Which logo do you prefer? (UPDATED!)

Number two, no doubt.
Good weekend, Saker!

Número dos por favor!

2

Why the eagle, which is the symbol of the empire of chaos and all Nazi???? Why not the white bear???

I like number two. Thanks for asking for everyone’s input. Blessings!

Design element..OK the mother hen aspect is OK but in line with Putin’s very firm response to the US imperial class i.e.
when he said “It will not be that way”, you might want to face the eagle forward and have it trumpeting territorially. A brown eagle did that to me from her treetop nest up at 7,200 feet in the Mts. of New Mexico and she was formidable. It was : “What don’t you understand about-‘come no closer and no one will get hurt’.” Putin had some of that energy when he said with a very tight voice,” God forbid that they might be tempted to use a final solution for SE Ukraine…”

Number Two.
It would be better without that protective wing.

Hi there Saker,

Number two.

Hi Saker

Number 2 in my opinion.

It’s a no choice: the first one is (as said by Lonkal), by far, too imperial, with almost fascist resonances (sorry).

Hi Saka

Number ONE. I’m for peace, world without wars.

Kindest Regards

JC

Number 2 is preferred. Expresses the power of knowledge.

Number 1 is nice but too rosy.

Logo 2 please, Saker.

And thank you so much for the tremendous contributions you and your teams make to our world.

I say you use the image from the left side of the page. Personally I think you would do better with a more polished image in general, I’m a graphic designer, if you would like I can create something nice for you, with revisions no charge, let me know.

Number Two. I wish the bird was a tad bigger more distinct. The photo from your original blog site is such a knockout.

Logo 2, with birdseye spelled as is. An apostrophe disturbs the continuity of the phase, imo.

Congratulations! And best wishes!

logo 1, I feel uncomfortable with logo 2 : something too warlike – we want peace or war ?

2

[from Blue]
Frankly, I can’t say I’m crazy about either of them. Surely not #1 with the arrows.
#2 is a bit dark, busy, and too ‘photographic’. A log should be simple, with the image expressive of feeling and idea in simple lines (line drawing is good for this — more like http://www.clker.com/cliparts/6/2/6/8/13047399991392516098dove-hi.png but a different image content and feeling, of course).

Maybe a simple drawing of a saker in free flight, over a simple landscape, perhaps with some landmark, carrying the St. George ribbon?

But it’s not an important thing overall, and it’s a lot of time and work to make a good logo, and it doesn’t seem like a very high priority now. And it can be changed later. Maybe people could send in suggested designs (posted on photobucket, or whatever).

Given the choice of the two I’d go with #2, but only because you asked.

_Blue

number 2
but why the eagle? Nazi too got it!

{aidan pryde}
i would prefer the first one. Its more simplistic and therefore the better choise in my opinion. i think the quote from “the blue” isnt bad at all, with the saker flying over an landscape. but thats not easy to design. at the moment i like the first one more.

Number one.

The yellow and red text in the second logo is just too ugly. Plus, it’s too dark—looks ominous.

Number 1. 2 is too dark and less stylish

I wish you’d step back and reconsider if you even need a logo. I’ve never been comfortable with the thought, frankly. You have always seemed to me to be a naturally humble man – and I call this one of the greatest things a man can be – and it’s a quality that makes you trustworthy in a hugely compromised and treacherous information space.

I love the simple photograph in the sidebar of the authentic and unpretentious Saker. I also love the other photograph used for your Russia Insider avatar. I understand a writer needs an avatar – surely the bird itself is enough? Why all this meta-message about the globe and arrows and corporate/imperial pretentiousness like that?

I was sad to see the logo, but also in the scheme of things it’s a very small concern, not worth talking about, except in this thread, since you asked.

Personally I’ve always suspected that you only came up with a logo because a designer asked for one for the new blog, and you thought you should have one. Or maybe a designer offered that one.

People take an authentic and naturally occurring thing and they try to package it and take its meaning – which would be worth a weekend retreat or perhaps a lifetime contemplating and writing about – and make it into a sound bite or eye candy to give it “meaning”.

