About this site's lack of design: Yes, it's supposed to look this way — I'm using a sandbox theme for WordPress (see it on GitHub).

Dan Rubin's SuperfluousBanter

Design, random musings, and the Web. Since 1977


Some Thoughts on Logo Design

A few months ago, I had the plea­sure of answer­ing a few ques­tions for an arti­cle being writ­ten by my friend Elliot Jay Stocks for .net Mag­a­zine (Prac­ti­cal Web Design here in the States). Elliot quot­ed me quite nice­ly in the arti­cle, but I thought it would be inter­est­ing to pub­lish my com­plete answers here, along with his ques­tions, and he kind­ly gave his permission.

Note: The arti­cle itself is full of some sol­id infor­ma­tion and quotes some bright minds—well worth pick­ing up if you get the chance (as is the rest of the issue).

EJS: Please could you tell us a bit about your­self and your work with logos so far?

DR: I’ve always loved logos, and some of my ear­li­est exper­i­ments with design were logo­types (I tend to pre­fer type-dri­ven logos with min­i­mal imagery). I don’t get as many oppor­tu­ni­ties to design logos for clients as I’d like, but I do a fair amount for friends and per­son­al projects, some­times for imag­i­nary ideas just as an excuse to design a logo or logotype.

EJS: Which logo (that you’ve designed) are you most proud of and why?

DR: I’m torn between the cur­rent logo for Super­flu­ous­Ban­ter and a logo I did a few years ago for a real estate com­pa­ny that by broth­er was start­ing. I put most of the work I do into two cat­e­gories: design for myself, and design for others—so those are my cur­rent favorites from each category.

In the case of SuperfluousBanter’s cur­rent logo (there have been a few over the years), the “sb” mark on an orange field sport­ing a lighter spi­ral (with the counter of the “b” over the cen­ter of the spi­ral) has a nice bal­ance of sym­me­try and asym­me­try at the same time, with­out get­ting complicated.

With the logo for the real estate firm, the busi­ness name was that of the main part­ner in the com­pa­ny, so it required a visu­al mark in addi­tion to the logo­type in order to com­mu­ni­cate the type of busi­ness. Not that it was ground­break­ing in any way, but the mark does its job well, with­out being too complicated—the more basic the shapes, the eas­i­er it is to rec­og­nize an image at a glance (impor­tant for prop­er­ty sig­nage), and the bet­ter its repro­duc­tion at var­i­ous high- and low-res­o­lu­tions. The qual­i­ties of the mark that make it my favorite are sim­i­lar to those of the Super­flu­ous­Ban­ter mark: a com­bi­na­tion of sym­me­try and asym­me­try that results in bal­ance (it’s extreme­ly impor­tant to have all three), and in this case, the end result was almost exact­ly what I pic­tured in my head before even sketch­ing the first rough.

EJS: Can you name an all-time favourite (web-relat­ed) logo that some­one else has designed? Why do you like it so much?

DR: It’s hard to decide, but I’ll go with Dan Cederholm’s Cork’d logo. I like Dan’s style in gen­er­al, but the Cork’d logo is just ele­gant in its own lit­tle way (recur­ring theme: com­bi­na­tion of sym­me­try and asym­me­try result­ing in an over­all bal­ance). I wear the t‑shirt so much that I’ve almost worn it out ;)

EJS: What do you con­sid­er to be the cur­rent trends in web indus­try logo design? Are they good or bad?

DR: While there are still a lot of “web 2.0” design trends every­where (not just online, either), in my expe­ri­ence these design trends result almost as much from client demand as from design­ers impos­ing those trends on their work. As I said before, I’m a fan of type-dri­ven logos, with sim­ple, straight-for­ward visu­al marks to sup­port the type. Aside from the drop-shad­ows, bevels and oth­er stan­dard design clichés, I don’t think there are any awful trends per se (some peo­ple might say there’s been enough round­ed type and bright, hap­py col­ors, but if a client wants their brand to be ‘friend­ly’ etc., more often than not it’s the right direc­tion), but I could still do with­out bla­tant 3‑D or an over abun­dance of fil­ter effects. And let’s not get into the pros and cons of reflections…

EJS: Where do you get your inspi­ra­tion from and can you rec­om­mend any good places of inspi­ra­tion or resources (books, web­sites, design­ers, etc.)?

