New Crayon Logo Results (for PSP prize)

[Phil Steinmeyer]

[Edit - the contest is now over - see the winning result at www.newcrayon.com]

(New URL - final 6) www.philsteinmeyer.com/games/logo2


No decision by me yet, but here are the entries:

(old url with all 81) www.philsteinmeyer.com/games

Feel free to comment. Be kind - some entries are by folks who appear to be less experienced with this kind of thing. But there are also a lot of good entries as well - 81 entries total, at least half are reasonably solid (IMO), and probably at least a dozen that are real contenders (to me) for the prize. I will withhold my particular opinions (and a decision on the winner) for a few days, and in the meantime, I welcome feedback.

Quick notes: I rescaled stuff to be roughly equal size. In some cases where someone submitted 4 or 5 variants of the same logo, with only color variations or other minor differences, I trimmed it down to the one or two best versions. Other than that, AFAIK, all entries are shown here. In a few cases I included monochrome versions of the logos that were submitted along with the color version, but I'm not entirely consistent about this.

If any logos appear to be too closely similar to a major corporate logo, please let me know - I didn't spot anything that was a direct rip-off of another company, but obviously I'm not aware of all logos out there.

Feel free to discuss here - if you have private comments, you can send them to me at psteinmeyer A T charter D 0 T net.

Order on the page doesn't really have much meaning, except the page is loosely chronological (I added to the bottom as entries came in).

The last entry came in 11 minutes before the deadline. C'mon - he could have gone out for a cup of coffee and still made it in :)

[Phil Steinmeyer]

Also, thanks to everyone who entered. I was pleasantly surprised by the quality and depth of the entry field.

Phil

[Adrian Cummings]

12, 41 & 79 are the best I reckon :)

[Savant]

I like 14. It'll look good on splash screens and such.

[ggambett]

I like #13, #14, #41 and #44. I think #16 is a terrible idea :)

[Bmc]

really like
13, 14, 41 ,71

top 2 in my opinion are 13 and 14

[Robert Cummings]

29 - A good quality logo suitable for all kinds of games. Gives a good impression and makes YOU look good - one of the prime things you need from a decent logo. It is also trustworthy. It is the one I would choose for my company.

It looks like a brand to me. I'm fully aware it didn't take much work to make: but thats not the point of a good logo. When you choose, don't choose a logo that looked like it took the artist hours. Or reject one that uses well known fonts.

The perfect logo makes your company look great and helps people see you, not a faceless website. With so many high quality logos, I found it almost impossible to choose, but choose I have and it's 29.

Don't take my word as gospel as there's several others I think are real close contenders but I have to choose just one or it's not helpful IMHO.

[svero]

I have to say.. You got way way better results than mike did for the r64 logo. A lot of these are quite good.

[Bmc]

i think they had alot more to work with in this contest.

you can get an clearer image of what a logo for New Crayon should represent then you can for Retro 64

edit: also I forgot about 29, I like that one and it's variation as well, though 13 is still my favorite.

[luggage]

14 and 44 for me. 14 looks good so long as you don't want to put it into 2 colours.

I guess people must want a PSP more than an iPod.

[Greg Squire]

There are a lot of good ones there. I think I like #21 the best. It's bright, bold, and simple. #29 & #44 are close seconds for me.

[Omega]

#1 is the best one by far. If it wasn't, I wouldn't have submitted it.

[lakibuk]

My favorite is #13. But the blue writing should be more realistic. Doesn't look 100% like from a crayon.
I also like #81's style. Reminds me of 50/60-ies ads. The good old time.

[Omega]

I have to say.. You got way way better results than mike did for the r64 logo. A lot of these are quite good.

Mike wouldn't tell us what he wanted. He said to do it any style.

[papillon]

Lots of good stuff in here!

19 - This is very cute and I like it, but it might be considered too subtle by some.

21 - Close to what I envisioned when I thought about trying this. I like it.

