• #1 is my favorite because it *sort of* looks like the cover of a bible, but then makes you look twice. #5 is my next favorite because it brings in the whole “tweet” thing. Good luck!

  • Jana, I like #1 because it tells you right away what it is: some version of the Bible and also lend a suggestion to the pronunciation of the long “i.” The other images help you to know it’s related to twitter, but not necessarily the Bible, which is the most important thought to convey. My only other recommendation would be to add a little gold bird to the first image to immediately cement the two concepts. But the designers may have already ruled that out.

    Can’t wait to see what you go with.

  • While I think the reference to old fashioned Bibles in #1 is cool, I have to admit that when I first started reading/following your twible project, I did not immediately get that it was a combo of the words “twitter” and “bible.” In fact, I thought it was pronounced “twibble” (with a short “i” sound!) Maybe I’m just dense, but I assume that’s why your other four designs try to play on that. Also, I assume for copyright reasons you can’t use any actual Twitter graphic (hence, the green bird?). Given that, #2 seems to best highlight the “twitter” + “bible” for me. (#5 is cool too, but I’m wondering how that would actually be written in regular text?) Hope that helps. btw, I love the whole crowdsourcing design thing.

  • Hi Jana!

    What a great idea. I LOVE the first one. It highlights the right amount of respect for scripture but in today’s relevant social media. Well done!

    Robin Jarrell
    (Wellesley Classmate)

  • Linda

    I’m for #1 because it makes pronunciation clearer and communicates so quickly what we’re in for. (For a while I thought it was pronounced “twibble”.) Next I like #5 with the bird, although I wondered if the designer could add a tiny olive branch in its beak.

  • Matt Crow

    Love #1, but you need something “Twitter” related. Either the blue bird sitting on the word (my favorite), or change the word color to the Twitter blue.

  • Marcia

    Nix on #1 — I agree with Heidi — can you make the bird in #5 more blue-and-white? Green says environmental, making the message less clear (the problem with #1).

  • As an artiste (well, at least I have a degree in art), I would go for #1 for the reason already stated that it looks like a familiar Bible cover. But I’d go with a bit of a twist
    Riess-vised Standard Version or

    Tweet-vised Standard Version
    (in 140 characters or less)

  • Jen

    #1 for sure. I like the idea of adding a little gold Twitter-bird.

  • Adding to the chorus, #1 is my favorite because it looks like a Bible. I think it would be better if the “TW” and “IBLE” parts were broken up just a little like in some of the other designs (e.g., #2) to make it clearer that it’s a version (loosely speaking) of the Bible. Also, along those lines, I *love* Brent’s “Riess-vised Standard Version” idea!

  • Dani

    I really like #1 but think it would be good to incorporate the Twitter aspect of it too. Perhaps have that typeface in a word bubble with a Twitter-esque bird speaking it? At least for the cover. For all other purposes (the spine, etc) you could just have the typeface as shown above.

    I have been enjoying your Twible posts, looking forward to getting the book!

  • Wendy Gustofson

    Leave it to me to be different, but I like #3

  • Maddie

    I like 1 and 5!

  • Sarah

    I think #2 is your best bet. I see that a lot of people are in favor of #1, but my concern is that the distinctly black leather-looking background and the gold lettering is doing all the work. Which is fine, but how will that be used on a variety of mediums–ads, promotional materials? I don’t know that it will work as well visually. With #2, you could place it anywhere, and it would pop and be distinctive. Plus, it clearly says two things: It clarifies the bible/twitter connection by how the “TW” is replacing the “B”, and the visual of the word bubble seconds the idea of a tweet.

  • I like the #1 as a image reference to the Holy Bible, as other stated. You can also use in it the “W” with the form of a inclined “B” of the #5, but using the same golden font of #1.

    I’m enjoying the current fast foward reading of the Twible on facebook and I’m sure I will enjoy the book.

  • Wendy Demandante

    Don’t think any of these is ready to go.

    Number 1 is a reasonable starting point but needs help. Also, the font is only the “bible-font” for some. For many editions of the bible, a different font was used. I would experiment with some other bible-fonts.

