Hey everybody, could you take a minute and take a look at a logo I
Watch the &. It's getting too close to the 2nd 'Stamps'. Also, I'd track the 2nd line just a bit, since the size, weight and caps make it seem cramped (to me). Also, it'll reinject the nice visual contrast from the first set. (in this one it's too high in the first and not high enough in the second)
To be honest, I prefer the regular weight, mainly because the ampersand just seems to play better with the 'Stamps's. But it also seems more austere to me.
I like the rule, but it's really just a judgement call.
Much better. I prefer the top one now, as well. Tap the 'S' on each just a hair closer to the 'T', or loosen the space in the 'TAM' just a tad to compensate (this may be the best way). The rule when kerning is to find the most difficult spacing pair and match the rest to that. This is a minor thing, but will get exaggerated on signage.
The rule you're using is a bit heavy (1pt, right?) Maybe try a .5pt rule. But it may just be too much. See what happens. I agree with Daniel on font in the all caps version, too. The 'S' and 'T' are odd, which is why I prefer the top one now. The 'T' seems to stand too tall with its vertical serifs.
Another suggestion, which may or may not pan out: try using the small caps for the 'attorneys at law' with no full caps. Right now, I'm guessing that you're using the full caps version of the regular weight, and the forms are getting very thin. This isn't necessarily bad, but you might be able to get a sturdier logo with the SC and still preserve hierarchical contrast (you should track it slightly to compensate for the additional color from the heavier strokes). But, it could end up being too similar and look bad, or lose the fine, austere feeling.
If I may: imho the face chosen looks like belonging to a firm from the times of Billy the Kid. And although oldfashioned type can implay longevity and trustworthyness, I'm afraid this one is beyond that point and plain stale. Moreover the caps are almost twice the height of the small caps, which is visually disturbing
Captured from web.archive.org on 17 Nov 2008. view this capture