Typophile - Logo Design for web publishing outfit. - Comments

Thanks for everyone’s

SecretFun — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 22:58:53 -0700

Thanks for everyone’s responses. My friend says he prefers the square corners as well. Here are some other designs I’ve been kicking around. Sorry for the haphazard jumble, I was kind of in a rush.

I really like this,

rachelle — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 21:59:01 -0700

I really like this, especially the windows but i would make it square-
-you could try ff meta - Its a humanist sans-serif typeface by Erik spiekermann
I dont have a problem with the typeface that you are using though

I prefer the later iteration

Duckworth — Fri, 24 Aug 2007 05:45:19 -0700

I prefer the later iteration of your logo, simplified and less intricate - if it’s complex and gets used at a small size on the web, detail inevitably gets lost.

Eben’s nailed it with designing in a single colour (black) before you look at colour - you’ve got to design for the worst-case scenario. Like your logo used small, single-colour by a screenprinter, for example.

I hope I’m not stating the obvious, but if the word ’the’ (as you had it orignally) referred to the URL of the company, maybe try a version of the logo with the URL as the name (you don’t have to have the leading ’www.’). I’ve always thought this was a shrewd move because you’re communicating more than just the company name with the logo - you’re making them aware of the web address (and therefore much more). Especially as it’s a web design company.

I am not sure I would go as

Eben Sorkin — Thu, 23 Aug 2007 17:38:57 -0700

I am not sure I would go as far as ’as a favicon’. That’s a little too litteral. But the favicon should be an element of the planning. I agree with that!

I think a web company should

Christian Barca — Wed, 22 Aug 2007 15:06:19 -0700

I think a web company should have a logo that works on 16x16 pixels to use it as a favicon, I think they call it that way.

Love the simplicity of the

arthur — Wed, 22 Aug 2007 08:19:58 -0700

Love the simplicity of the mark. You instantly draw a correlation between the name and the mark. Also many thanks to Eben Sorkin for his remarks on finalizing in B&W before you move to color. I work in a corporate environment where a majority people don’t go through this process and raise an eye brow when you put pencil to paper before grabbing the mouse. I have began to fell that I’m a bit crazy for this belief. If you need examples of bad full color logo design just look at Command and Scotch-brite, both owned by 3M (who ironically has a very strong corporate logo). Neither of these logos can work in B&W and more alarmingly the Scotch-brite only exists in color and has to sit in the upper left hand corner of something because of the triangle shape. But enough venting.

If the point of the logo was the tower, or the hill than I’d agree that they need to be more memorable. But the point is to identify with people familiar with the landmark and it’s vicinity, but not give the impression that the company is in some way related to the tower. Your evoking the area that the tower is contained in in essence and the culture identified in and with the area (at least I hope this was considered).

Another consideration is this is for the web. That means that the mark also has to be understood at some level by people unfamiliar with Tower Hill. In this instance recognition with the concept is far more important than the landmark. Making this an effective solution “tower on a hill” easily equals Towerhill to viewers unfamiliar with the landmark.

All in all I like the progress so far I agree with the corners needing help. I’d go square if only to avoid the “rounded corners web look”. Also look at the roof line on the “white side” of the building the line appears to have a slight taper that either needs to be greater or not there.

My only main concern with the lack of association between the companies name and what they do, but I am well aware the this is probably outside of your control and trying to force the association through the logo would be a mistake.

Sorry to be log winded. You are approaching a memorable and effective solution.
Good work.

The rays are definitely a

henrypijames — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 17:43:01 -0700

The rays are definitely a no-go — they’ll give you all kinds of problems when the logo is scaled down.

I like the original version of the building — it’s distinguished. The new version looks too common and dull — the windows make it better, but not really good.

Same goes for the landscape — the original one has style, the new ones are too symmetric.

The box corners can be both rounded or not — I prefer square, because it’s a nice contrast to the rounded corner of the building (the original version). Either way, inner corner and outer corner should be consistent.

The text looks better to me in uppercase — don’t know why, as I’m usually a strong opponent of all-caps. I like the “the”, but I don’t like any version you’ve presented for it. Maybe try lowercase “the” with uppercase “TOWER HILL”?

Please, for us newspaper

ytknows — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:14:53 -0700

Please, for us newspaper employees... always start in black and design toward color!

I’m really liking the evolution of this logo. If you can just break it out of that blasted box.

Fair counterpoints!

aluminum — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 21:09:13 -0700

Fair counterpoints!

I’m leaning away from that

Eben Sorkin — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 14:28:50 -0700

I’m leaning away from that school of thought.

You have a heck of a good point. But I still think that logos that rely on color too much in order to work are usually not as strong. I can’t back that up with examples just now - I would be interested to see counter argument especially with examples. And it’s not just faxes. Faxes are in fact almost a non-issue I think. The real issues are

- sometimes a logo needs to be in a newspaper.
- it could also be cut into stone or steel.
- or it might be used in a two color only situation like the typecon corporate sponsor web page.
- or the typecon program guide - one color.

I agree the momentum is shifting but as a logo is a serious business decision, and an investment, I would still not advise a client to make black and white an afterthought - yet.

It’s true that not all companies have these venues as serious options. And so contraint in these cases might be besides the point. But on the other hand, you never know what situation a business will be in for sure. So over all I still say - why risk it?

“Unless your logo will

aluminum — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:54:46 -0700

“Unless your logo will never receive any significant black & white only use.”

I’m leaning away from that school of thought. Yea, it’s what we were all taught, but these days color is the norm much more than the exception with the web, video, and massive amounts of cheap color printing.

How many of us are still sending faxes all that often? ;o)

As umumbrella business the

Eben Sorkin — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 11:39:56 -0700

As umumbrella business the arc of the hill makes nice sense. I would loose your frame. I don’t think it’s doing anything for you except perhaps giving you false comfort. A tower on top of a hill on the other hand might work quite nicely. I would make the windows either smaller or bigger. Right now they fight with the tower for primacy.

Why this type choice?

Also, I disagree with darrel (Aluminum). I suggest you fully work it out in black & white & then thing color afterwards. Unless your logo will never receive any significant black & white only use.

I really like the windows

aluminum — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 11:22:01 -0700

I really like the windows too.

I think if you use the rounded box, you need a rounded typeface. Otherwise, I agree with chn...square up the corners a bit more and see how that works.

You may also want to play with the scale of the type vs. mark. If this is mainly going to be used online, the type will likely need to be larger in comparison.

Now start playing with color...this is just begging for some!

I like the windows. Nice

Sharon Van Lieu — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 09:27:35 -0700

I like the windows. Nice touch!

Sharon

I really like this new

chn — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 06:05:51 -0700

I really like this new version, it is an excellent solution to represent the “3 founders”. It looks like the 3 guys are working extra hours at night in their offices :)
I’m not so convinced about the round corners of the frame, maybe with a smaller radius it would look better (and you could make the text bigger).

Logo Design for web publishing outfit.

SecretFun — Sat, 11 Aug 2007 09:29:20 -0700

This is a quicky prototype logo or a friend who’s starting a web design company. The idea is the company will be like blogger where you upload your files and use templates to create your own website. The idea behind the logo is it’s supposed to be a somewhat famous landmark in the Southern San Francisco Bay Area. Any critique would be appreciated.