oldschoolvikings Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 A few weeks ago I posted a concept for the Denver Broncos that added a second shade of orange... a lighter Tennessee/Tampa Bay throwback orange. Why? Why not? Here it is again...I got some decent feedback (thanks!) but I did start to think the second orange was a little too clever. Especially since I had to keep the navy in the logo for visibility. That meant, technically, the concept had two oranges and two blues. So, I decided to simplify... drop orange #2, and replace it with navy throughout. I like it, but its maybe a little too... expected. Tell me what you think.For the record, I redid the font. I was OK with it when it was trimmed in orange, but the navy really showed off the quirky angles to poor effect. So new font. http://dstewartpaint.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beluga4 Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 At first I thought this meant you were insulting the Broncos again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexInHBurg Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Much better! I really wasn't digging the light orange, but this feels much more hmm. fluid? I mean the use of the colors are more consistent from helmet to uniform to pants to socks. Well done! DALLAS STARS INDIANAPOLIS COLTS WASHINGTON WIZARDS NEW YORK YANKEES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tifq76 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 I like the idea but i think you have one too many colors - remove a blue or an orange and youll be solidjut one of the oranges i guess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ujju2 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Actually, I loved the version with two oranges, much more interesting. Although the new one is still not bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.