Logos/Watermarks on content images.

RawAlex · 2005-03-30, 10:45 AM

Nekrom, The current logo combination is way too much... It obscures the images, and it takes away from the presentation of those images.

The smaller while logo with a VERY small URL below it might fly, but the URL would have to be similar in color and style as the existing watermark so as to make it look integrated. Otherwise you are likely to get shot down again.

I am really interested: Who told you to take off all the logos and URLs?

Also, after all is said and done, most of the link sites around here wouldn't list the content because it isn't just vidcaps, but horrible, poor quality, poorly colored content. As video clips it MIGHT fly, but as vidcaps, it is horrible. As I said, from a personal standpoint, I couldn't list it because of the combination of penetration and bound subjects.

Alex

2005-03-30, 10:45 AM	#1
RawAlex Took the hint. Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 5,597	Nekrom, The current logo combination is way too much... It obscures the images, and it takes away from the presentation of those images. The smaller while logo with a VERY small URL below it might fly, but the URL would have to be similar in color and style as the existing watermark so as to make it look integrated. Otherwise you are likely to get shot down again. I am really interested: Who told you to take off all the logos and URLs? Also, after all is said and done, most of the link sites around here wouldn't list the content because it isn't just vidcaps, but horrible, poor quality, poorly colored content. As video clips it MIGHT fly, but as vidcaps, it is horrible. As I said, from a personal standpoint, I couldn't list it because of the combination of penetration and bound subjects. Alex