Thanks for the info. I have not been reading the thread regularly and missed the concept. I am on the list back around 120, and I do intend to buy some.
I liked the small latern logo from our first design, but the one with the rays is also fine and would fit to names like lighthouse or polaris. But because DBSAR supports a simple L1 I am now interested what the exact name limitations are.
I just commented in the naming thread, but now I have to revise that… BLF L1 with DBSARs logo (the first one where the light rays don’t touch the writing) would be just fabulous. Short, not easily confused with the GT logo like the manyfacturer fears, L1 just means Lantern 1 so there may be others.
The interest list in the OP does not get updated super regularly, maybe once every couple weeks or so, and your post just missed the last cutoff. So I have to ask, are you interested in two more, or do the two you have noted above satisfy your wishes?
- As suggested by some other members, keeping the name-string short & simple will keep costs down maybe, and going with BLF L1 keeps the name as a model designation & on que with past BLF project names, ( Q8, A6, GT, etc.) also L1 keeps the lantern open for future updated models, ( L2, L3, etc.)
so here is the name with the lantern image logo and beam graphic that many have expressed they like. Even though this name was not added to Angerdan’s poll, it seems to combine the popular voted longer name abbreviation (BLF Lantern) with a model number (1) while keeping the name string simple, short, and aligned to past BLF light projects.
I like L1. As others have said, maybe the logo in between “BLF” and “L1” would look good. I know it’s only a first rendition, but less blocky, more modern font would be my other suggestion. I really like the overall idea, though. Good job