71 - I *really* like this. The letters have slightly unexpected style. The coloring quality is crayony, but still crisp and readable. It's playful but not too kiddie, or too not-kiddie. The colors are my kind of colors. Downside? You might need the artist's input to make your website match it. :)

Lots of the others are nice too, these are just the three that interest me the most. (Now reading other comments to see what others picked)

41 - This is very nice, but it looks like a retail box logo. Great if you're doing a box! Don't know if it would fit as well on a site.

[Christian]

Personally, i think 41 is the most profesional looking, but, i think it doesnt perfectly fit with friendlyness and playfullness as i belive you are seeking.

Number 81 looks professional too, looks also like a toy company, wich is bad because of the audience you are aiming, also, it doesnt look playfull either.

69, looks good, it has a game on it, has to do with the name, but it lacks on visual impact, wich is bad.

67 also looks pro, but its too serious.

40 looks a little weird...

Its true that this logos are really good.

PS By the way, i sent you a last one not so long ago.

[Savant]

41 is nice but it reminds me a lot of other game company logos. "dice" (did Battlefield 1942) and "Red Storm". Not exact matches, of course, but the vertical shape and the red/white theme really clouds things.

[Omega]

Is it possible that people are skipping over #1 just because of it's placement in the top-left-most corner of the screen? The reason I ask is because I scanned the whole page looking specifically for my logo and could not find it for about 2 minutes. Then, I accidentally looked at the top-left and saw it there. So, I assume that other people are also ignoring the logos in the corners of the image.

I also think my logo was made very small, and Games takes up half the space.

This is what the logo actually looks like, and the GAMES part is optional:

http://forums.indiegamer.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=150

[.jpg]

alot of good submissions...

[Omega]

Could it be because it has nothing at all to do with the subject matter...

It's a top-down view of a crayon.

[.jpg]

average person sees it as a circle, which may be why

[papillon]

One self-promotion post is funny. Repeated self-promotion is... odd. Especially as it was posted before (in the original thread, iirc) and everyone already saw it. Really. It's not invisible. :)

[Bmc]

yeh, I was going to mention something in an earlier when you were trying to discredit the winner of the ipod contest, but I thought you may of been joking around... now I don't think you are.

[Omega]

I am posting my unbiased opinion. What's wrong with that? I don't make graphics for a living so how can it be self-promotion. Also, Phil's list of 4 logos that he liked in the Retro64 thread included one of mine, so of course I entered his contest as well. Fourthly, I'm not hiding that the #1 logo is mine. Fifthly, everybody is commenting on what they like about the winning logos, and I was wondering what they don't like about mine. I am more concerned with improving and taking over the world than with winning a contest. Finally, I was also surprised to learn in the last 5 minutes that people don't have the imagination I do, seeing it as a circle instead of a top-down view of a crayon. I think part of it is it being half the size of the other logos and in the top-left corner of the screen. It is really true that I could not find my logo even when I was looking for it because of its placement, and I haven't heard a comment yet that said people actually noticed #1.

It seems the concensus that people said they didn't think the circle represented a crayon, which is exactly the feedback I was looking for. Thanks!

[.jpg]

Okay, first I thought it was a blue bug that went kersplat on a windshield, but when it comes to making an identity it's not about how you see it with your imagination ( I just showed how I saw it with my imagination ) but how the general public is gonna see it. The shouldn't need to use their imagination or even think twice about it - you have to communicate the message instantly, because that's all the time you have in a fast paced world.

[cheese_phantom]

#69 is my favorite. It is the only one where an "identity" shines through. It conveys a certain position of the company. It's also the only one where a reference to games is made. It says "This is a new, creative game company". I couldn't "read" such a sentence in other logos.

#13 is fresh and crisp and has style. Originally it was my favorite and I still think it is one of the logos one can remember. I wish it would tell more about the game aspect.

#29 is very close to #13 I believe. It is a bit more "fine arts" but I like its simplicity. But again the game thing is missing.

