Personally, my favorite is C. A would be my second choice. B would fall to third.
Golly, I hate to disagree with Jonathan, but for a National Flag, I like B the best with C being used for infantry regiments (with suitable color changes). I really don't care for A at all. But then I like "national symbols" and I think that the rampant unicorn would be a great one.-- Jeff
"A" with its stars if far too 'modern' (read 19°C). The rampant unicorn is great, and "B" where it is proeminent is more adequate for the national/ Leib/ regimental flag (equivalent to the flag with white field in austrian inf., or the king's colour in british service). "C" with the national emblem present as if 'inserted' and larger area free for regimental facing color could be the 'batallion' flag (equivalent to the flag with yellow field in austrian inf., or the regimental colour in british service). If you feel that having 2 flag-bearers minis is out-of-scale / representational scale of the battalion as a whole, what about a single flag, but with one 'national' and one 'regimental' side?
Jean-Louis makes a point regarding the modern-ness of A. I was looking at it more on a purely aesthetic level.After looking at them some more, I think this is what bothers me: the corner fields are just so small on A and B. If you reduced the size of the central emblem and therefore reduced the cross to a more balanced width, as in C, I'd like B better than I do. I do love the unicorn :) The reason I picked A over B is that the stars hide more the disproportionate size of the blue bar, because the cluster of several objects seems to make the eye ignore some of the size difference. It's just the blue looks so disproportionately large to me.I do agree with both Jeff and Jean-Louis that C would make a good regimental flag. I wasn't considering that as an option.So to summarize, I've changed my position. C would be a great regimental flag. And I would like B better than A if you reduce the size of the blue band so that it becomes more of a central cross and less of a big blue flag with little white corners.
Whichever you pick for your "national flag" (and I still prefer B or a variant as Jonathan suggests), let me urge you to also make it your "avatar" (photograph).Just look at how nice our flags look in the comments section . . . easily identifiable and (I think) rather classy.-- Jeff
As for the national flag (how anachronistic the notion may be by Lace Wars times, the British Union Jack excepted), what about B with the unicorn (even slightly enlarged) on a blue oval as in C *and no cross at all*, just a white background field as whith the austrian banners displaying the icon of Virgin Mary? A pure white field often characterized 'royal'/ 'Lieb' standards by then. Of course you can add some small heraldic device in the 4 corners if they look too 'empty' - crown, laurels, a rose...
Thanks for the input!I didn't think the stars was that anachronistic (look what those forward-thinking fellows in the colonies will be up to in a generation - US flag in late 1700's with stars). I do favor the unicorn myself as well though.I do like c for regimental standards and something along the lines Jean-Louis suggested for a "national" standard. And once I get that sorted I will make it my "avatar" (if I can figure that out when the time comes - haha).
Actually it is pretty simple. Go to your Dashboard (click on orange button on upper left); go to "Edit Profile"; scroll down about halfway to where it says "Photograph" and enter webaddress of photo you want (i.e., your flag).-- Jeff
Hi FB,I've replied to your comments on my template blog here: http://nba-sywtemplates.blogspot.com/Sorry to butt in on your flag discussion; I couldn't find any other way of letting you know!David.
Post a Comment