I think I like the second one more, although I'm wondering what it'd look like if you used the same fonts as on the first with the person from the second.

--- Mr. DOS

Have to agree with Mr. Dos the 2nd one any day......

What was the brief from the client? That's important, so you can make sure that you're answering the major aspects of their request.

The text on the first one is friendlier, more welcoming, whilst the second is more business-like. If you're going to use a script font, look for one a bit out of the ordinary (or write the word on paper yourself, then clean them up before use). At the moment, it looks a touch too generic.

Minor points to consider..

The man on the first one has better definition on the body (which I think is good), but there is a thin line to the top left of him (an extension of the arm?) which doesn't bring anything to the party, and which will be lost at smaller sizes.

On the first logo, the 'e' in fellowship looks optically further away from the F than it should be. I'd move it a little closer.

On both logos, a major feature is the large O above the body, but the letters 'i' in the word have square dots above them. I'd suggest removing those, and replacing them with black circles.

Some basic rules I follow with logos...

1. Has to work in greyscale
2. Has to work when faxed
3. Has to work at small sizes
4. You should be able to (theoretically) make a rubber stamp out of it

I'm sure there are more rules, but these four usually help concentrate the mind somewhat!

Just my 2c worth....

Regards,

Pete.