You are viewing our Forum Archives. To view or take place in current topics click here.
#11. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Mar 05, 201410Year Member
Posts: 25
Reputation Power: 1
Status: Offline
Joined: Mar 05, 201410Year Member
Posts: 25
Reputation Power: 1
CDR wrote Considering you didnt make the second one its a tough callI didnt make the logo, yeah thats bullshit id love to see proof youve seen this logo before. Post a picture of it if it exists. Maybe something similar but I designed both of these logos.
- 0useful
- 4not useful
#12. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Feb 01, 201410Year Member
Posts: 887
Reputation Power: 49
Really?!? I'm on my phone right now but will see what I can do
- 0useful
- 0not useful
#13. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Jan 15, 201410Year Member
Posts: 1,144
Reputation Power: 46
#1 because it looks like 3 mountains and is more eye catching where as #2 just looks like a screwed up piece of paper.
- 0useful
- 0not useful
#14. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Feb 01, 201410Year Member
Posts: 887
Reputation Power: 49
EnthusiastBuilt wroteCDR wrote Considering you didnt make the second one its a tough callI didnt make the logo, yeah thats ******** id love to see proof youve seen this logo before. Post a picture of it if it exists. Maybe something similar but I designed both of these logos.
There is similar....and there is copy
[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]
- 2useful
- 0not useful
#15. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Jan 20, 201410Year Member
Posts: 115
Reputation Power: 4
Status: Offline
Joined: Jan 20, 201410Year Member
Posts: 115
Reputation Power: 4
I personally prefer logo #1 better. As an enthusiast camper, I'd much rather have logo #1. It reminds me more of the outdoors. It's also simpler and easier to remember.
- 0useful
- 0not useful
#16. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Oct 24, 201112Year Member
Posts: 12,652
Reputation Power: 718
Status: Offline
Joined: Oct 24, 201112Year Member
Posts: 12,652
Reputation Power: 718
I like the second one better as of now. The first one fits your design idea better, though, it does need some touch ups and improvements.
- 0useful
- 0not useful
#17. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Jan 16, 201410Year Member
Posts: 1,629
Reputation Power: 90
#18. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Apr 25, 201113Year Member
Posts: 1,927
Reputation Power: 82
Status: Offline
Joined: Apr 25, 201113Year Member
Posts: 1,927
Reputation Power: 82
#19. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Oct 24, 201211Year Member
Posts: 5,070
Reputation Power: 346
Status: Offline
Joined: Oct 24, 201211Year Member
Posts: 5,070
Reputation Power: 346
EnthusiastBuilt wroteCDR wrote Considering you didnt make the second one its a tough callI didnt make the logo, yeah thats ******** id love to see proof youve seen this logo before. Post a picture of it if it exists. Maybe something similar but I designed both of these logos.
He found proof bro here it is if you didn't catch it XD
[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]
Sorry but you got proved wrong.
- 0useful
- 0not useful
#20. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Jun 22, 201211Year Member
Posts: 3,432
Reputation Power: 377
Status: Offline
Joined: Jun 22, 201211Year Member
Posts: 3,432
Reputation Power: 377
I personally like the second one better.
BUT neither of them really look like a good logo to me.
If it's just going to be a solid color, it will look a lot better than the low poly look.
BUT neither of them really look like a good logo to me.
If it's just going to be a solid color, it will look a lot better than the low poly look.
- 0useful
- 0not useful
You are viewing our Forum Archives. To view or take place in current topics click here.