#12 is a compact one. It feels strong and progressive, which might be good attributes to build a company identity upon. Only thing is that the "game" element is missing.

#67 is really simple, clever and nice, and it makes good use of the crayon concept, but it lacks the "game" thing (I hate to say this!).

I think a single crayon in the center and an orange button in the upper left would have turned it into something like an Atari joystick. (This is what # 24, 25 and 26 made me think of too.)

#19 looks creative and smart, but lacks the game idea.

#41 and 43 are very stylish and aesthetic. But I think the red crayons make them a bit unbalanced. In a way they rather distort than complete the design. Without crayons they would be much better.

#61 and 63 look very stylish and professional, but they are a touch too "big" or "serious", not like a company about games but more a company about fashion for men.

I would reserve a special place for #57 btw. I think as a logo it is very compact and well proportioned. Very good... It's just that it seems to be a logo for something else than a game company. Out of this context I would say it's my favorite.

Don't want to be unfair to others, I think many other designs are nice too, but the ones mentioned above were the most catchy ones IMHO. Seems like Phil will have a tough time to decide!

[Omega]

By the way, isn't #39 spongebob squarepants? So are 70-73.

The shading in #14 is nice but it is nothing special without the shading.

I think #69 is the best logo for a company specializing in educational games. Considering that New Crayon sounds like a game company for 5 year olds, this logo is readable, and you get the feeling of games because everybody knows what tic-tac-toe is. It has an educational feel to it. As well, it is also the one that always attracts my attention for a few seconds whenever I scan the image. The blue-orange is nice. The only problem is that the sloppy lines give the feeling of a sloppy company. Maybe if the orange tic-tac-toe lines were straight and almost perfect, it would be the perfect logo. Also, maybe the lettering could be done in a crayon style, as well, like the text in logo #77.

However, the best logo for a generic games company that even a layman could understand and remember is #13. However, it loses the tie-in with the name "New Crayon", which really sounds like it is for educational products.

Since your true feeling is in EDUTAINMENT, according to this post on your web site, you should choose #69 and go with it, since that is your passion and not match 3 games.

I’ve long been interested in doing a good game for kids (i.e. edutainment), but, as always, that market looks awful.

[PeterM]

I think I'm the only one that thinks 80 is best. Love the retro square style.

Pete

[Vectrex]

13
21
71
57 - has personality, but yeah, feels unrelated

Omega: well... it's just not very good that's all, even knowing it's a top down view. Messy fonts, weird shading.. etc. Basically if noone comments then it's probably not worth commenting on, there's logic for ya :)

[Omega]

The fonts are not messy, it is just the compression and the small size of the picture. If I knew it was going to be only a few dozen pixels high and highly compressed I would have submitted a logo for that size without the Games, etc. I.e, different logos for different sizes. I believe I sent a Jpg, which was about half a computer screen in size, which was then resized to a very small size, which caused further loss, then finally saved as a jpg, causing 3 losses of quality and readability. The small size was the #4 loss of readability.

[soniCron]

The fonts are not messy, it is just the compression and the small size of the picture. If I knew it was going to be only a few dozen pixels high and highly compressed I would have submitted a logo for that size without the Games, etc. I.e, different logos for different sizes. I believe I sent a Jpg, which was about half a computer screen in size, which was then resized to a very small size, which caused further loss, then finally saved as a jpg, causing 3 losses of quality and readability. The small size was the #4 loss of readability. It should be expected that a logo can go through a lot of hell in its life. Too small, monochrome, overcompressed, etc can all lead to loss of quality and are often present during the logo's display.


Your font is too thin.
Your design is too vague.
Your design has nothing to do with crayons or games, other than the present text.
Nobody is going to get that it's a crayon facing the viewer, and frankly, I suspect you're lying since the logo is not much more than an upgrade from what you submitted to Mike's contest.
Games is twice as large as either of the other words, which is contrary to what Phil wanted in the first place. (Games should have been secondary, if at all.)