    Number 1 is too plain. A subtitle is a good idea. Any art would need to be subtle to maintain respect for scripture, but it’s worth experimenting.

    Number 5 is cute but would require a deeper shade for the yellow letters. The medium-yellow doesn’t offer sufficient contrast to the white background.

  • Wendy Demandante

    Also, is the background color of #1 black as it should be? I can’t tell.

    Maybe I’m wrong about the bible-font. I am judging by the many bibles I see in thrift stores.

  • I like #2 because it is the most descriptive of your project. It lets your readers know that the project is about the Bible and is a kind of comic book-style paraphrasing (the word bubble gives this impression). #4 is also descriptive, but it takes a few more moments to figure out.

  • LaVonne Neff

    Definitely NOT #1. It looks like a KJV from the 1950s or earlier and has no association with Twitter. Probably doesn’t even look like a Bible to the major audience for your book. I like #5. You need the bird, if you don’t run into (c) problems with Twitter. But you also need to communicate that this is a Bible, and #2 does that, though I’m not sure that blue/white are trending colors. Suggestion: use the word arrangement of #2. Add a bird, as in #5. Update with colors that pop – maybe a coral or an emerald background, reverse out type – but hey, an actual designer, not me, should be recommending the colors and placement of elements. From my editorial/marketing standpoint, though, whatever cover you end up with should (1) convey BOTH Twitter and Bible, (2) look extremely contemporary, and (3) be in colors that simply can’t be ignored.

  • Stephen Carter

    It seems to me that you want the logo to show what the book is doing: juxtaposing the old and new to create something a little quirky.

    What if you went for a wood cut and digital motif, rendering an instantly recognizable object or scene from the Bible (a ten commandments tablet, a nativity scene, Eve holding an apple) into a black or brown woodcut, and then posing a bright blue, slightly digitized Twitter bird lookalike somewhere in the scene.

    For example: An old-looking woodcut of a ten commandments tablet (with TWIBLE chiseled heroically into it) with the Twitter bird, bright blue and slightly digitized, pecking out the last of the E.

    Or the ark with Noah releasing the Twitter bird into the air.

    Or Jesus and John the Baptist post-baptism as the Twitter bird descends.

    Or the four horsemen of the apocalypse riding in silhouette, the Twitter bird trying to keep up.

  • Amy Smith

    I really like #5, but I love pictures!

  • Ellen Painter Dollar

    I like #5 the best, with #2 a second choice. I really really don’t like #1, because it looks old-fashioned and will not translate well for all of the various mediums you mention. You need something crisp, bright, edgy… and #1 is not that.

    What I like about #2: That the “B” in Bible is more visible than in the others. It tells the viewer that this is a project clearly focused on the Bible. I don’t like the way the “B” is more obscured in #3.

    What I like about #5 (which is my favorite): The bird gives it a clear link to Twitter. I think the colors need to be more vivid and vibrant. The garden-y pastels are not edgy enough, and you need to communicate that this project has edge and humor. It’s not just a sweet re-telling of the Bible on Twitter, which is what those pastels communicate to me. And if there were some way to make the Bible connection clearer in this logo, somehow combining the ideas of #2 and #5, that would be golden for me. Could the Twitter bird be carrying the “B” from “Bible” away in its beak?

  • Kimberly

    The idea of me giving advice on something artistic is rather amusing, but I like #5 the most, maybe with fewer colors overall and the “IBLE” in a darker color. #1 doesn’t convey anything fun or quirky to me; when I looked at #2, #3 and #6 I had to think for a moment about whether I should pronounce it TW-B-ible or no; I liked #4 less because the “Ible” part up top seemed less important.

  • Rolf

    I like No. 5 the best because it most clearly shows the Twitter connection, which is necessary to understand the length of each of the entries (though I suppose folks could assume you arbitrarily like using 140 characters or less for aesthetic reasons). I like the inclusion of the bird, which helps reinforce the Twitter connection. I understand why it isn’t blue, to avoid copyright issues with Twitter, but making the shape/color more similar to the Twitter bird, as much as is legally possible, could help more folks make the Twitter connection. The only real downside to this entry is the lack of a B to show the pun on “Bible”–perhaps if you change the bird’s wings to be shaped like a B?

