What else would you use for Evolution? Evolution is the selection through natrual means of changes in the DNA code over time. There is little space to represent this fully and so I selected a representation of DNA as the best 'stand in' for this concept.
If I had chosen "Madonna of the rocks" then your comment in regard to 'religious art would be valid. I didnâ€™t. As you well know the image used is from the 'Creation of Adam'. A universally well known image, that directly depicts God in the act of creation. I could not think of a more fitting image to symbolise creation, by a divine being(or intelligent agent).
Also from a design point of view the two sides worked together to create a nice curving flow from bottom left to top right
Not wanting to get into a fight: just wanted to state my rational.
Finally I do think the consensus it should be Evolution and Creation sans the -isms.
Moderators: this is off-topic, I'm guilty, punish me as you will.
It was tempting but I won't go admin status and sentence you to a one hour suspension for the sole purpose of meditation on what you are going to say to your supreme theist almighty god when he asks you why your website didn't give him credit for intelligently designing you. ;)
Edited by Buzsaw, : add quote
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28
I don't think there is necessarily a problem with God v DNA as iano suggested. After all both of those images can mean a lot of different things. DNA might be an emblem of how cool God is to creationists.
And it looks sexy.
I agree. I like the choice of images.
There's a subtle interaction happening. The design isn't just about one side 'versus' the other. Each image leads your eye into the other. The viewer is invited to explore connections as well as note contrasts.
I like your alternate to the design, provides better color difference between the two sides.
I think that the filters you used could be town down just a bit, to provide a bit more detail to the photos. I can get the DNA from it but the painting is too detail and the filter blurs it up too much to really tell what it is.
My 2 cents, coming from a aspiring graphic designer (schooling is the progress)
intresting, but has the unwanted side efect of creating a set of virtual scales that unintentionally implies greater value for what ever initial is placed at the top. It sets up 'higher-lower' 'top-bottom' conciderations that unfairly unballance the image and more importantly the infered value of the two sides in the viewer.
You have something nice happening with the line created across the monkey's back rolling into the curve of the foreground hills on the other side. But the typography is disastrously weak.
Whilst the choice of images is important I feel that the main purpose of this logo is to assert and set an identity for EvC as a whole. In that regard the text is just as important as the images, and if Iâ€™m honest, would suggest even more so.
The text exhibits as three utterly separate elements that stand off from each other, and donâ€™t work as a whole, to sell the siteâ€™s identity. The â€˜VSâ€™ is much bigger than the other two words, and thus dominates them. Drowning them out. You loose their message.
Finally the choice of colour for the text (three different strong colours) also serves to alienate each element, making them fight for dominance rather than working as cohesive whole.
It is worth having another look at the text, because as I said you do have the beginnings of something interesting with those background images. Have a look in the print media and on packaging and on TV and examine all those professionally designed logos out there. Keep an eye out for how strength, cohesiveness and balance are approached.
Noted. Bt Unfortunately the origional image (creation) has FAR less contrast thant he DNA image and without the golden highlights to ballance the blue ones on the DNA side the creo side looks very flat and lifeless. I will see what I can do to re-assert some definition into god's face and arm (the two key elements of the image).
Thanks for the feedback. :D this has been really usefull. we have allready gone from this