At first, I thought you were joking with all your logo submissions, your logo design thread, and the constant self promotion, but now I see that you are very serious. I have a feeling that I'm not speaking for only myself when I say: Please, stop.

[Pyabo]

21 is the one that jumps out at me.

[Addictive 247]

Great selection - well done guys!

My favourites are: 5, 21 and 29.

[Ricardo C]

2,3,4,6,7,8,9,10,15,16,17,19, etc... An amazing amount of logos with nothing to do with the company name, and the immediate visual hook it provides. If the authors had been charged with designing the Apple Computer logo, they probably would have used the Nike "swoosh", combined with some "edgy" font.

My vote goes to 13, 21, 29 and 34.

And the Sega Dreamcast-esque spiral needs to die. Now.

[DayDream]

The fonts are not messy, it is just the compression and the small size of the picture. If I knew it was going to be only a few dozen pixels high and highly compressed I would have submitted a logo for that size without the Games, etc. I.e, different logos for different sizes. I believe I sent a Jpg, which was about half a computer screen in size, which was then resized to a very small size, which caused further loss, then finally saved as a jpg, causing 3 losses of quality and readability. The small size was the #4 loss of readability.

What a load of bullsh... Omega... if you are the professional you claim to be [ so far all I have seen is a lot of hot air ] you would know that good logos have to work in all different sizes and coloursettings [ from monochrome small letter head on a fax to full screen promo splash screen with vibrant rpg colours ]. Just spare us your excuses on why you might not win this competion.
Thanks.

[Ricardo C]

Just going out on a limb here, but I daresay Omega is just messing with your heads... Seriously, doesn't his logo entry remind you of any other logos out there? ;)

[Omega]

LOL. I took the popcap logo and made it into a retro64 logo. Then, since Phil liked that parody of a logo for retro64, I submitted it to him in his own contest. ;) This time he didn't like it for his own use. :) It's basically the same exact logo I submitted to retro64 that he did like.. for Mike B. ;)

Actually, logos are different depending on whether they are made for a 32x32 icon, a button, a banner ad, or a full-screen image, or for embroidering. You would have different versions. A good logo that looks good full-screen would need to be adjusted in its button-size version. Plus, you would want several different logos for different markets for the same product. I already said what my serious picks were. Since Phil is dreaming of the edutainment market, I think #69 is the best one with that in mind.

Once again, why would I not submit the exact same logo Phil liked for Mike B. that I made, for Phil's own contest? Of course I would.

The logo is what it is because that's the same one Phil liked in the retro64 contest, so I thought maybe he would like it if I made a top-down view. Only took me 5 minutes. That's why it's the #1 logo. I was just trying to be nice. It's SUPPOSED to be the same logo that I entered in the retro64 contest, that phil liked. And that logo it's based on is a parody of popcap anyway. If I was a pro I would have entered something else. But what I did do is post my logo early on in the thread and posted many times, bumping Phil's contest up to the top so that it would receive a lot of entries.

[bluejay]

I like #12, it immediately grab my attention.

[Reactor]

Yep, a vote for 12 from me as well, since it really does jump out (to me, anyway). 21 and 41 are also good.

[SquareDanceSteve]

I like them all.

Good job guys

[iopred]

13 & 81
The only ones I think translate well to ingame, and inprint.

[digriz]

My vote goes on #61...Simple, elegant and you could use the logo without any text too....

[undersan]

If any logos appear to be too closely similar to a major corporate logo, please let me knowCrayola. A lot of the crayons in these entries look like Crayola crayons (stripes at each end, oval in the middle). Regardless of the legal implications (if any), I don't think I'd want to reference someone else's well-known brand in my company logo.

I agree with Rob about 29 -- it gives a good impression. However, it looks like the actual crayon was added as an afterthought. I think a crayon needs to be central to your logo.

