Ok Scott,[b said:Quote[/b] (SarraceniaScott @ Mar. 21 2005,10:15)]If I had to vote on one logo, as is, it is PAK's logo.
I like the coloration, font, silhouetted imagery, and ESPECIALLY, the four corners of conservation and the slogan at the bottom.
But Noah's protective hands cupping the Sarracenia adds a muted sense of... I don't know... Urgency? Humanity? Whatever it is, it speaks to me at a gut level, with great force and grace.
Finally, divaskid's pentagonal logo provided a means to join PAK's and Noah's logos together.
Replace divaskid's center graphic with Noah's protective hands, add PAK, slogan to the bottom, and the four words around the remaining sides, along with PAK's color scheme and fonts, and you have a winner!
Anybody with photoshop skills care to take a stab at combining the logos to see how it looks?
That does look nice. Thanks. But seeing it side-by-side with PAK's I am forced to agree with you... PAK's is simpler and more professional looking.[b said:Quote[/b] (scottychaos @ Mar. 23 2005,9:24)]Ok Scott,
here is the logo you asked for!
its nice, but I have to say I still like PAKs better..
PAK's is simpler and more refined..more "professional" looking
Second.[b said:Quote[/b] (scottychaos @ Mar. 23 2005,3:11)]well it seems everyone agrees!
I move that we formally accept PAKs original logo as the OFFICIAL logo of the NASC, so we can stop debating this and move on!
second?
Scot
The motion has been made and seconded.[b said:Quote[/b] (SarraceniaScott @ Mar. 23 2005,9:27)]Second.[b said:Quote[/b] (scottychaos @ Mar. 23 2005,3:11)]well it seems everyone agrees!
I move that we formally accept PAKs original logo as the OFFICIAL logo of the NASC, so we can stop debating this and move on!
second?
Scot