Topic awaiting preservation: marking time...

hope this comes out right - very new, but think i got it figured out.

anyways, followed the KISS rule of thumb for my first sig, and i know there's not much to it, but any feedback will be appreciated.


<img src="http://disk919.com/sig/pH_clock.gif">

[This message has been edited by phyreHazard (edited 11-25-2002).]

Well... nothin' really too "wrong" with it, I suppose.
Colour and size are good.
I think it's ugly tho. =\
Mebbe "ugly" isn't the word I want to use....
More like...... "not-fluent"... and "unexpected".

I had been sittin' here thinkin that you'd use a series of fire symbols or something for a sig.
hrmph. Perhaps I'm not in tune with this sig because I was expecting something else. *shrug*
As for the "non-fluent" comment........ well......... I just don't like the look of the letters. Particularly, the "e", "a", and "z".

Definately good that you stuck to the "sig standards" tho. =D


FAQs n' Bits: Michael

pretty cool - nothing stunning, but a nice start.

inmy opinion, the font is way too fat tho.

a competent effort.

nope, definitely not an earth-moving sig. and the more i look at it, the more i think Michael was right in his first impressions. if i stare at it long enuf, it begins to look more like a bunch of maggots more than anything (especially that 'z').

but ultimately it was more a study in figuring things out. i had zero exp with imageReady, maybe 3 weeks with PS, and about a week.5 with the asylum faqs and archives. wanted to make sure i had the 'basics' down pat before moving on... and since comments so far have been on content (what there is of it), and not size/color/transparency/matting/etc issues, i guess i got at least that part of it right.

*pats himself on back*

onto things "bigger and better"

and thx for the comments!



[This message has been edited by phyreHazard (edited 11-25-2002).]

Actually, you'll find that if you stare at just about anything here long enough, it starts to look like a bunch of maggots. Maybe that's just the medication, though.

Anyway, yes, technically speaking, I can see no real flaws in the sig as is. Artistically speaking, yeah, it does need a bit of work. In terms of the letters themselves, I think you have an interesting representation there, but I don't think it works on all counts (I would agree with Michael on the "a" and "z," but I think the "e" is OK. Have you considered making the "a" on o-shape with the little triangle on the outer lower-right corner? It would probably more closely resemble a lower case a then...).

Good luck with future sigs.

It looks cool, yet a little hard to read. Other than the fact that it is a littl ehard to read I think it's pretty good. Size and color are perfect. I like the two blinking dots in the middle too.

Nothing amazing, but better than I can do, so good work.

Actually, I think what really throws it off are the fact that the components don't line up. For example, if you look at a standard watch lcd screen, you'll see that all the elements line up in a gridlike way.

Take the p and the h. The right side element of the p is higher than the lower left side element of the h. That's why the consistency seems off.

Try making all symbols the same height (not on different levels either, turn the whole thing into a rectangule), increase the blinking : 's size and enlarge the space between it and the surrounding words. You want more emphasizing on the "clock theme" thingie. For the color, try white, white-white, or a complementary color to the asylum's theme, but that one right there is great too.

Other than this, like it a lot.


edit: an easy way out (or perhaps not, if that is not a font) would be turning caps lock on




[This message has been edited by Arthemis (edited 11-30-2002).]