The Finland arms use "among" not "semy."  Gules, among nine roses argent, a lion rampant crowned Or, having for its dexter forepaw a human arm armoured, brandishing a sword trampling a falchion fesswise reversed, both of the second hilted of the third.

I like the among drawing with more roses, but the orle of roses looks better to me (though I guess I am biased).

Michael Swanson wrote:

The Finland arms use "among" not "semy." Gules, among nine roses argent, a lion rampant crowned Or, having for its dexter forepaw a human arm armoured, brandishing a sword trampling a falchion fesswise reversed, both of the second hilted of the third.

I like the among drawing with more roses, but the orle of roses looks better to me (though I guess I am biased).

For educational purposes would you say that semy would have a uniform placement of objects while among would have them placed where they fit (as long as it looks decent)?

T.R. Griffith wrote:

For educational purposes would you say that semy would have a uniform placement of objects while among would have them placed where they fit (as long as it looks decent)?

I would say that that would be as much splitting hairs as distinguishing between "semee" (in which some of the roses would be cut off by the edge of the shield) and "sans nombre" (in which they don’t).  I know of very few heraldists that consider this a useful distinction.

T.R. Griffith wrote:

For educational purposes would you say that semy would have a uniform placement of objects while among would have them placed where they fit (as long as it looks decent)?

Wouldn’t this be gerattie?  Friar defines this in his Dictionary of Heraldry as "the distribution of small charges on a field or on a large charge in such a way that the attributes of the principal charge are not obscured and the smaller charges not defaced ... the distribution of gerattie charges is determined by the outline and the features of the charge on which they are placed and unless the alternative term sans nombre is used, the number of charges may be specified."

Another vote for the roses in orle (oh, I forgot—they’re your arms, we don’t get to vote!).

As a suggestion then—try nthe orle, possibly two variations to see which you prefer—the normal orle of 8 roses, and another with, say, 10 or 12 roses?  (With a larger number, each rose would be depicted smaller, thus leaving more uncluttered space for the bee.)

Clever design!

Ooh, ooh, me like! :D The roses in orle with the big bee look awesome!

Just my 2¢.

Take care,

Michael F. McCartney wrote:

they’re your arms, we don’t get to vote!).

What a great idea! 8)  Anyone who gets our help designing his arms must use the arms that win a forum poll.  It works somewhat like the College of Arms, where future armigers have input but what they get in the end is up to the College.

T.R. Griffith wrote:

I surprised Mark Olivo didn’t make a bee-line straight to that punchline first. 

Hey, is someone tyring to steal my job?

Now, now people.  BEE-have everyone. Negativity gives me the hives.

Mark…just sen the avatar…very, very cool!

ElSteveo wrote:

Now, now people.  BEE-have everyone.

Donnchadh wrote:

Mark…just sen the avatar…very, very cool!

Thanks!

I had this strange urge to create my entire arms only with real-life objects.  I was trying to find any naturally occuring photo of an owl resting on an anchor on the interent (as close to my crest as I could get), but to no avail.  So I decided to just whip together a couple of real-life images.

Glad you like it!

While I like both I’d have to vote for the one that Mike Swanson suggested in ref to Sweden (I believe…have to go back and check). The orle is great, but I just like the scattered look of having them fit around the bee itself; gives the impression of movement as it is not so rigid. Don’t get me wrong, as rigid is a good thing in art in general and in heraldic art in particular and normally I’d go with that. However, in this case it is just nice to see the movement of the charge amongst the scattered roses.

My friend Dave likes the orle of roses. And he likes the added beehive for his crest, which is also associated with his canting of arms, it also signifies the church as well

http://img83.imageshack.us/img83/2046/bigbeecoatofarmsuv7.jpg

Ok let’s see if I can do the blazon right. Here we go:

Argent, a large bee Or and sable charged with eleven orle roses borduer gules.

On a torse of Or and Gules, a beehive proper Or

Ok, I know I messed up somewhere.

I’m not a fan of the beehive crest, kinda makes it look like your friend has joined Devo.  Maybe the bee can make reappearance?  Just a thought…

ElSteveo wrote:

Ok let’s see if I can do the blazon right. Here we go:

 

Argent, a large bee Or and sable charged with eleven orle roses borduer gules.

No, not a large bee—just a bee.  Heraldic artists should always scale the charges to fill (most of) the available space.

"Argent a bee proper within an orle of roses Gules barbed and seeded proper."

That’s assuming the number 11 doesn’t have any particular significance.  If it does, then "within an orle of 11 roses…etc."

Personally, I preferred the version that was semy of roses—a more original composition and it looked like an aerial view of the bee flying over the field of flowers, but if your friend prefers the orle, so be(e) it.