You are not logged in.
I don't know why but it just rubs me the wrong way. I imagine I may eventually get used to it but I wanted to see if it was just me
Offline
Long live the hedonism, –enjoy your sexual pleasure!
Offline
I like it, it's firm & bold.
Offline
Me neither, I miss the old fancy script. That's generally the way rebranding goes though, I've never seen a company make their logo less simple or their name longer.
Take for example the Firefox logo
old:
https://www.logaster.com/blog/wp-conten … t_logo.jpg
new:
https://blog.mozilla.org/firefox/files/ … 00x310.png
Simpler shapes, fewer colors and less detail. I've always wondered why that is.
Offline
I quite agree - the new watermark impinges too much on the image.
By the way, if you look back over earlier submissions, you'll find quite a number which would be wrecked by imposing the new watermark, because the artist's face would be partly hidden. Also, logically, if you're using the modern 16.9 format for a head or head-and-shoulders shot, it really doesn't make sense to make the vertical aspect even smaller in proportion to the horizontal. After all, looking back again, only a few artists go off the screen sideways as they lose control (even in 4:3 format), whereas there are quite a lot of problems with losing part of a face vertically, so to speak.
Offline
I don't mind the font but I find the new placement very distracting. I understand if there's issues with pirating but it's really distracting to have the letters cut right across an agonist like that.
Offline