  • Wow. You all are coming up with some terrific ideas. I am so glad I asked . . . . It will be a challenge to choose a winner!

    Keep the suggestions coming. The designers will be reading all of these too.

  • I like 1 and 6. 1 is simple and straightforward, connecting with the Christian narrative of the classic bible, while 6 is more creative, showing how we’ve changed and twisted (in a good way. :P) the scriptures to explore our modern language. Could you create a hybrid of the two?

  • Wendy

    Great advice!

  • Wendy

    Great advice!

  • Wendy

    Good advice!

  • Susan Bantz

    I’m not getting the “tw” for Twitter when it stands alone, but maybe that’s because I personally don’t tweet. I like #1 for all the reasons previously stated, but also agree that it might be an immediate turn-off. I hate #6–it took me 3 tries to figure it out and I even knew what it was supposed to say! #s 2, 3, and 4 are too plain. I like the bird.

    So here’s my idea. I’m going to try to explain this visual using words, but I don’t know how successful I’ll be. How about the words “Twitter” and “Bible” stacked on top of each other with a space in between them, each in a different color. Then drop the “Tw” down into the space and bold it, leaving “itter” above unbolded. Similarly, slide “ible” up to follow the “Tw” and bold it, leaving the “B” below and unbolded. Thus, it is clear that you have taken “Twitter” and “Bible” and combined them for “Twible” and the pronunciation is clear. If you want illustration, put a bird at the beginning of “Twitter” and a little Bible at the end of that word, maybe in the space left over by moving the letters.

    I hope this makes sense. I could draw it if you were here!

  • Wendy Demandante

    I’m not sure exactly what Susan means, but I think she is on to something.

    That is, I think for those who haven’t been falling you, the meaning and origin of “Twible” are not self-evident.

    I’m thinking somehow having both “Twitter” and “Bible” in full on the cover but arranging the juxtaposition and the colors. Am guessing you would want “Tw” and “ible” to be the same catchy color, while “itter” and “B” would be in a color that would recede.

  • susan mulloy

    I like #4 best. It is the only one to have some life in it, and some color. The others look like stop signs to me.

  • Marion Sæternes

    I’d chose design no.3; drop the circle and part of the B. turn the W 90 degrees counterclockwise and it will look a lot like a birds beek. The tilted W will also work as sort of a logo. Possibly one could attach a couple of stylized wings to the W. The colors are great! They pop out and show some of the projects humor.

    For this same reason I would not use the no.1 design; it gets the title across and the connection to the bible, but it has lost the unique and humorous feel of the Twible.

    Good Luck! 🙂

  • I like the first one with the leather-grain look, but I’d love to have the font be an echo of Twitter’s font — lower-case Alba or something similar — with the gold bird Linda mentioned.

  • Adrianna Wright

    Definitely the first one! The old-school look nails it–I love the retro-future vibe. Also, significantly, it’s the most clear and readable one of the bunch.

  • Markie

    I’d vote a concept similar to 5, but with a blue bird bringing the slanted TW in its beak and the B falling out of the way (as if it has just been knocked down by the TW. Also, as others have noted, I’d go for brighter, bolder colors in letters. I like the #5 font.

  • Frank Young

    It seems to me that the real title of this book is “Twibble: Tweeting the Bible”. Given that you want a design that separates the TW from the IBLE and somehow adds the “eeting the B” in some way. Perhaps having the “eeting go off above the “IBLE” and the “B” be below that TW. You want three things to be obvious – TWIBLE, Tweeting, and Bible. There should be a way to use size and color to make these all obvious and still make TWIBLE so clear that it hits the viewer over the head.