DR: I’m con­stant­ly search­ing for new sources of inspiration—my per­son­al pref­er­ence is to find as much as pos­si­ble offline rather than use the web. Not only does it give my eyes some need­ed respite from the glare of the screen, but I find my reac­tions are dif­fer­ent when read­ing a book, sift­ing through old album cov­ers, dig­ging through piles of magazines—the tac­tile expe­ri­ence engages more sens­es, and that helps get the cre­ative juices flow­ing for me. As for spe­cif­ic resources, I think it’s use­ful to have good exam­ples around (for com­par­i­son if noth­ing else), and the Logo Lounge series of books is a good place to start for more recent designs. A sim­i­lar resource online is Logo­Pond (though I wouldn’t per­son­al­ly sub­ject in-progress work to pub­lic exam­i­na­tion like some users of the site). If you can find books about logo design and brand­ing written/printed pri­or to the mid-1980’s, you’ll find some great exam­ples of how to design marks with­out going over­board (a sim­ple mark that repro­duces well in black after being faxed will like­ly trans­late quite nice­ly to the web).

EJS: How do you approach the logo-design­ing process? Is there a sys­tem (maybe in 6 steps) that you can recommend?

DR: While I don’t have a fixed set of steps in place for any of my work (I like to think it helps avoid pat­terns and forces me to think from a fresh per­spec­tive on every project), I do tend to go about the prob­lem-solv­ing process the same way each time:

  • Find out as much as you can about the client/product/organization/person/service that the logo will rep­re­sent. With­out that input, a logo is just some text, lines and color.
  • Research oth­er brands in the same market—I used to use this step as moti­va­tion to “design a bet­ter logo” or “beat the com­pe­ti­tion” but I feel that was mis­guid­ed. Now I use it pri­mar­i­ly to get a feel for what is already suc­cess­ful, and to know what to avoid visu­al­ly in order to cre­ate some­thing unique.
  • Sketch and Play—this step is the most ran­dom for me: some­times I’m sketch­ing with pen­cil in a Mole­sk­ine, oth­er times I’m mess­ing around in Pho­to­shop or Illus­tra­tor, and a few times the good ideas have come on the req­ui­site cock­tail nap­kin or in the mar­gins of a mag­a­zine. The exper­i­men­ta­tion is the fun part—it’s not always need­ed (if you see the final logo in your head the first time inspi­ra­tion hits, get to a com­put­er as quick­ly as pos­si­ble and just draw the thing!), but when you’re wait­ing for the light­ning to strike it’s a good way to try things out.
  • Design in black and white until you have your logo­type and/or mark, then add col­or and adjust as needed.
  • Once you have some­thing, print it out. A lot. I tend to do most dig­i­tal logo work in Illus­tra­tor so every­thing is vec­tor and eas­i­ly print­ed at var­i­ous sizes. Print vari­a­tions in type weight/style, as well as invert­ed ver­sions of your logo­type and mark. Print large ver­sions and paste them to the wall, or lay them out on the floor. Look at them for a few hours, or a day, or a few days—as much time as it takes you to real­ly let things sink in.
  • If it’s paid work, don’t deliv­er final art until receiv­ing final pay­ment. If it’s for a friend, give them a CD over dinner.

EJS: What tools fea­ture in your logo-mak­ing process (and how promi­nent­ly, like main­ly Illus­tra­tor and only a bit of Pho­to­shop?), and can you name any that peo­ple might not know about (i.e: any apps out­side of the Adobe family)?

DR: I guess I already answered that for the most part. Illus­tra­tor is my pri­ma­ry weapon, though any­thing that allows vec­tor illus­tra­tion should be fine (even if you’re design­ing a logo for a web site—there’s noth­ing worse than design­ing a kick-ass logo in Pho­to­shop at 72dpi and then real­iz­ing that you have to recre­ate it from scratch as vec­tor art because the client wants to make t‑shirts).

EJS: What prob­lems have you encoun­tered in design­ing logos and how do you avoid them?