Very sad that we do this. It’s a fall from grace.

I love your writing and the heart behind it. For me that’s enough. I’m in no hurry to give the world handles to lift you up and hype you and franchise you. Your truth will travel without a logo.

I like the falcon logo from the original site best, but #2 is lovely.

This blog has some very astute and sharp-eyed readers: the commenter who noticed the red Rothschild arrows on #1, for instance. But maybe it’s just a coincidence. Ask Texe Marrs or Jordan Maxwell.

Lord Rothschild is not concerned about what the small percentage of intellectually curious folk read. There aren’t enough of them to make a difference.

But Rothschild’s mission since Old Sumer and ancient Egypt is to harvest the gold for the Annunaki space lizards who need it for their civilization. That’s why FDR confiscated the gold and why Fort Knox is empty and Ukraine’s gold was stolen. Now Russia and China have all the gold.

The guy on the History Channel with the crazy hair is right: “I don’t want to say it’s aliens. But, it’s aliens.”

logo #2 please

#2 please

#2 is not really a logo, it’s more like a banner. Many times a logo similar to #2 cannot even be used as a logo because it’s too heavy, because it doesn’t scale up/down in size, because it would not work on stationary, for example, in black & white or greyscale mode.

I think you should invite your community to send logo ideas and even designs. The ideas of others can be a happy surprise.

Should “The Vineyard of the Saker” reside under the graphic?

Logo Two

Dos

Dear Saker,

The present icon in blogspot is way too much better. Why? Coz it is the original and and we are accoustomed to it. But of the 2 choices 2nd is preferable over #1. However no one beats the original.

Regards,
Biswajit

Please do NOT use logo 1.

It contains a recurrent piece of subtle propaganda which is very widely used and inadvertently reproduced even by many well-meaning people: A GROSSLY OVERSIZED NORTHERN HEMISPHERE.
This makes the global North (mostly North America and Europe) look much larger than they really are, while the Equatorial area and the global South (basically Africa and Latin America) are severely “downsized” IN PEOPLE’S MINDS.

Just a couple of rules-of-thumb to let you detect this practice at a glance, whenever you look at one of these globes:
(1) Imagine a horizontal line through the middle of the world – remember that the real Equator runs through the Gulf of Guinea (i.e. across the sea, South of Nigeria) and through the mouth of the Amazon River (in Brazil, just North of the bulge into the Atlantic). It does NOT run across the Sahara Desert or across the Caribbean sea or Florida, as on the logo.
(2) The real South America is more than 21 (twenty-one) times larger than Greenland, not 3 times larger, as it appears on the logo.

Note that there are some slightly more “politically correct” versions of this fraud, where the perspective is chosen not as perpendicular to the Equator, etc. But “somehow”, the result is always the same: an illusion that the North is much larger than it really is.

And NO, it is not an honest “mistake” or an accident. I have yet to see an “accidentally” oversized Southern Hemisphere.

Come to think of it, maybe it is a good idea to use a globe, but please make it a Real one (and “observe it, don’t “embrace” it).

Thank you all for the great work.

One. The ribbon strikes me as a response to the NATO intervention in ukraine which I view as a subset to the blog. Also the restrained modernism of the first one is preferable to the photo and besides looks more like a dove than an eagle. Cheers.

#4

Jim of Olym

Number 2 with some modifications:

The url is redundant as it must already have been entered into the browser to show the logo. Remove it and move the yellow text “A bird’s-eye view of the vineyard” there.

The url would only be needed for non-browser objects such as mugs, pens, t-shirts etc.

The black background is a little heavy and it masks some of the fine detail of the trailing edge of the extended right wing of the saker. Maybe a white or pale gray background would be better?

Number four. You/we are looking out for the world.

Hello feathered falcon,

As it is said: First move is best!
Stay with the origonal,but banner a
simple truth like Jesse’s Café Américain,

long life and prosperity,
Joat.