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
