|
|
Post by Martì Vataldestreça on Jan 30, 2015 7:37:12 GMT -6
As a great fan of vector art, I was thinking of producing a vectorised form (without changing any of the elements) of my coat of arms. If I did this, would it be considered a faux pas and something of an insult to the CoA? If it would be, I wouldn't do it.
|
|
Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă
Puisne (Associate) Justice of the Uppermost Court
Fraichetz dels punts, es non dels mürs
Posts: 4,063 
Talossan Since: 9-23-2012
|
Post by Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă on Jan 30, 2015 12:36:04 GMT -6
It wouldn't be an insult, but it also wouldn't necessarily be allowed as an official emblazon either. It might be kind of cool, though :-)
- Kingsbridge
|
|
|
|
Post by Martì Vataldestreça on Jan 30, 2015 13:15:25 GMT -6
Is that because it wouldn't have been produced by the CoA (even though the design was by the CoA)?
|
|
Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă
Puisne (Associate) Justice of the Uppermost Court
Fraichetz dels punts, es non dels mürs
Posts: 4,063
Talossan Since: 9-23-2012
|
Post by Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă on Jan 30, 2015 13:25:51 GMT -6
Is that because it wouldn't have been produced by the CoA (even though the design was by the CoA)? No. An emblazon can be created by anyone as long as it is easily identifiable as the official blazon granted by the King. In reality, a Coat of Arms grant is not the visual depiction (emblazon), but the description (blazon). For example, you own grant "Per chevron or seven mullets three, two, and two azure, and sable an owl close or" is officially your Coat of Arms. The emblazon (or visual version) is what an armorer would have made for your shield to be used in battle. This is why everyone's grant of Arms needs to be different. Imagine the chaos on the battlefield if two knights or armies bore visually similar arms! I'm not saying that your vector version won't be acceptable. I'm saying it MIGHT not be acceptable if, for example, the colors (you have gold, black, and blue in yours) are not represented as your official grant lays out. I hope you get what I mean. A lot of this is pretty technical stuff, which is why not everyone is a pursuivant or even a herald in the College. - The Kingsbridge Pursuivant, Dean of the College of Arms |
|
|
|
Post by Martì Vataldestreça on Jan 30, 2015 14:52:47 GMT -6
I reckon judicious use of the eyedropper would probably ensure a colour match.
Thanks, Txec!
|
|
Sir C. M. Siervicül
Posts: 9,636
Talossan Since: 8-13-2005
Knight Since: 7-28-2007
Motto: Nonnisi Deo serviendum
|
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Jan 31, 2015 0:10:26 GMT -6
The colours certainly need not be an exact match to what you have now. Like the Dean said, they just have to match the blazon (written description). So any shade of yellow is fine so long as it isn't so pale as to risk being mistaken for white, and isn't so dark as to look orange. Similarly you could change to a slightly lighter or brighter shade of blue if you prefer (though much darker might make it hard to easily distinguish from black). You could make other aesthetic alterations like making the owl slightly bigger or choosing an owl with a more rounded head shape (versus a horned owl) or one that's a little more stylised or a little more detailed. But a photo-realistic owl would be bad style (just tacky), and it would be improper to change elements beyond their written description. For example, any of the following would be improper:
* depicting more or fewer mullets (stars)
* changing from five-pointed mullets to mullets with some other number of points
* changing the owl to some other bird
* changing the position or orientation of the owl, such as making it face the opposite direction or spreading its wings
|
|
|
|
Post by Martì Vataldestreça on Jan 31, 2015 18:41:56 GMT -6
Done it. Not sure if owl is clear enough, and think the arms might be a bit too big. Should I reduce the size?
|
|
