Fred White design

 
Michael F. McCartney
 
Avatar
 
 
Michael F. McCartney
Total Posts:  3535
Joined  24-05-2004
 
 
 
21 September 2007 20:35
 

After all is said & done, it is after all your arms, not ours—you’re not obliged to do it our way or put it to a vote!  (or rather, like Lincoln is said to have said to his cabinet, "Ayes 10, nays 1—the nay has it")

FWIW, I wouldn’t add a bordure—IMO it adds nothing artistic or symbolic to the existing design, which is quite nice, except a touch of unnecessary business.

 
Wilfred Leblanc
 
Avatar
 
 
Wilfred Leblanc
Total Posts:  1223
Joined  31-07-2007
 
 
 
21 September 2007 21:03
 

Michael F. McCartney;49967 wrote:

After all is said & done, it is after all your arms, not ours—you’re not obliged to do it our way or put it to a vote!  (or rather, like Lincoln is said to have said to his cabinet, "Ayes 10, nays 1—the nay has it")


Understood, but the discussion is still helpful!

 
Stephen R. Hickman
 
Avatar
 
 
Stephen R. Hickman
Total Posts:  700
Joined  01-12-2006
 
 
 
21 September 2007 21:53
 

Whatever you decide for your CoA, I already know that it’ll look GREAT!  I can’t hardly wait to see the final design!  :cool::D

 
Michael Swanson
 
Avatar
 
 
Michael Swanson
Total Posts:  2462
Joined  26-02-2005
 
 
 
21 September 2007 22:23
 

Did you consider placing the charges 3,2,1 in a past message?

 
David Pritchard
 
Avatar
 
 
David Pritchard
Total Posts:  2058
Joined  26-01-2007
 
 
 
21 September 2007 23:16
 

Michael Swanson;49972 wrote:

Did you consider placing the charges 3,2,1 in a past message?


While 3, 2, 1 is the traditional arrangement, I would be inclined to leave the exact positions of the crosses ambiguous. This would allow the charges to be placed 3, 2, 1 on a (pointed) heater shield or placed 3, 3 on a (squarish) French shield.

 
Patrick Williams
 
Avatar
 
 
Patrick Williams
Total Posts:  1356
Joined  29-07-2006
 
 
 
21 September 2007 23:43
 

I also agree that a bordure is just too much for this design.

 
Wilfred Leblanc
 
Avatar
 
 
Wilfred Leblanc
Total Posts:  1223
Joined  31-07-2007
 
 
 
22 September 2007 01:31
 

I don’t think the shield needs any enhancement, either, and I think I’m done considering further changes. (Cheers to Joe for suggesting the counterchange!). However, the question remains of how to forestall the perception that the overall design is insufficiently differenced from the COA of my ancestor. That leaves monkeying with the crest.

I really like the overall look of the greyhound passant, because it feels very stable and communicates the right idea—fidelity to what is worthwhile in the traditions started by the ancestor. But as matters stand, perhaps this crest is a bit too small relative to the shield. This possibility is clearest when the eye comes to rest on the mullet, which I think should be closer to the size of the crosses paty. Anyway, if the ratio of crest to shield is inflexible, then perhaps this crest won’t work, regardless of its merits, but it doesn’t seem altogether dissimilar, scale-wise, to some crests in our armorial and that of the American College of Heraldry.

 

I also really like the greyhound salient/rampant. It has an appealing dynamism. But in the existing rendering, it does seem to be just too big; the whole image seems liable to tip over, but perhaps that’s an easy problem to solve. I’ll try my hand at it.

 

The demi-greyhound is definitely out, because the truncation just doesn’t work for me, personally—too jack-in-the box like. I recognize, though, that the demi-greyhound is a reasonably common feature of crests.

 
Wilfred Leblanc
 
Avatar
 
 
Wilfred Leblanc
Total Posts:  1223
Joined  31-07-2007
 
 
 
22 September 2007 01:34
 

Michael Swanson;49972 wrote:

Did you consider placing the charges 3,2,1 in a past message?


That didn’t occur to me, but I gather that some artists might just opt to depict them that way. My own preference is that they remain 3 and 3.

 
Wilfred Leblanc
 
Avatar
 
 
Wilfred Leblanc
Total Posts:  1223
Joined  31-07-2007
 
 
 
22 September 2007 02:33
 

How about this configuration—slightly smaller crest?

http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc122/fwhiteiv/ArmsSep21.jpg

 
Wilfred Leblanc
 
Avatar
 
 
Wilfred Leblanc
Total Posts:  1223
Joined  31-07-2007
 
 
 
22 September 2007 03:22
 

Actually, I think I’m in love.

 
PBlanton
 
Avatar
 
 
PBlanton
Total Posts:  808
Joined  06-11-2005
 
 
 
22 September 2007 12:57
 

Fred,

I personally like this last one! :D

 

Regarding the charges placed 3, 2, 1, I think Michael was suggesting there be three crosses in chief, two on the fess, and one in base.

 

Take care,

 
 
David Pritchard
 
Avatar
 
 
David Pritchard
Total Posts:  2058
Joined  26-01-2007
 
 
 
22 September 2007 17:01
 

PBlanton;49990 wrote:

Regarding the charges placed 3, 2, 1, I think Michael was suggesting there be three crosses in chief, two on the fess, and one in base.


If that is what Michael was suggesting then I would prefer the crosses 3, 3, 3, as it would make the counter-changing more prominent (which in my own opinion is what makes these arms attractive) and eliminate any possibility of duplicating extant arms.

 
Patrick Williams
 
Avatar
 
 
Patrick Williams
Total Posts:  1356
Joined  29-07-2006
 
 
 
22 September 2007 22:40
 
 
Wilfred Leblanc
 
Avatar
 
 
Wilfred Leblanc
Total Posts:  1223
Joined  31-07-2007
 
 
 
22 September 2007 23:48
 

Patrick Williams;50003 wrote:

Oooh…three threes. Something like this:


Hot diggity, that looks good! Very textural. I reckon we can add those three extra crosses to the blazon (which takes care of two differences, BTW). Kind of makes it seem like something should have been going on in the fess all along. Thanks to Michael for the suggestion and Patrick for the illustration.

 

So, how would the blazon for the shield read now?

 
Wilfred Leblanc
 
Avatar
 
 
Wilfred Leblanc
Total Posts:  1223
Joined  31-07-2007
 
 
 
23 September 2007 01:01
 

Here is the revised shield with the original Habersham crest (which I think I can keep, given that the shield now has two differences) somewhat crudely assembled and inserted.

The mullet/coronet crest seems strong to me, and as I said earlier, enigmatic and abstract, which I like. It also seems very consistent with the kind of arms all my armigerous ancestors bore. Their designs were almost always quite simple—one tincture, one metal, maybe an ordinary, and/or one charge, which would simply be repeated as the crest.

 

I have a feeling that in the end, this is the design I’ll want to go with, though it seems a shame to part with the greyhound. Any thoughts? It certainly wouldn’t be too hard to "read" on a signet ring.

 

http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc122/fwhiteiv/ArmSep22.jpg