Refund, please

The new North Carolina logo with the tree looks like an unsuccessful high-school art project (Triangulator, Dec. 9). The capital N and C are just plain awful. No competent typographer would distort those letters like that. And as for the tree, take a look at the Stanford University logo. Looks pretty similar to me.

Four hundred and fifty thousand dollars? Maybe the state can get its money back.

John Fitz

First draft

The [logo’s] gradient is too distracting and the proportions are uneven (Triangulator, Dec. 9). When I first design a logo, I take everything the client says they’d like represented and try to fit it in there, just to get an idea of my options. This feels like that, a first draft, just something put together to get things started. Which is sad because it has the makings of a great logo.

Cori Cartwright, via Facebook

Something’s missing

A gradient, three fonts, a tagline and three graphic elements (Triangulator, Dec. 9). They forgot the kitchen sink.

Sarah Herr, via Facebook

Dull, crammed, unattractive

I saw [the logo] on a billboard near Wilkesboro yesterday. It is dull-colored, too jammed together and not attractive at all (Triangulator, Dec. 9). The font is too thick and the tree in the middle is disproportionate. Had I not already seen it on the Internet last week, I doubt I would have known exactly what it was.

And I was not speeding, so I got as good a look as anyone there would have. I have no art degree, but I could have managed to get a better job done for $1.5 million [the cost of the promotional campaign].

I support promoting the state and grew up in the tourist business. This does nothing for us.

Bill Bush, via Facebook