Jay Bohn;86659 wrote:
I wouyld stay away from the three-tiered cross; seems a bit presumptuous. The elm leaf ideas are simple and bold. Don’t try to do too much.
How about a cross in general - if not a three-tiered one? I know it’s a bit cliche using a cross to denote your faith and some might say it’s akin to lucky charms heraldry (clarify: I don’t, and I haven’t heard this, but I can assume) - however let’s be honest - the cross is an incredibly elegant symbol with a rich heraldic history. Might I also add that it fits perfectly within the shape of the escutcheon?
Call me old fashioned, but I put my 2cents into employing a cross as the principal charge or ordinary.
Jay Bohn;86659 wrote:
I wouyld stay away from the three-tiered cross; seems a bit presumptuous. The elm leaf ideas are simple and bold. Don’t try to do too much.
I would be inclined to agree. (Thanks, though, David, for the advice.)
Jeremy Corbally-Hammond;86671 wrote:
How about a cross in general - if not a three-tiered one? I know it’s a bit cliche using a cross to denote your faith and some might say it’s akin to lucky charms heraldry (clarify: I don’t, and I haven’t heard this, but I can assume) - however let’s be honest - the cross is an incredibly elegant symbol with a rich heraldic history. Might I also add that it fits perfectly within the shape of the escutcheon?
Call me old fashioned, but I put my 2cents into employing a cross as the principal charge or ordinary.
Yes, I think I may want to move the proposals back to having at least a little religious imagery.
Toward that end, how’s this Pittsburgh-colored throwback to some of the original designs? (The elm leaves have disappeared, alas.)
damase;86677 wrote:
Yes, I think I may want to move the proposals back to having at least a little religious imagery.
My original thought with the conjoined leaves was to have them in the shape of a cross. Maybe something like "Quarterly Gules and Or four elm leaves conjoined at the stems in the shape of a cross Counterchanged." I have no artistic skills, so I can’t illustrate this.
Alternate: Change the division from quarterly to per saltire, avoids dividing the individual leaves.
Jay Bohn;86689 wrote:
My original thought with the conjoined leaves was to have them in the shape of a cross. Maybe something like "Quarterly Gules and Or four elm leaves conjoined at the stems in the shape of a cross Counterchanged." I ahve no artistic skills, so I can’t illustrate this.
Alternate: Change the division from quarterly to per saltire, avoids dividing the individual leaves.
http://schrenk.us/coas/arms12.png
Hmm! This strikes me as being very original. With a more skillful emblazonment, I think it would actually look pretty great.
damase;86700 wrote:
http://schrenk.us/coas/arms12.png
Hmm! This strikes me as being very original. With a more skillful emblazonment, I think it would actually look pretty great.
I like this one! I think it’s the best of the leaf designs.
j.carrasco;86701 wrote:
I like this one! I think it’s the best of the leaf designs.
This is very cool and subtle. Have you tried different tincture combinations or are you set on Gules / Or? What about leaving the leaves "proper" (Vert) instead of counterchanged to give more "life" to their being connected in the cross shape?
By the way, I’m very impressed with your graphic renderings - what are you using to make them?
David Fofanoff;86705 wrote:
This is very cool and subtle. Have you tried different tincture combinations or are you set on Gules / Or? What about leaving the leaves "proper" (Vert) instead of counterchanged to give more "life" to their being connected in the cross shape?
Something like this?
http://schrenk.us/coas/arms13.png
Quote:
By the way, I’m very impressed with your graphic renderings - what are you using to make them?
I’m using Inkscape, a vector graphics drawing program, with public domain images from Wikimedia Commons.
damase;86707 wrote:
Something like this?
http://schrenk.us/coas/arms13.png
Yes, leaving them proper helps to emphasize the cross shape more against the field as well as showing the leaves on the same plain together rather than blended into the background. Although now you have a tincture problem with the Vert on Gules. How about changing the Gules to Argent? This would also coincidentally mimic the Vatican flag colors in the saltire (Argent and Or)....:cool:
David Fofanoff;86708 wrote:
Yes, leaving them proper helps to emphasize the cross shape more against the field as well as showing the leaves on the same plain together rather than blended into the background. Although now you have a tincture problem with the Vert on Gules. How about changing the Gules to Argent? This would also coincidentally mimic the Vatican flag colors in the saltire (Argent and Or)....:cool:
http://schrenk.us/coas/arms14.png
Yes, that is more handsome for sure.
damase;86709 wrote:
http://schrenk.us/coas/arms14.png
Yes, that is more handsome for sure.
I like it! In my humble opinion I think the tincture combinations are just right. Maybe now if you’re inclined to, I would try different divisions to see what background shape is most pleasing to you. Maybe divided per Fess, or per Pale, or something else altogether. Whatever you think is most appealing.
Very nice, but you’ve now lost the allusion to your motto. The red and yellow scheme preserved that, albeit subtly.
Joseph McMillan;86713 wrote:
Very nice, but you’ve now lost the allusion to your motto. The red and yellow scheme preserved that, albeit subtly.
I agree. This is my new favorite of the leaf designs but you seem to have lost everything you were originally alluding to. Will this new design work for that?
Joseph McMillan;86713 wrote:
Very nice, but you’ve now lost the allusion to your motto. The red and yellow scheme preserved that, albeit subtly.
j.carrasco;86716 wrote:
I agree. This is my new favorite of the leaf designs but you seem to have lost everything you were originally alluding to. Will this new design work for that?
Unfortunately I agree. Even having just the elm leaves is sort of a stretch; if someone asked me what those mean I would have to give a lot of explanation for it.
As much as I like the last design, I think it might be good if I shelve that for now and maybe brainstorm for some new charges. There has to be more than pelicans and elm trees.
(Does this process always take this long? I don’t want to be drawing this out beyond the limits of others’ patience.)
damase;86717 wrote:
(Does this process always take this long? I don’t want to be drawing this out beyond the limits of others’ patience.)
It’s been, what? A week? Oh, yeah!
At least if you know what’s good for you, it does. As Mike McCartney occasionally reminds us, blazon in haste, repent at leisure.
damase;86709 wrote:
I don’t know if it was intentional or not, but you lost the conjointedness (?).
FWIW I preferred the two-tincture version.