DR: Aside from fig­ur­ing out the start­ing point (always a mov­ing tar­get from project to project), clients and their expectations/preferences are the biggest prob­lem. That’s a big­ger top­ic of dis­cus­sion, but I retain as much cre­ative con­trol as pos­si­ble, and let my clients know up front that I expect them to trust my opin­ions. If you’re firm with your client from the begin­ning, their expec­ta­tions will fall more close­ly in line with yours.

EJS: What gen­er­al tips can you offer for oth­er logo design­ers out there?

DR: Play. A lot. Look for sources of inspi­ra­tion that may not seem imme­di­ate­ly obvious—if you’re stuck for ideas on a logo for a children’s book, start dig­ging through some heavy met­al album cov­ers, or a stack of per­for­mance car mag­a­zines, or some swimwear cat­a­logs. The con­trast can do won­ders for your subconscious.

EJS: How would you define a good logo? What ele­ments does it need?

DR: Though I have my own, sub­jec­tive thoughts on this, I’m sure not many would dis­agree that a good logo is one that com­mu­ni­cates the intend­ed mes­sage effec­tive­ly. Usu­al­ly that mes­sage helps define the brand in an eas­i­ly digestible way. So a suc­cess­ful logo is one that can rep­re­sent the brand (whether it’s an indi­vid­ual, a small non-prof­it orga­ni­za­tion, or a mul­ti-nation­al corporation).

When it comes to the actu­al visu­al ele­ments, I pre­fer logos that do the above described job with­out being com­pli­cat­ed. Strik­ing the cor­rect bal­ance between typog­ra­phy, col­or, shapes and sym­me­try isn’t some­thing that can be quantified—it will be dif­fer­ent for every logo. I find that the logos that pique my inter­est the most are those with some lev­el of bal­anced asym­me­try: if you split a logo down the cen­ter of either axis, it should not result in a mir­ror image. Type is a straight­for­ward way to achieve this, since you can very eas­i­ly bal­ance the let­ter­forms with­out cre­at­ing a mir­ror image. In fact, you’d have to work very hard to achieve that effect, to the extent that if it was the intend­ed effect, it would like­ly be a more cre­ative end result (and as such, become a suc­cess­ful excep­tion to the mir­ror rule), for exam­ple the ambi­grams of John Lang­don.

EJS: What would you con­sid­er to be mis­takes in logo design, be them your own or made by others?

DR: A lev­el of detail that pre­cludes low-res­o­lu­tion or small-size repro­duc­tion, includ­ing col­or and type selec­tion in some cas­es. This is a poten­tial issue with the pre­pon­der­ance of pho­to­re­al­is­tic logos that are becom­ing increas­ing­ly pop­u­lar with soft­ware com­pa­nies, but I’m start­ing to see it creep into oth­er uses. I also feel like type­face selec­tion is often not giv­en as much care­ful con­sid­er­a­tion as it requires. Of course, logos can still be suc­cess­ful with­out being “per­fect” by any one person’s definition.

Many thanks again to Elliot and the edi­tors of .net Magazine.

This item was posted by Dan Rubin on Friday, June 20th, 2008.


You can follow comments on this item via the RSS 2.0 feed.

Feel free to leave a comment below or trackback from your own site.

10 comments on “Some Thoughts on Logo Design”

  1. Posted by Elliot Jay Stocks on Friday, June 20th, 2008.

    This is a great blog post, mate — you have some real­ly good answers. I still feel guilty about not being able to include every­thing you said in the arti­cle, so I’m glad to see your words pub­lished here in full. Cheers for the kudos, too. :)

  2. Posted by Dan Rubin on Friday, June 20th, 2008.

    @Elliot: I real­ly enjoy inter­views, because in the hands of a good inter­view­er (like you) it results in a dif­fer­ent set of thoughts than the inter­vie­wee might oth­er­wise have if left to their own devices. Thanks for allow­ing me the oppor­tu­ni­ty to be thoughtful :)

  3. Posted by Caz Mockett on Tuesday, June 24th, 2008.

    Real­ly inter­est­ing read, Dan. Thanks for shar­ing it with us.

