4 ms·
I was rooting for #10 as well. The selected logo looks... cheap. When you can see the bevels they're distracting, but at typical resolutions (as on the home pag
by dpe82 13y ago
I was rooting for #10 as well. The selected logo looks... cheap. When you can see the bevels they're distracting, but at typical resolutions (as on the home page) they get anti-aliased out leaving the edges of the letters looking fuzzy. You end up with an image that looks like it was improperly scaled.
I'm astounded they didn't hire an agency for this. Updating the logo for a major brand is incredibly specialized work and not something for which in-house talent is typically suited. They're too close to the brand to be objective and with an agency the power dynamic is better - they can fire the client if they're being dumb. I'm a fan of Marissa, but she should leave font and logo design to the pros.