_Bat_ Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 you can tell what the company is by the logo If you had never heard of yahoo or seen their logo, how could you possibly know what company that logo was for? It is only because you have seen yahoo several times that you recognise the logo.
apoth0r Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 Is this not a good time to make a logo which can be recognised, is the point he is trying to make I think
FN-GM Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 you can tell what the company is by the logo If you had never heard of yahoo or seen their logo, how could you possibly know what company that logo was for? It is only because you have seen yahoo several times that you recognise the logo. Yes exactly so that logo has been shortened in a fashion so it can fit in smaller places on websites, can make an icon put the smaller logo on places were the big one can't fit.
GrumbleDook Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 One of the problems with commercial branding (and this is what it is getting to rather than just a single logo) is that the above companies spend a serious amount of money or have a plethora of staff available to work on it. Whilst all of us would love to see some fantastically imaginative and heart-capturing symbol of the ideals behind EduGeek it takes time and money. Even with time and money you don't get it right ... ask the Post Office about rebranding or the British Olympic Committee about logos. I think the new one is not bad ... I still like things from the present logo and think they could be rolled in. I don't think we would ever end up with a single 'iconic' branding logo similar to Apple Computers, Ford Motors, the FA and so on.
Dos_Box Posted September 4, 2007 Author Posted September 4, 2007 you can tell what the company is by the logo If you had never heard of yahoo or seen their logo, how could you possibly know what company that logo was for? It is only because you have seen yahoo several times that you recognise the logo. Yes exactly so that logo has been shortened in a fashion so it can fit in smaller places on websites, can make an icon put the smaller logo on places were the big one can't fit. Yes, but if you have never heard of Yahoo, Peugeot or Apple, you would have no idea who they were simply be looking at their logo.
Guest Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 ... or have a plethora of staff available to work on it. Well with 3839 Members I am sure the Edugeek community could come up with something
witch Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 I agree with all of grumbledook's comments about the new logo Every Single One! (which made me feel a bit odd when I read his post, I can tell you!)
GrumbleDook Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 Brilliant ... that global telepathetic imprinting module has finally kicked in!! Don't worry, WITCH, now that you are one of the collective it becomes easier to understand my jokes (unfortunately you will realise that they are not funny, but you can't have everything!) @SYSMAN_MK I know what you mean ... but you can end up with a logo by committee ... the easiest way of doing it is people taking the idea of the existing logo, the idea of the new one and coming up with suggestions. Three get created by our ever friendly designer and get voted on by the masses (remembering that final approval is with the almighty himself ... though I have noticed that Chris doesn't really look like the second coming to me ... and not even a bit like Meatloaf ... but I keeping watching the Friday Night Project and thinking JLC is just DB with a fake beard! erm ... I'll get my coat!)
paulhyman Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 Sorry But i don't like it. looks like you have left your company's stationary on the table and the kids have been drawing on it. you should go for a logo but keep the name or web address smaller.
Domino Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 If i'm honest as well i find it messy. There needs to be a decision made: go for fun and funky or serious and professional. the mixed up styles look silly, as does having the "www." and everything drop-shadowed while the edugeek itself isn't.
contink Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 Been giving this some thought over tucker and came to the conclusion that the double 'e' and horns thing has been the bit that's screwing things up (for all versions of the logo to date). There's way too much emphasis on this forming some kind of smile 'naturally' with the tails of the e's and the result just feels wrong. I'd seriously rework the idea dropping the horns and/or the switched 'e' idea and see if something can be done with that. Failing that stylise the e's completely and close them up a little. Critique aside I really like the new .net part... The wings and halo just appeal to me
crc-ict Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 Sorry DB, but I don't like it. I think a good logo needs to be simple and TBH, that one looks like a dogs breakfast. Sorry, got to agree. I don't like it either. The existing one is much better IMHO As we should all know better than anyone else: If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
FN-GM Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 you can improve the existing logo i think that would be better personally.
SimpleSi Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 @DB - I think you've over cooked the egg with this one. I echo the KISS comments. But remember folks - this isn't a democracy - DB rules OK regards Simon PS - I coudn't do any better BTW
FN-GM Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 To be honest I like the draft version better.
crc-ict Posted September 5, 2007 Posted September 5, 2007 To be honest I like the draft version better. I really didn't like the draft, but I'll have to agree with FN, I think the new one is worse. It really isn't professional - I find it hard to believe that a 'design professional' gets away with producing output like that. I suppose my idea of good design must be a bit outdated? I re-iterate what I said last time around, though, about having a professional and respectable image if we want to be taken seriously. These logos seem to me to be giving a similar image to turning up to an important meeting wearing a 'death metal' T-Shirt and ripped jeans.
ajbritton Posted September 5, 2007 Posted September 5, 2007 How about some kind of 'mortar board' sitting on top of the G?
FN-GM Posted September 6, 2007 Posted September 6, 2007 on the poll 27 out of 30 people didnt like it
ajbritton Posted September 7, 2007 Posted September 7, 2007 I guess now we'll find out if the Mayor is a dictator or not!! (sorry, only joking!!)
contink Posted September 7, 2007 Posted September 7, 2007 on the poll 27 out of 30 people didnt like it But of the 3 who did, one runs the place *gets coat*
Dos_Box Posted September 7, 2007 Author Posted September 7, 2007 on the poll 27 out of 30 people didnt like it The remaining 3860 all pm'd me with their support
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now