The largest independent, non-commercial, consumer-oriented resource on the Internet for owners, collectors and enthusiasts of fine wristwatches. Online since 1998. | ||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Vintage Heuer Discussion Forum
The place for discussing 1930-1985 Heuer wristwatches, chronographs and dash-mounted timepieces. Online since May 2003. | |||||||
| |||||||
|
(a) The middle arm is not parallel to the top arm (which would be horizontal);
(b) it's not parallel to the bottom foot (which would also be parallel to the bottom line of the shield);
(c) rather, it bisects the imaginary line between the top arm and the bottom foot . . . right?
(a) or (b) would have been too easy . . . leave it to the designers to opt for (c)!!
Jeff
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
: Mark-
: Thanks for taking the time to post and graphically illustrate your
: points. The evolution of typography and logotypes is indeed
: fascinating, and what is really interesting is how over time,
: older corporate images begin to look fresh again. i think the
: BMW logo from the 50s actually looks cleaner and more modern
: than the current one with the glossy texture and dimensional
: look. It is the same way with furniture--much of what you see
: from the 30s and 40s is more prototypically modern than, for
: example, the 80s and 90s.
: There is clearly something funny with the balancing of the Heuer
: "E"s; the longer you look, the stranger the
: arrangement appears--why didnt they just elect to set the middle
: element at a right angle?
Chronocentric and zOwie site design and contents (c) Copyright 1998-2005, Derek Ziglar; Copyright 2005-2008, Jeffrey M. Stein. All rights reserved. Use of this web site constitutes acceptance of the terms of use. | CONTACT | TERMS OF USE | TRANSLATE |