logo 2005?

fun? weird? pointless?
or something else?



  1. The state changes read very slowly, even on my cable hookup. You might want to set them to cycle a little quicker. I’m pretty sure anyone coming in for a quick peek is missing the show…

  2. Hey, that’s one of my favourite fonts! Unfortunately, with the shadow it’s not very clear. I like the animation, though.

  3. I agree with Jenn–the animation could be sped up some. I didn’t know there was one, until I saw the comments and watched for it.

  4. The first one is the best, but somehow it loses some of its punch against the grey background of your navigation table. Maybe the third one will look better against that grey? Don’t know…
    The second one makes my brain hurt! 🙂
    The animation speed is just right, I think… if it was faster, it could get irriting pretty soon, I guess.

  5. I did slow down the animate to make sure that folks didn’t get distracted by it. If someone only sees it every five visits, that’s a design feature.
    Shame the second font is so hard to shadow–I like the font a lot. The shadow just makes it too blurry.
    The third sample is nice (Spirit Medium font and not animated) but we are going to go with the first–the small text is still Spirit Medium, the larger text is Clairvaux.
    The sidebar of links has never been intended to call attention–hence the gray background and subdued link colors. I’ve taken another look at the design, but determined that those colors are about a good a palette as I can do given the blue/gray theme. It will suit.
    Many thanks for all comments.

Comments are closed.