Jump to content

Victoria Highlanders new logo


kiwi_canadian
 Share

Recommended Posts

I feel like the "VH" is backwards. We read left-to-right (at least in most Western cultures), so it seems to be the left leg of the "V" should be over the left leg of the "H," instead of behind it like it is. Doing it that way reads more "the Highlanders of Victoria" sort of thing.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Gothamite said:

If you’re going to say that the crest shape mimics the shield in the city’s coat of arms, shouldn’t the crest actually have the same shape as that shield?

Further, mimicking the shield shape is pointless if you don’t include elements from the shield. 

Shield shapes in coats of arms are rarely unique. It’s the design, not the shape, that matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can sometimes be unique.  The shield that NYCFC considered for their badge was a nice nod to an element on the city’s seal. 

 

1200px-Seal_of_New_York_City_BW.svg.png

 

BiinvECCUAAGFqd.jpg

 

In retrospect, I’m really sorry that one didn’t win. 

 

But your greater point is well taken.  The shields themselves are often fairly generic.

 

In the Highlanders’ case, they seem to be reaching to justify a design choice they had already made, rather than seeking true inspiration from the city’s coat of arms. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Ice_Cap said:

Further, mimicking the shield shape is pointless if you don’t include elements from the shield. 

Shield shapes in coats of arms are rarely unique. It’s the design, not the shape, that matters.

 

Yes. Can’t stress this enough, designers. The shield shapes (escutcheons) used in coats of arms varied with time and origin and have little, if any direct meaning or reason. You can often pinpoint the century and country/region of a particular design by the shape of the shield, but that’s where the importance ends. The reason for one shape over another was never more than “well, this how all the other French/English/German/whatever shields are done, so ours will be, too.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, andrewharrington said:

 

Yes. Can’t stress this enough, designers. The shield shapes (escutcheons) used in coats of arms varied with time and origin and have little, if any direct meaning or reason. You can often pinpoint the century and country/region of a particular design by the shape of the shield, but that’s where the importance ends. The reason for one shape over another was never more than “well, this how all the other French/English/German/whatever shields are done, so ours will be, too.”

 

I have no problem with designers simply carrying over crest/shield shapes - that they represent the region in a bigger way than sports is justification enough for me... however, it only works for me if the original designs are unique enough (and therefore significant enough) to warrant that type of use. This B.C. crest is generic as all get-out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, C-Squared said:

 

I have no problem with designers simply carrying over crest/shield shapes - that they represent the region in a bigger way than sports is justification enough for me... however, it only works for me if the original designs are unique enough (and therefore significant enough) to warrant that type of use. This B.C. crest is generic as all get-out.

 

That’s what I’m getting at. This shield shape (it’s called a “heater”) just means that the origin of the person (or group of people) who created that particular drawing of the achievement of arms were likely English or French and learned heraldry from studying the medieval period. It has no direct correlation or specificity to Victoria and thus is kind of a watery reference to point out in a design; it’s the lowest hanging fruit to pat yourself on the back and show that you viewed at least one image during your exhaustive research. Using the V-shaped division (this is called “pile”), on the other hand would have been a fantastic thing to utilize and point out in this context because it’s relatively rare as a heraldic element and heraldry, by nature, is meant to be as unique as possible to distinguish it from others’ arms.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, andrewharrington said:

 

That’s what I’m getting at. This shield shape (it’s called a “heater”) just means that the origin of the person (or group of people) who created that particular drawing of the achievement of arms were likely English or French and learned heraldry from studying the medieval period. It has no direct correlation or specificity to Victoria and thus is kind of a watery reference to point out in a design; it’s the lowest hanging fruit to pat yourself on the back and show that you viewed at least one image during your exhaustive research. Using the V-shaped division (this is called “pile”), on the other hand would have been a fantastic thing to utilize and point out in this context because it’s relatively rare as a heraldic element and heraldry, by nature, is meant to be as unique as possible to distinguish it from others’ arms.

 

Incorporating the V in the original shield was my first thought.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.