I love the linocut quality of no.s 1 and 4, but they feel more book publishing than web design, at least to me.

I like 1 and 4 also. Nice work. I like the rounded corners of 2 a bit better than the square edges.

Sharon

no. 5 is nice

I agree with Chuck - they feel a bit stuffy. For a site like the one you describe, perhaps the mark could be a bit more friendly and accessible.

here’s another go at it. I ditched the rays emanating from the background as i think that still adds too much to the “book publisher” feel. The three stars added represent the three founders of the company. Any suggestions for different fonts to use are welcome.

these are nice, too. you have a good touch with minimal graphic illustration. a problem, though: since you’re working black figure/white ground, the stars — represented here in black — take on the “bullet holes in a road sign” look. perhaps if they had fewer arms? i don’t know.

does it have to say “the”?

I don’t necessarily think it has to. but that’s what’s in the URL. I agree I think trying to wedge it in on the top is a mistake. I did another version where I flipped the “the” on it’s side and placed in the same text line. I’ll post it in a few.

Here’s another revision. I flipped the “the” on it’s side and I also made the background grey and turned the stars white.

Bryan-
I think this is getting closer. And now the stars look like stars.

I liked the revision before the gray. Using gray cheapens the mark, as it does just about any mark.

The fact that the stars were reading as bullet holes had less to do with the foreground/background color and more to do with the shape of the stars. Personally, I would try just using three different size dots, which I think would bring some roundness back into the mark.

One other thing, why are they calling this “The Tower Hill?” Using “the” in the name is so dated, it hardly seeems appropriate for a web publshing outfit. “Tower Hill” not only sounds better, but it would look better, too. Why put a word into your name that does nothing to differentiate yourself whatsoever. The only time “the” makes sense in a business name is when you want your business to sound old-world.

As it is now, the type seems to small relative to the mark. Removing “the” would also allow you to make the type that much larger.

No grey. The stars like more like snowflakes then stars. I agree with Fisheye on trying other shapes and sizes. And if possible drop the ’the’ in the name.

It all feels a bit overly heavy to me. Oddly this makes it seem like a toy logo to me. I can’t explain why.

Why Tower Hill? Explain the assumptions or preferences you are working with. If you haven’t got any in mind think about what they are or your logo will never hit a target.

I would say my idea behind this is that wanted to convey both strength, reliability but also simplicity to reflect the nature of the kind of programs the company will be making. Essentially I wanted to try for something a little more iconic.

As I found out earlier tonight, Tower Hill is actually going to be more of an umbrella business whereas the web publishing site will be a different name entirely.

I removed “the” and changed the hill into a smooth surface and removed the stars and replaced them with open windows.

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).

I like the windows. Nice touch!

Sharon

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!

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.

“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)

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?

Fair counterpoints!

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.

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”?

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.

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.

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 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 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

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.