    I’ve final­ly man­aged to blog about your great talk at @media too — bet­ter late than never ;-)

  4. Posted by John on Wednesday, June 25th, 2008.

    This is a very inter­est­ing read. I’ve been mess­ing around with logo cre­ation myself main­ly in Pho­to­shop. I found the logo-design­ing process ques­tion Elliott asked espe­cial­ly insight­ful. I can see that you go through a rig­or­ous devel­op­ment process to cre­ate logos for your clients. Thanks for post­ing it here and keep up the good work.

  5. Posted by Heiko Mauel on Wednesday, July 2nd, 2008.

    great Blog & very interesting.

  6. Posted by AdamK on Thursday, July 3rd, 2008.

    I may be blind, but I haven’t found the super­flu­ous­ban­ter logo :)

  7. Posted by Eugenio Hertz on Saturday, July 19th, 2008.

    To the answer about what defines a good logo… I think that this is kin­da tricky.

    You have NIKE with that THING, the oth­er THING from TDK that is a dia­mond, but not eas­i­ly under­stand­able at 1st sight, and that last THING from Xerox, which i per­son­al­ly dont know if that was a styl­ish ball, or what­ev­er… It just car­ries a big X and make its way on the cur­rent Xerox logo renewal.

    Some clients want tricke inge­nious graph­ic along with their brand, oth­ers wont care if you do a “let­ter play” (like super­flu­ous ban­ter), and in gen­er­al peo­ple dont care that much to look and analise these works, as long as i can see these times.

    So you see brands that real­ly comu­ni­cate what they mean, while oth­ers dont expose direct­ly the sub­ject, but show a har­mon­ic piece, a nice col­or that com­bines with the sub­ject, and oth­ers that dont do either, but still are approved and peo­ple get used to.

    I think that no mat­ter beau­ti­ful, genius brand you got, wont be worth of much if you dont work it along the con­cept involved on its creation.

    Some­times the logo itself dont comu­ni­cate at 1st sight, but a web­site, a tv com­er­cial, or the media lay­out you use gets it, and unites the con­cept involved with the mean­ing you wan­na pass. Then the peo­ple get — “oh that sign… i remem­ber that well”.


    And all these are inter­lac­ing each oth­er. Remem­ber LOST series with the ARG inter­net game, the choco­lates around the world, the act­ing on com­ic con…

    So i guess that a good logo has to give a nice and har­mon­ic impres­sion (direct­ly linked to cre­ativ­i­ty, need­less to say), and the mean­ing involved (still some­times the har­mon­ic sur­pass­es the meaning).

    If you have MEANING, but not much HARMONIC… problem

    If you have HARMONIC, but not much MEANING… kin­da prob­lem but may pass

    If you have BOTH… you got an ass kick­er perfection

    But dont pun­ish your­self if you notice that you cant be per­fect 7 days a week.
    — Trump and his fake hair that say it…

  8. Posted by Dan Rubin on Tuesday, July 22nd, 2008.

    @AdamK: That’s inten­tion­al :) I’m of the opin­ion that a logo is usu­al­ly not the ele­ment on a page (web or print) that deserves the high­est visu­al pri­or­i­ty. Design­ers often make fun of clients want­i­ng us to “make the logo big­ger!” and we do so with good rea­son: it’s less impor­tant than the content.

    If you real­ly can’t see it, it’s hid­ing right below the main nav at the top of the page, and you can see it again at the very bot­tom left in the foot­er (it’s sub­tle, to be sure :)

  9. Posted by Jason Rhodes on Thursday, July 31st, 2008.

    Dan (or any­one) — Is there any way to get .NET/Practical Web Design here in the states besides sub­scrib­ing to it online through the .NET site? The con­ver­sion rate is so bad it comes out to some­thing like $12 an issue. (But see­ing how I’ve nev­er even seen an issue, per­haps that’s just how much it’d cost?)

    Good logo thoughts. ‑Jason

  10. Posted by AdamK on Wednesday, August 13th, 2008.

    While that is true, ANY visu­al pri­or­i­ty would be nice ;D

    Nice inter­view anyway :)

Leave a comment …

You may use the following tags to format your comment:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>