[thelist] opinions on logos

[Kelly Hallman]

I agree with the spirit of all the comments you've received so far.

My personal feeling is that just setting some type doesn't really
constitute a proper logo. The configuration of the letterforms may indeed
be original, but you can really increase the efficacy of a logo by doing
(at least) one thing that goes beyond font choice/layout/attributes.

As a case in point, our logo: http://gfx.wrack.org/white/uflogo.gif
Our designer took an existing font, converted it to paths, then angled the
serifs manually. The result is much more unique looking face. To seal the
deal: the addition of a vector element and a consistent color scheme.

I agree with the poster who suggested putting "the web guy" on a second
line. You may have some options with the circular shapes of the 'o' and
'e' in the word Joel (eyes, glasses, inifinity, or just run them together
a bit?). Try incorporating a shape--even something as simple as a
rectangle with reverse "Joel" and "the web guy" running underneath.

My gut feeling is that "the web guy" should be set in all caps, perhaps a
bit spaced out, and significantly smaller--possibly at a width that
matches the width of the Joel element above. Play with color, shape,
positve/negative space, the relationship of the elements to each other.

Also, serif faces don't really say 'tech' like sans-serif, it's not clear
exactly what mood you're intending to evoke. The examples you provided
have a very informal feel. That isn't inherently good or bad, as long as
everything you are doing is intentionally conceived.

Further, lowercase letters suggest similar informality. Perhaps you don't
want to lock yourself into either, so maybe you could compromise with
something like JOeL (with the right font/size you could still get the
double circle action). Playful, but with more attitude. A logo's ultimate
goal in life is to create an implied visual interest that is 'you'.

I'm confident that the web is full of great advice on creating effective
logos. Also, seek out some articles on the proper use of typography. Even
if people don't consciously notice the difference, it has a big impact
especially in the context of a logo. Pack all the punch you can.

A solid logo is probably one of the most valuable things you could
produce, so be sure you don't settle. Brainstorm, experiment, view from
various distances, sizes, mediums (on screen, print it, etc). Most
important: produce the final version in vector. Nothing is more painful
than a logo that only exists in a bitmap version. (You knew that.)

Best of luck, keep us posted!
--Kelly

P.S. - I question the stated goal of web/print convergence. ;)


On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, Joel D Canfield wrote:
> I'm going to fuss around a bit with the concepts of readibility and
> message. BTW, the fact that it says 'print' to some folks is fine with
> me - one of my goals is to blur the line between web and print. They
> *can* live in peace :)

-- 
Kelly Hallman
// Ultrafancy