<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Never Paint Again Logo Review</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.logodesign.com/logos/2006/05/30/never-paint-again-logo-review/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.logodesign.com/logos/2006/05/30/never-paint-again-logo-review/</link>
	<description>Logo Reviews and Education</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 18:56:49 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Guy Bell</title>
		<link>http://www.logodesign.com/logos/2006/05/30/never-paint-again-logo-review/#comment-138</link>
		<dc:creator>Guy Bell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Jun 2006 06:30:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.logodesign.com/logos/2006/05/30/never-paint-again-logo-review/#comment-138</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the comments, you have some good points there, i agree about the shadow. This logo was done 4 years ago (!) and has not been touched. The company has of course moved on since then, which is why i posted here as i wanted expert opnions. It is due for a revamp, and your comments will be noted. SO the paint splat, make it look more natural yeah? the TM, i agree, but do i make it more of a feature (the trade marked has been abused by unscrupulous people in my industry, i was trying to reinforce DONT COPY!), or do i blend it in more?

hmmmmmm........food for thought. keep the comments coming.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the comments, you have some good points there, i agree about the shadow. This logo was done 4 years ago (!) and has not been touched. The company has of course moved on since then, which is why i posted here as i wanted expert opnions. It is due for a revamp, and your comments will be noted. SO the paint splat, make it look more natural yeah? the TM, i agree, but do i make it more of a feature (the trade marked has been abused by unscrupulous people in my industry, i was trying to reinforce DONT COPY!), or do i blend it in more?</p>
<p>hmmmmmm&#8230;&#8230;..food for thought. keep the comments coming.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MontgomeryQ</title>
		<link>http://www.logodesign.com/logos/2006/05/30/never-paint-again-logo-review/#comment-135</link>
		<dc:creator>MontgomeryQ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jun 2006 13:21:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.logodesign.com/logos/2006/05/30/never-paint-again-logo-review/#comment-135</guid>
		<description>Try a different font. Something a little more unique that franklin gothic bold. Put a better-done paint splat ON the text (keeping it readable) and keep it 2-3 colors. looks like with the unnecessary drop shadow it's up to 4. 

I like that you're trying to keep it simple, we just need to tighten it up a bit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Try a different font. Something a little more unique that franklin gothic bold. Put a better-done paint splat ON the text (keeping it readable) and keep it 2-3 colors. looks like with the unnecessary drop shadow it&#8217;s up to 4. </p>
<p>I like that you&#8217;re trying to keep it simple, we just need to tighten it up a bit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Botha</title>
		<link>http://www.logodesign.com/logos/2006/05/30/never-paint-again-logo-review/#comment-129</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Botha</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 May 2006 18:41:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.logodesign.com/logos/2006/05/30/never-paint-again-logo-review/#comment-129</guid>
		<description>One thing that caught my eye was the 'splat' in the logo. It just does not look natural. The type used does  not compliment the 'splat', some how I would try and brign these two together by redusing the text size and enlarging the splat. Also the colors look dull. Study the charector of the company and you might get some bright ideas.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One thing that caught my eye was the &#8217;splat&#8217; in the logo. It just does not look natural. The type used does  not compliment the &#8217;splat&#8217;, some how I would try and brign these two together by redusing the text size and enlarging the splat. Also the colors look dull. Study the charector of the company and you might get some bright ideas.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Panel Expert - Brian J.</title>
		<link>http://www.logodesign.com/logos/2006/05/30/never-paint-again-logo-review/#comment-125</link>
		<dc:creator>Panel Expert - Brian J.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2006 21:37:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.logodesign.com/logos/2006/05/30/never-paint-again-logo-review/#comment-125</guid>
		<description>Lose the drop shadow. The paint splat isn't working at all. It is too small and poorly rendered. Further, it is located in the wrong spot. The type feels weak - it looks like you were going for something bold, but this type doesn't cut it. These colors are dated. The yellows should be the same in both the splat and tag. Are you using a vector based program for your logo execution? If not, it may be a good idea to make the switch. All in all this logo should be reworked. Maybe a custom type treatment would suffice... something professional and unique might eliminate the need for an icon or graphic that is overused in the industry.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lose the drop shadow. The paint splat isn&#8217;t working at all. It is too small and poorly rendered. Further, it is located in the wrong spot. The type feels weak - it looks like you were going for something bold, but this type doesn&#8217;t cut it. These colors are dated. The yellows should be the same in both the splat and tag. Are you using a vector based program for your logo execution? If not, it may be a good idea to make the switch. All in all this logo should be reworked. Maybe a custom type treatment would suffice&#8230; something professional and unique might eliminate the need for an icon or graphic that is overused in the industry.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Panel Expert - Rob Kirby</title>
		<link>http://www.logodesign.com/logos/2006/05/30/never-paint-again-logo-review/#comment-123</link>
		<dc:creator>Panel Expert - Rob Kirby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2006 20:13:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.logodesign.com/logos/2006/05/30/never-paint-again-logo-review/#comment-123</guid>
		<description>Yellow is a color that seems to have problems on a white background. I would try a different color. Try a color that is darker and thus creates more contrast with a white background. It looks as if this logo has three colors to it. For cost, it could easily be two colors. Does this logo really need a drop shadow? No. The paint splat seems a bit forced and needs the edges smoothed out. Also, the placement and color of the ™ needs to be reconsidered.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yellow is a color that seems to have problems on a white background. I would try a different color. Try a color that is darker and thus creates more contrast with a white background. It looks as if this logo has three colors to it. For cost, it could easily be two colors. Does this logo really need a drop shadow? No. The paint splat seems a bit forced and needs the edges smoothed out. Also, the placement and color of the ™ needs to be reconsidered.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
