Printable View
I agree with the critics - a bit cartoonish for the site and doesn't look professional.
As a Teeshirt logo it works fine.
The site at the moment has that 'Corporate feel' to it. If the new logo is to match the look of the new site then I would have concerns about the professional look being compromised.
If the new site scheme is similar to this one then the new logo would look out of place.
As I've said. There is a more formal version on the way which many may feel is more suitable for the site, but the current one is just not suitable for many purposes. We could go down the route of just having a recognisable 'logo' ala the Registers' vulture with separate lettering, but I feel that would not work for us. Th next 12 months are going to be a period of massive expansion for us as we get more and more media exposure via our advertising contractors (IDG Communications). We will be seen and joined by many, many more people than ever before, and for that we will need a recognisable logo that stands out.
Why the devil horns? I've not been here from the start so maybe I missed something? I've never liked the name EduGeek either, but that's a personal thing.
On the subject of the design; I think a logo would be better. Preferably smaller. The current logo on the site takes up a third of my browser window.
The devilish horns are to reflect just how we feel after a futile attempt to make things better but being thwarted due to the environment we work in.
When you need a particular spare to make things work, or need to get a new piece of hardware in to facilitate a new project the school needs and are denied the funds or are told to make do, or when you need to fix a single fault but are demanded to treat the individual symptoms by staff.
The horns do not demonstrate evil intent, merely built up frustration. Besides, there is a bit of the BOFH in all of us ;)
Can't remember why we had horns on it now sure was reason at time.Quote:
Originally Posted by altecsole
As for name ohh can of worms has just been opened...
Well name was decided by db when he started site name back then it was just a community forum site. After the group moved into a sort different phase name edugeek has become a brand and so it means name is here to stay for while.
As if we changed the name we would lose brand etc just have to look at commercial world to find companies who name was changed and had to close down.
I am aware some people do not like the association with word geek and yes maybe if db knew in 2005 what he was going to start he may have chosen a different name. But that is life..
Russ
If you want an instantly recognisable logo, such as the vulture, then surely you need the stereotyped Geek, ala Wally, from where's wally?
It could be argued that calling us Geeks, doesn't help much in the professional stakes though.
Why not invite us all to come up with a new logo?
I quite like it. I've not tried printing the old one (its not the original, I just did something to replace the "logo going here" box) , but I should think it looks a bit washed out as I only used colours that worked quite well on the blue that was around the logo space!
I think it will just take a bit of getting used to as the temporary one has been around for a while now :P
[opinion] Hmm, gotta admit I'm not all that keen, and from a printmedia perspective I don't think it necessarily does what you want there either. Large black areas on anything other than a formal printing process (read: commercial) is going to be washed out so the impact could well get lost. Also talk of two different versions that seems a little disengenious if you want to establish a brand identity. EDIT: re-read OP, and now see what you mean.. :oops:
Would look excellent on a printed shirt though. Should be interesting to see what other creativity this unleashes..
Totally agree about the current version though as the shadow makes it nigh on impossible to create effectively, especially on silk screen..
[/opinion]
Excellent - love it...
Seems like a good time to bring this up while the discussion is out there - I do not think the tag line is correct, are you not education IT professionals rather than educational IT?
We ourselves are not educational, and whether the kit we support is educational is questionable.
Not that bothered by it - as you can tell from the fact I have never mentioned it before, but just thought I would open the debate as everything else seems to be being debated.
(sorry DB - probably not the discussion you had planned when you posted this last night!)
Indeed, with the benefit of hindsight 'itstakenovermylife.net' and 'answeringemailuntilmidnightisnotwhatisignedupfor. net' would have been more appropriate.Quote:
I am aware some people do not like the association with word geek and yes maybe if db knew in 2005 what he was going to start he may have chosen a different name. But that is life..
From dictionary.com. See point 1.Quote:
Originally Posted by limbo
ed·u·ca·tion·al /ˌɛdʒʊˈkeɪʃənl/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ej-oo-key-shuh-nl] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective
1. pertaining to education.
2. tending or intended to educate, instruct, or inform: an educational show on television.
I understand what you are saying, but not convinced it is the appropriate application in this case - to me educational suggets the entity being described is doing the educating.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dos_Box
Point 2 of the description makes this clearer - intended to educate. We do not educate, we provide the facility used by the educators and educatees in most cases.
"That was educational" is how you would normally use the word or "Educational resources" because the resources themsevles are providing education, a book is educational not a librarian.
But going to shut up about it now because, as I already said, does not bother me that much - just wanted to raise the question.
I love the new look logo. But then I am an evil, twisted SOB!!!!!!!!!!!!
Alright limbo discuss away...
I disagree that we do not educate as students learning is not just about what they learn from teacher is the whole learning process. But then I am from camp that we should act more like educational technologist than 'techies'
I am of the mind educational is not teaching in my mind names are defined as this...
Teaching - Standing in front of class aka lecturing to student
Learning - Student actively gaining knowledge be that from a book, from the teacher or from using the internet etc..
This two terms are obviously linked.
Then in my mind the term Educational is the process and environment that student learns in. I.e a pub could be classed as educational as if student see's another student drink too much and vows not to get that bad then student has been educated about dangers of drinking in excess.
But then I am aware I am person who is disliked by some teachers etc for being to 'educational minded' and sticking my nose in where they think i shouldn't. But then on equal measures disliked by some 'techies' for exact same reason being 'educational minded'
I still strongly believe that all staff have part to play in educating the students and so by either definition it works but that is my view..
Russell