Kudos to 42 for incorporating both "crayon" and "new", but I'm not too crazy about the overall look of that entry. I wish someone had entered a sunrise icon, with a crayon tip in place of the sun.

My pick is 81. The crayon looks great. The logo is simple and professional.

Weird sidenote on 81: I actually like how the jpeg compression noise breaks up the solid pink of the crayon -- it kinda looks like the pink was painted with watercolors or maybe printed with some crude 50's technology.

[Dan MacDonald]

13 .

[C_Coder]

I like the logo number 15. The top one is good for site and color print while the bottom one is good for two-tone print. I also like the simplicity and it is very eye-catching with its simple shapes. I could not find any other that is that eye-catching as this (Except number 16 which is quite funny! ;) )

I'm very picky myself :p

[Christian]

It seem that many people think that a logo MUST say what the company does, but, this is not an obligation i belive, just think on the people that will buy your games, wouldnt they know that you make games allready?, so, i belive that a logo is for personallity and identity purposes. Think about some succesfull computer logos, like "Apple", what has an apple to do with computers????, or LucasArts, what has a golden doll holding a stripe to do with games?????, or the EA logo to do with games, or the Raven software to do with games, or the rockstar logo to do with games, so, the important thing about logos is to communicate a unique personallity, to communicate the values of the company.

[Phil Steinmeyer]

Thanks for all the feedback so far. It helped me trim out a few that had been among my own favorites, made me take a closer look at a couple that hadn't been on my original list, and suggested tweaks to further improve a couple that I liked.

Now I've cut the field to the 6 finalists.

http://www.philsteinmeyer.com/games/logo2

Some tweaks to a few of these - a color change on one, an alternate version (minor change) that the artist had provided on another, and for #19, I took the font from #29, which I liked better (if I go with this composite #19, I'll reward both artists).

Thoughts?

[Reactor]

Number 29 looks the best out of those... but then, it depends on what you're after. It might look the best to me, but it's nowhere near as dynamic as some of the originals.

[Hamumu]

#13 all the way! The only other one I would consider from the final 6 is #29, though it bothers me how far apart the crayon and the words are, and it's not nearly as fun as #13.

[Sirrus]

Ditto on 29 - looks fantastic.

You got some great submissions though.

[soniCron]

I vote a strong NO to #19, #29, and #81. The others are excellent and fun, but those are bland, not fun, and barely anything more than fonts.

EDIT: A nice feature of #74 is that the circle could easily be animated for a really nice "feel".

[Christian]

Have you made a competition research?, i did, i think that 81 is the most original one, most others look nice, but they are more for other stuff, not for a logo.

81 gives you the image you are looking for, it has visual impact, its simple, its original, its easy to reproduce anywere, follow my advice! im a graphic design student! :D

[PeterM]

Out of those 6 I like #29 best too.

Pete

[DangerCode]

[Edit - I've trimmed the list to the final 6 - see post #47]

(New URL - final 6) www.philsteinmeyer.com/games/logo2

Number 71, IMHO. Look nice.

[Gary the Llama]

#29 is the one to go with!

[Ricardo C]

13 or 29. If I had a gun to my head, I'd go with 29.

Unless the person holdoing the gun wanted me to choose 13 :D

[soniCron]

Why do people keep voting for #29? It's got the most gawd-aweful color scheme! :eek:

[Stu]

Definitely #29. ( :p @ sonicron) Although I would tweak the colors just a bit. Or you could use them all and your motto could be "The company with 81 logos with mixed degrees of crapiness or a lack thereof."

[Nikster]

Why do people keep voting for #29? It's got the most gawd-aweful color scheme! :eek:

I agree, it should have used the vibrant colour scheme used in the Solari logo *chuckle* ;)

twenty nine for me too, because I like it..

[Robert Cummings]

Of the new selection, only 29 and 13 are any good. It's important to realise that it must serve a purpose and that is why 29 is better than 13.

