New Thames Endcap

Unfortunately there are parallax problems with the landmarks you've composited.

It appears we're looking down upon the dome of St Paul's, whereas Tower Bridge and the Telecom tower have been photographed from below, looking up at them.

Because of this, its jarring on the eye, as you instinctively know something is incorrect and then have to work it out.

You'll can probably find alternative images of those buildings that have all been captured from a consistent point, like street level, and then give it another go.

I have now changed the concept entirely. Now large glass letters that make up the name THAMES form the main feature of the new endcap.

It's probably a sign that the current endboard is so bad, this is roughly on level with it.

Why not have a go yourself if you believe this is 'so bad'? You do know it is an endcap and not an ident don't you? Quite frankly you are trying to appear on a higher level than me which is impossible. How about coming up with constructive comments and not just acting like an idiot?

Baa Humbug.

This is much better, I've been put of from commenting, however, having 'THAMES' outlined is thing that is not working, it's a bit like I'm seeing through it at the background, of which the word mark becoming slightly less notable.

How do you believe I could improve the THAMES text?

Come to think of it, that background itself at the right size and angle, would do just as well.

How about this?

Your latest is a fine concept, but the execution is wanting. As a general rule, Gills Sans Ultra and Condensed are subsets best avoided (I realise the former is used in the current T-T mark but that doesn't make it a wise choice).

It suffers from an overload of blue, from the pale, wishywashy 3D logo + background to an impossibly royal blue sky and you've done little to remedy the problem Gavin described earlier; Big Ben (pedants read: the Clock Tower) is depicted at a weird angle. As mentioned, the outlined text does nothing for it.

A bit too high on the naff scale without the polish or finesse to pull it off.

Also,


Is that really what you were wanting to say?

I hope that's not what you're intending to say, as you sound extremely obnoxious...

Oh, baa and humbug.... two in one, clever boy.

To tell anyone "why don't you do it" is basically invoking TVF's version of Godwin's Law: the second you ask anyone to do it themselves you've lost the argument.

This isn't for me to show that I can do it, it's for you to show you can do it. I'm giving you my honest opinion like everyone else is here because that's the small little contract you sign when posting your mocks for people to comment upon. I'm sorry it's not all handjobs and plaudits but what do you expect when you're asking for opinion on your work? Nothing but unbridled praise for your subpar work? Some will be negative, deal with it and improve but don't whine about it like a petulant child or insult anyone because you're not getting the positive feedback you seem to think you're owed for posting your work here.

Finally, "higher level than me which is impossible"? Really? So, I suppose being childish and incompetent weren't enough, you needed to go for the obnoxiously deluded egotist label too. Jeez, get one lousy mock picked up by some lazy staffer at Sky and you think you're the greatest that's ever been...

One last attempt, don't forget that all my depictions will appear on screen animated.