|
lucky for you, you're not a graphic artist. the match is CLOSE, but far from indistinguishable without even looking back to nitpick, the font you chose is lacking weight. you should try bolding that which might get you another step closer if not way too heavy. it's just that things average people can't pick up on are glaring to my eyes. for what it's worth, the version i re-posted looks MUCH BETTER to my eyes, but you'd have to search through a bunch (as in THOUSANDS) of conventional fonts to find something close to that particular "K". if you're not so much trying to be 100% authentic as capture the original vibe, you should be able to find a script font that looks even BETTER than the old logo. looking at it, i'm POSITIVE it was hand drawn as the letter sizes aren't too consistent like a carefully designed font would be. someone freehanded it, then perfected it, but didn't map it out on a grid & design it for full alphabet consistency. there are, i'm sure, a lot of brush script fonts out there where the letters properly connect as they should (NEVER happened before desktop publishing!) and that have a more even weight. (letter thickness variation) look at the R & especially the S. they go much higher than the rest of the letters. the R,S & N have almost no weight variation whereas the A & O have more thickness variation and MOST telling, look at the left "spine" on the letter R, it's almost vertical while it's very angled on the N. even more subtle, the spacing between letters isn't consistent. the ARL has wider spacing than the SON. there's other clues, but those stick out the most and would be easier for you to see once you know what to look for.
|