Lets look at what a logo does: it says "This is who I am and this is what I look like and this is what I can do for you."

A logo isn't: "I am very pretty, very good to look at. I am funky but I don't give you anything else."

And ultimately a logo must work on: a splash screen, a website and also inspire confidence with publishers and customers. It must not be an introvert nor be so extroverted to alienate people. It must provide security and be positive and also say "This is who I am".

--------------------------------

Why I like 29: It's smart, very smart. It's going to work with the mac (aqua) people and the pc people. It's open, friendly and fun, yet it promises that it can deliver. I like it, it feels expensive but it doesn't feel like it'll mess me about. Friendly but purposeful colour. It manages to side step "red and green should never be seen" by using pastel colours. Crayons also are pastel. You can get away with illegal colours doing that.

Why I like 13: It's great and it's daring! Can't fault the colours, I would be wanting to experiment a bit more with this. Ultimately it doesn't work because it looks like a cross between a logo for a flash cartoon and a something you would find on a kids toy. It isn't really a product logo because it doesn't offer security. The reason it doesn't offer security is because of the chaotic design. It's too all over the place. Great fun though.

--------------------------------

Why I think the others aren't suitable:

71: It's just like jewel quest in crayons. It's nice to look at but it does not tell me it is part of a good company I can trust. It is just cool and nice to look at. It is a great design but ultimately it looks too shabby. I know it's supposed to look like crayons... but at the end of the day crayons are a metaphor used to indicate creation and creativity. Crayons actually look fairly rough so why do we want a rough looking logo? That is why I don't think it works.

81: Nice, it gets the crayon right, but the colours are not emotional. The colours will turn you off. You will not buy from these people if you use that shade of Blue, it's a colour which has it's guard up. It is also too rigid, formal. I feel the artist is formal or technical.

74: Good to look at, nice design, not inspiring enough. Tries but doesn't get the colours right. Again, Orange and Blue: it's a nice colour combination but it just isn't a friendly combination. Also too loose.

19: Close but no cigar: it tells me that it's a playroom or acting school. Or performing arts. Blue is a bit deep. Use light blue or pastel Dark Blue. Lovely idea with the hands though. I can see where the artist is coming from... Nothing to do with crayons apart from perhaps playschool hands on.

--------------------------------

Thats why I like 29. But don't take my comments seriously: and ignore what we've all said: ultimately, from that list, pick the one YOU like the most :)

[Robert Cummings]

ps... I get the feeling that the client just loves orange and blue.

[PoV]

Wow, those were some great logo's. I wasn't going to comment, but I think #13 is being underappreciated.

#13 is great. It's playful. It actually looks fun. I'm having a great time just staring at it.

#29 is slick, but lacks the playfulness. It's serious. It's business. IMHO, if that's your company, business, then sure. It could use some crazy animation of it splitting in half and big robot arm coming out, then it'd be more "new".

I'm not so much a fan of #19, as I used to work for another company with a similar logo (http://www.terrysznober.com/images/SandboxStudios.gif).

I'm almost not sure how #71 made it past, as the crayon effect it uses looks really dirty.

#74, love the swoosh, hate the font. Not playful enough.

#81, it's nice. But dude, it gives me flashbacks of a time I made girl games. :(

[Bmc]

I'm a big fan of 13... 29 is very, very nice but it's a little too corporate or "uptight" for the image I think you want (fun, creative etc).

[DrWilloughby]

The logos are really cool but...

Am I the only one that's bothered by the similarity to the name "NewPencil", a major video game contracting studio?

[Stu]

Am I the only one that's bothered by the similarity to the name "NewPencil", a major video game contracting studio?

Look at their website and I'll bet you'll be less bothered by it. :)

[.jpg]

That may be why he's bothered... bothered that the name NewCrayon maybe somewhat of a "Cash-in" of a once more popular but now defunct company (or at least percieved that way which is probably worse).

