Comments on: Some Thoughts on Logo Design

By: AdamK

AdamK — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:41:26 +0000

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

Nice interview anyway :)

By: Jason Rhodes

Jason Rhodes — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:32:23 +0000

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

By: Dan Rubin

Dan Rubin — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 19:06:14 +0000

@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 :)

By: Eugenio Hertz

Eugenio Hertz — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 15:20:22 +0000

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”.

Today we have: TV - INTERNET - CELLPHONE - PRINTING - STREET OR LOCAL ACTING

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.
NOBODY CAN…
- Trump and his fake hair that say it…

By: AdamK

AdamK — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 22:00:57 +0000

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

By: Heiko Mauel

Heiko Mauel — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 09:11:20 +0000

Hi,
great Blog & very interesting.
thx

By: John

John — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 01:39:34 +0000

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.

By: Caz Mockett

Caz Mockett — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 17:35:28 +0000

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 ;-)

By: Dan Rubin

Dan Rubin — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 20:49:10 +0000

@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 :)

By: Elliot Jay Stocks

Elliot Jay Stocks — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 11:45:28 +0000

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. :)