>>For Web, they may be a little simple. How do you think? It depends on style of Your website. Simple logo always is better recognizable and easy to remember. There is no rule that logo on the website must be combined and complicated.
>>Could we see some arrangements about the taste? >>Show us it please, If you have them. Could you explain? Please. Are you interested in variation about this logo (different colors/font) or you want to see my other logos?
>>Could we see some arrangements about the taste? >>Could you explain? Please. >Are you interested in variation about this logo (different colors/font) or you want to see my other logos?
We would also like to see your other logo, if you have other ideas and if it doesn't task your work.
Now, we are interested in the variation about #36, especially the colors (blue) / font. To exaggerate the edge of each elements (front panel / side panel), Could you add some gradation to them? (Or by giving some white spaces between each elements)
We weaver now... (about the color and design). We feel the logotype of #45 is the best and we like the shadow under the ark (for Web). #43 is good for print.
When we would select your logo as our logo, i might request you to add white-spaces(like #43) to the ark(#45). (I mean the combination of the gradation and the white-space.)