[Robert Cummings]

And thats bad? Some people want to make a living doing this.

[DrWilloughby]

Huh. I didn't realize NewPencil was shutting down. That's too bad.

I'm not offended by the name, to be honest, my only negative reaction is that it feels like a copycat name. It's like naming your company UbiGames or Electronic Artists.

Despite that, the logos look really good and it's actually not a bad name, despite the lack of originality. But perhaps the OP has some connection to NewPencil I don't know about?

[Bmc]

i don't really see much a connection... as a matter of fact I don't even think New Pencil sounds good or even makes that much sense. Not many people ever had a farm fuzzy feeling sharpening a new pencil. now a new crayon on the other hand...

[soniCron]

I'm not offended by the name, to be honest, my only negative reaction is that it feels like a copycat name. It's like naming your company UbiGames or Electronic Artists. No. It's not. I've never heard of Newpencil, and I'm willing to bet that almost no gamers have heard of them either. "UbiGames" or "Electronic Artists" eat off highly public names. You can't really boost off the ego of another if your audience hasn't heard of the other. So, no. It's not.

[DrWilloughby]

I'm not trying to claim that they are leeching business because of NewPencil... NewPencil didn't even make their own games! Doesn't take away from the fact that the name sounds like a copycat to me, since I *am* aware of NewPencil.

Phew... it's amazing how easy it is for my panties to be in a bunch on the internet.

[DrWilloughby]

By the way, I like 29, feels very Pixarish.

[Omega]

I am confused about whether Phil wants the most impressive logo or a logo for his CUSTOMERS to understand what his company is all about. I think that in terms of getting his CUSTOMERS the most memorable logo and the only one that makes you think of edutainment (which is what Phil talked about in his blog) is the tic-tac-toe logo. Sure, it's not as spiffy as some others, but it instantly gets the point across and is the most memorable. Since you eliminated that one, I think you would rather have a logo that makes you feel impressive rather than one that communicates a message. Therefore, I suggest #29. For the sake of impressing his friends in case the company ceases to exist in 2 months, #29 is the obvious choice. He can look back and say, wow, but look at what the logo was! It is so impressive! (Same with 19. A completely useless logo, but hey, it looks expensive!)

[soniCron]

(Same with 19. A completely useless logo, but hey, it looks expensive!) Ironically, #19 is nothing but a couple fonts. The handprint "NC" is actually a font.

[iopred]

13 really is the superior logo there, It is playful yet serious, 29's downfall is it relies on gradients, which are hard to print, it also feels a tiny bit too serious.

13 will work well both ingame and inprint as I said last vote.

[sand858]

I like 13 and 19. ;)

[Robert Cummings]

I can't see how 13 is serious in the slightest. It's chaotic and fun.
my only negative reaction is that it feels like a copycat name
You realise not many people have even heard of NewPencil? I didn't. It's in no way a rip off and very easy to come to a similar name. I think you're being a bit wet feeling like that. Get a grip man :)

[Phil Steinmeyer]

I've decided to go with #29. Congratulations to it's designer - Chan Karunamuni.

#29 edged out #13 and #74 in my mind. I decided that I liked the slightly more serious/formal/professional look of #29, to help convey that the games are for all ages and not just kids. And I just think #29 looks cool.

That said, all of the others in the top group, and many from the larger group are quite good. I really appreciate all the good contributions on this one.

To that end, I will send a copy of my upcoming game to everyone who submitted an entry in the contest.

The game is a downloadable casual game - a word puzzle game along the lines of Bookworm. It's a lot of fun and I hope you enjoy it (the free copy will probably take the form of a 'coupon code' you enter into a box in the game to permanently unlock it). For those who entered - you don't have to do anything - I'll e-mail that coupon code to you when the game comes out.

Thanks again,
Phil

[Edit - see first crack at New Crayon (http://www.newcrayon.com) website with logo - colors and fonts for site as a whole need tweaking]