Pine Tree Redesign
One of the biggest symbols of New England is its evergreen trees, chiefly the Eastern Pine. Once they were the timber used to build the masts of the British Navy, and therefore the main export of the New English colonies. Anti-British New Englanders made it the canton of their flag.
Many modern New English groups use the pine to represent themselves.
Currently, my party, the New England Worker's Party, uses a pine tree derived from a design made for a local soccer team (New England Revolution).
Apart from potential issues of copyright, the design is not universally liked.
Many take issue with the odd, rounded design; more with the design being extremely difficult to recreate by hand.
Of course, we have to redesign the pine tree.
I've created ten concepts, types A through J, to potentially replace the N.E. Revolution II design.
Please look them over before voting, and read my explanations and comments on each design.
There are so many already existing designs for New English pine trees, and pine trees in general. I will focus particularly on the trees that we have used in the past or have influenced development now.
This design comes from the flag of the local Major League Soccer team, New England Revolution. It's certainly a very good representation of a pine tree, those rounded bits follow well the shapes created by the tree's needles. However, this design is pretty much impossible to draw by hand. Although I don't dislike asymmetry, this looks unbalanced in many circumstances, and its branches sometimes look like freaky tendrils since they don't all recede the same way. (Take a look at the second from the top). The trunk is also a little strange.
NE REV II
This design comes from myself. It is, visibly, derived from the previous tree. However, I fixed some of my peeves with the old one. Now it's more balanced, less bent to one side. I did it using Photoshop paths, making it a vector, just in a weird format (.csh). However, it retains the same issues as the first pine. You can't draw it. I've gotten close by hand, but it's not quick to draw at all. Sickle and Hammers and Circle-A's, you can just, swish swish swish and have one. That should be something we shoot for I think.
The concepts are quick things thrown together to showcase an idea in their design. I don't intend for them to be used in and of themselves as a finished design. They each followed similar patterns, every tier above the previous had to be thinner. I aimed to make them on the simpler side, thinking about what I can draw by hand. I paid no attention to the amount of branches, and relatively little to the trunks. Of course, suggest amounts of branches and different styles of trunk, suggest absolutely everything and anything you think.
Type A - Flat Triangles
This one is made up of simple triangles, and fans out at the bottom. Because of the flats, the tree has the same angle repeated throughout it.
Type B - Arrows
This tree is based off of Type A, but using arrowhead shaped bits that I mistakenly call chevrons.
This gives a different impression than Type A, feels sharper and a bit less soft.
Type C - 2D Cones
This tree is another built on the base of Type A, but with the bottoms of the triangles bent into a curve.
I wanted to see what it would be like to play off the sort of "safe" feeling I got from Type A, by rounding out the triangles, but not touching the corners so as not to compromise 'drawability'.
Type D - D is for Drawable
This tree emphasizes my focus on drawability, but sacrifices any feeling or meaning that could come from the shape or amount of branches. I think playing with the width and height of the triangle might be able to convey different feels, but the main aspect of this is that basically anyone can bang this out with a pencil and paper.
Type E - 'Point-E'
This one looks like it would hurt to touch. It's made of a bunch of triangles with their sides pushed in. I think we're naturally supposed to not like things that look painful, so I'm not so sure how I like it.
Don't have much to say about this one, other than the more skinny design conveys different feeling than the wider A through C design.
Type F - The Type B to Type E's Type A
Basically, convex bottoms, concave sides. I think it's more pleasant to see than E, but still a bit scary.
Type G - Completely Concave
I figured it might look neat to have a design where all the sides bend inwards. Who can really say if it does?
Type H - D + A = ?
Type H was another attempt at drawability and simplification. I'm not sure it warranted an entire Type for itself...
Type I - Convex
Type I looks like a stack of weird bells. It's bascially the exact opposite of Type G. I can safely say that it's terrible, and the only reason I included it was so that anyone wondering what that would look like wouldn't have to bother.
Type J - Convex sides, Concave Bottom
This one was actually a pleasant surprise! After Type I, I was worried this would look like ass. Luckily it doesn't.
It looks exactly the same if you do the arrow head thing with slanted bottoms, and it barely looks worse if you flatten the bottoms too.