<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Typographic Logos VS Graphical Logos &#8211; A fiddly comparison!!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.graphicdesignblog.org/typographic-logos-vs-picture-logos/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.graphicdesignblog.org/typographic-logos-vs-picture-logos/</link>
	<description>An Ultimate Resource for Graphic Designers</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 21:43:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: iphone 5 cases</title>
		<link>http://www.graphicdesignblog.org/typographic-logos-vs-picture-logos/comment-page-1/#comment-22521</link>
		<dc:creator>iphone 5 cases</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Dec 2011 12:46:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.graphicdesignblog.org/?p=3782#comment-22521</guid>
		<description>Rich ideas for designing stunning logos.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rich ideas for designing stunning logos.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Victor</title>
		<link>http://www.graphicdesignblog.org/typographic-logos-vs-picture-logos/comment-page-1/#comment-17038</link>
		<dc:creator>Victor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Dec 2010 17:34:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.graphicdesignblog.org/?p=3782#comment-17038</guid>
		<description>To me quote kid looks similar to the goodwill logo... did anyone else notice this?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To me quote kid looks similar to the goodwill logo&#8230; did anyone else notice this?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MBO</title>
		<link>http://www.graphicdesignblog.org/typographic-logos-vs-picture-logos/comment-page-1/#comment-14171</link>
		<dc:creator>MBO</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Aug 2010 17:57:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.graphicdesignblog.org/?p=3782#comment-14171</guid>
		<description>excellent collections! kfc&#039;s my favorite though.. keep it up!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>excellent collections! kfc&#8217;s my favorite though.. keep it up!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Website Design</title>
		<link>http://www.graphicdesignblog.org/typographic-logos-vs-picture-logos/comment-page-1/#comment-10920</link>
		<dc:creator>Website Design</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 May 2010 05:59:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.graphicdesignblog.org/?p=3782#comment-10920</guid>
		<description>nice set of logos.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>nice set of logos.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hunter Gatherer</title>
		<link>http://www.graphicdesignblog.org/typographic-logos-vs-picture-logos/comment-page-1/#comment-9585</link>
		<dc:creator>Hunter Gatherer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Apr 2010 21:31:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.graphicdesignblog.org/?p=3782#comment-9585</guid>
		<description>Nice collection, but I don&#039;t think you&#039;re making a clean distinction between graphic and typographic designs.  Many of the graphical selections rely on the typography for definition.  And, many of the typographic ones are essentially graphical.  So, your collection, though provocative, is not a good collection to fully make your point.  You should do a little more research and find two groups where the graphical ones do not need the typography at all; and good typographic ones that rely much less on graphic design.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice collection, but I don&#8217;t think you&#8217;re making a clean distinction between graphic and typographic designs.  Many of the graphical selections rely on the typography for definition.  And, many of the typographic ones are essentially graphical.  So, your collection, though provocative, is not a good collection to fully make your point.  You should do a little more research and find two groups where the graphical ones do not need the typography at all; and good typographic ones that rely much less on graphic design.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: div</title>
		<link>http://www.graphicdesignblog.org/typographic-logos-vs-picture-logos/comment-page-1/#comment-9432</link>
		<dc:creator>div</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Mar 2010 09:01:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.graphicdesignblog.org/?p=3782#comment-9432</guid>
		<description>Awesome......... Both types are simple awesome.

Simple love the Gandhi &amp; wrong/right........hats off to the thoughts &amp; designs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Awesome&#8230;&#8230;&#8230; Both types are simple awesome.</p>
<p>Simple love the Gandhi &amp; wrong/right&#8230;&#8230;..hats off to the thoughts &amp; designs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

