logo I altered it with the signature since it was done - and I would like to be credited for doing what I DID do to the logo.
When I did logos for others, I usually don't add anything like a signature to it - some say I should but regardless - I usually don't. I leave any extra "noise" out.
So Mr. PY, let me direct your eyes upwards to the logo on the site itself. Compare THAT to the one in this blog post.
See how there's a lack of a signature? See how I'm not complaining? The sig wasn't part of the LOGO but it was part of the picture, if you get my comparison. The logo is up there on the page - no sig. I'd like it to have it but I don't really care - as I didn't even expect people to like it enough - nor did I expect Cyrus to even go that step and put it up (and I'm quite flattered). But ultimately I didn't make the logo for you. I didn't make the logo as a commission or a request. As I said again and again - it was a spur of the moment idea that I showed to you guys when I was done.
The signature does not destroy the image. It does not ruin it. It simply shows who did what. Does it incorrectly hand out credit for the work? Yes. And I fixed it - I just didn't re-upload it here. But it most certainly does not ruin it. I could go on, but I'm rambling enough and I don't need to go further on.
:D
Well, I disagree, I think it does ruin it. It's just noticeable enough to be obvious, and not noticeable enough to be easy to read, so yeah, I think it ruins it.
Personally, I'd have taken the fact that it could be ruined as a compliment - I'm telling you there's something there to ruin. But hey, if you want to be insulted by me telling you I like your logo, that's your choice.Honestly? I never heard that ever used as a compliment. I thank you for that, but still. It was a bit odd. However you could have always suggested that I make the text a bit lighter - I want it noticeable but I don't want it to obscure the image - which is usually what signatures are for on images (unlike watermarks).
I have to agree the name does kind of ruin it. I liked cyrus' original idea where it shows your name after hovering over it.
For some reason, the name over the logo seems kinda unprofessional. I don't know why it does though, to me.The problem is that it's the site logo. You want to be credited for whatever you did to it, fine, I think Cyrus' idea of a rollover is a good one, but it's /the site logo/. It's the one thing you WANT to keep clean and free of distractions, and you're slapping a great big distraction that's just hard enough to read to make sure people have to try.
And yes, my issue is that I like it, but there're things wrong with it. If I see absolutely no redeeming value in something, most of the time I won't even bother criticizing it, because if somebody's managed to make something that bad, they're either beyond hope or are aiming for something entirely other than what I like. I'm morecritical of things I like more - because there the flaws shine hardest.Interesting way of putting it.
But like I said - ultimately - while I'd LIKE the signature there, it's not neccesary - the signature was for the image that portrayed the logo - not the logo itself (aka what's being used for the site versus what I'd post on say… deviantART). This is also not an art-centric site like a few other places - so it's not neccesarily something to emphasize. And I'm sure on a site like this there's plenty of places to give credit where it's due but regardless. It's not a big deal. And of course you can see the logo up there where there's no signature. I got no issues.But again, ultimately I do thank you - while I did get the wrong impression, I'm glad that was cleared up.You should just do a mockup just for kicks, put it on deviant art and link to it from here.
If people like it, maybe theyll let you beef up the design a little bit. But no credit line is needed thats so obvious. As long as its on the site, telling other people what you did can be proven if neccessary./words of wisdomGood point.
<img src="avl1991logo.png" title="logo by Anthony Loprimo" /> would be the best solution to have your credit somewhat visible. But I find it still absurd to put that text there even though you didn't design the logo.
EDIT: Yes, I did post this comment before reading the other comments :3That's a further idea i didn't think about though that'd be more for you guys if you had the logo up there.
Anyways, it was fun guys, but I gotta go...Not I dunno if I should be afraid of what logo I'll find when i come home in about 5-6 hours….. LOL :3