  • Kevin

    I had the same thought as Libby did about using a Twitter-like font (didn’t know about Alba but yeah, that works) against a faux leather-grain background. Not sure the bird is necessary, though. Also, generally rethink the use of all capital letters. I can’t help connecting it to the connotation of SHOUTING that it’s picked up in online use. all lowercase, on the other hand, feels casual like a text msg should 🙂

  • Olde Skool

    Is there some way to incorporate the bird motif into #1? I think a design that calls up both the traditional Bible and the new media approach would serve your purposes well, and express the content of the book for folks who may not be familiar.

  • I’m drawn to the one with the bird, No. 5, because it reflects your Twibles’ humorous, lighthearted take on the Bible. However, in reading your Twible tweets, it took me a while to “get” that Twible was a play on Tweet + Bible.

    The gold on black cover makes the Bible connection clear, but that black leather feels very serious, The title is fun-loving, of course, and eventually the reader will get it — but maybe not soon enough to keep them from skipping on to the next book on the shelf.

    Here’s my suggestion — No. 6 with the W and B combined has possibilities. How about having the fun-loving bird in No. 5 flying into the No. 6 graphic with the cross bar that makes the W into a B. (Or vice versa. Maybe he’s flying away with the cross bar.)

    The typeface would have to be more fun and interesting, of course.

    Good luck. Looking forward to seeing all the Twibles collected up in one place.

    PS: People who enjoy a choosing-a-book-cover challenge might stop by my website and offer some suggestions for my book, “Wresting With God.” http://barbarafalconernewhall.com/2013/07/25/a-book-contract-for-wrestling-with-god/

  • Carolyn Martin

    I would use the blue word bubble with the sans-serif font in # 2 but choose a more sedate and traditional serif-ed “Holy Bible” font and color for the Bible lettering beneath/beside it. I think the #2 composition best portrays the concept of a Twitter translation of the Bible, and the proper pronunciation. You could play on the Flunking Sainthood cover by showing a subtitle (Chapter and Verse in 140 characters) on a handheld device, similar to the way the paper in the typewriter was used to illustrate trial and error. I liked #1 at first, but I think it is too dark and traditional to stand out in a crowd. I think using the more traditional serif-ed font as in #1, interrupted by the Twitter blue word bubble would be a good combination of the two strongest designs. Twitter’s guidelines preclude your use of their bird, which must always face right (#5 is facing the wrong way.) However, it seems you are allowed to display the Twitter trademark bird as part of an official @ or # identification, which might be allowed appear on the cover with the author’s name.

  • #1 is too serious although Bible-readers will recognize it immediately, it feels irreverent (I know that the project is lighthearted but I wouldn’t call it irreverent). #5 doesn’t suggest Twitter enough as some of the other commenters have pointed out. Font, maybe? I like #3 best because of the modern font, colors and it looks like it was professionally designed. #2 is also good, especially the use of a color close to Twitter’s. #6 is just confusing and so is #4. Thanks for putting these up and letting us all weigh in during this stage – we rarely get to see these decisions as transparently as this!

  • Linda Andrews

    I love #5 and I’d like to see the bird winking at us. That would “be gilding the lily” I believe! Could the bird be facing in the other direction, as intutively since the twitter-bird goes to the right it just seems “right”. Don’t change the multi-coloring of the bird, since I think that would invite the lawyers, double-quick. The change in direction would give a nod to the those who have not yet caught on the “twitter” tie-in however, and help them read the “book on it’s cover” more completely.

    I hope this helps and just maybe I’ll win the gift card!

  • Pingback: Why I Am a Mormon | Flunking Sainthood()

  • Just as a follow-up to Monday’s post: Thank you all so much for the remarkable design feedback on the Twible logo. I haven’t made a decision yet because I have an appointment with the designers early next week — but I will announce a contest winner soon!

  • Phyllis Barber

    Sorry I was out of town for the contest, but I happen to like #3 as it seems to tell what the intention of the book is in contemporary terms. #1 is terrific for those of us who read scriptures (or look at them on our shelves) often. It is very appealing, but may not carry the message as well to the public as #3. Just had to weigh in.

  • Pingback: And the Twible Logo Contest Winners Are . . . | Flunking Sainthood()