ryan constantine wrote:
> 
> i think they all suck.  i agree with bob's comment that these logos
> don't show what pov can do.  i think a logo should.  were any of them
> even done with pov?  they could've been done in paint shop pro so far as
> i can tell.

The purpose of a logo is *not* to demonstrate the software's abilities.
There are demos scenes for that.
IMO, a logo must *express* what the software *is*, not what it 
produces.  In our case, I think the logo must meet 2 requirements : 
 - express the nature of Pov (a raytracing engine)
 - specifically referring to Pov (but how ?), so the logo is'nt
   suitable to ANY raytracer.

Meeting these criterias (plus others) is far from easy, but some
logos does.  Aside, showing what pov can do within a 64*64 canvas
must be close from impossible.

And, as others said :
I didn't see your entry...

Fabien.

Post a reply to this message