Glad to see you put the previous good suggestions in play. This logo is much better. I like the pixelated graphic. Do you think it would be overkill to try pixelating the word "blue" as well?

The balance between your graphic and company name is working now, and I prefer the switch from pale to dark blue--are you using one of the graphic's deeper, richer blues, because it seems slightly off to me?

That's about it. I like it.

ciao
3dogmama

A pixelated 'blue' would be very interesting. I'll play!

I'm not sure what went on with the color of the text. I noticed a shift when I created the internet-ready jpeg. I'll have more control in print.

Thanks for the positive feedback. I think I've stumbled upon a fairly descent mark but I'm looking forward to any suggestions to help push it to the next level.

Thanks again!

Not sure about the pixelated 'blue', but here it is.

Nope. Looks like an error. Oh well, don't know unless you try.

ciao
3dogmama

Just over pixelate the "blue" and not the logo or other text and see how that looks.

----
Powerpoint is not a design application

Good idea. But would not the word "blue" be illegible at the strength of pixelation it would require? And if yes, could you try knocking the word "blue" out of the blue to still retain the name of the company?

ciao
3dogmama

How about if you use the same size pixels as are in the graphic?
____________________
HeatherDawn
Dawning Concept

I would leave the word "blue" as you originally presented it in your revision. The idea of pixelating it, while making for a valid "let's try this" design moment, just looks junky, and detracts from the impact of the mark.

Although it's catchy and cool and all that, it troubles me that the mark requires a lot of technical explanation to make sense to the average person (and yes, I'd say a lot of artists would fall into that, versus the "printer geek," category). Once you reel in your artist clients somehow, that ceases to be a problem, but up front, you have the extra task of overcoming the tendency of many potential clients to think your mark has to do with something technical about computers rather than art. I guess that's why you felt the need to add the semi-explanatory tagline. It just seems to me that needing to explain a logo and company name in that way reveals a fundamental problem with both. (BTW, if you do use it, I don't think you need a period at the end of the tagline.)

I notice that your last draft (the one with the pixelated "blue," has a different tagline that speaks more directly to the product. I think that's a step in the right direction. Are you happy with the typeface for the tag, and its size? Do you really want to include Piezo in the tag, since your whole logo/name theme is about color? And would you need permission to use the name as part of your logo, since I assume it's copyrighted?

You've got an interesting set of problems! It does seem that you're closing in on a solution, though.

Mara

You might turn off the fine artists you are trying to attract.
They don't want their art to look pixelated at all!

My suggestion is to try something that demonstrates how vivid and true your printing can be. (that was an unintended pun on your Co. name) perhaps a watercolor splash or even better -- a hand -drawn logo from an actual artist (you could d probably barter that). Though It might be a pain to convert such a thing to vector.

just my suggestion (coming from a fine arts background)