An artificial and needless separation.Hinatasan wrote:Devira , you are right !!!!!!!! 8-)
This "logo" is more a EMOTICON that a logo.
A logo just has to represent a site, and there is nothing problematic in using an emoticon for that purpose.
Yes, maybe if it wouldn't be so pixelated. The form itself isn't bad, but it would only look good in larger resolution with smooth curves.trythil wrote:A logo just has to represent a site, and there is nothing problematic in using an emoticon for that purpose.
So you're saying that if I open up a vector graphics editor and spend 10 minutes or so to retrace it, you're fine with it?Moha wrote:Yes, maybe if it wouldn't be so pixelated. The form itself isn't bad, but it would only look good in larger resolution with smooth curves.trythil wrote:A logo just has to represent a site, and there is nothing problematic in using an emoticon for that purpose.
Sorry to say this but I don't really think it's fit for a logo.trythil wrote:An artificial and needless separation.Hinatasan wrote:Devira , you are right !!!!!!!!
This "logo" is more a EMOTICON that a logo.
A logo just has to represent a site, and there is nothing problematic in using an emoticon for that purpose.
Devira wrote:And it doesn't even has the URL of a-m-v.org, so that's one reason for not voting upon it. I think the URL is needed.
Rules wrote:Logo entries may contain zero or more of the following phrases: "www.AnimeMusicVideos.org", "AnimeMusicVideos.org", "Anime Music Videos", or "AMV". Logo entries containing other words or phrases in any language will be rejected (such as "a-m-v.org").