Alliedassault - View Single Post

Tripper · 01-26-2006, 04:48 PM

It's not a bad logo, in the first year on my uni course, we directly attacked the subject of logo design - It is probably the most important initial area to master if you're getting into commercial (for businesses etc) graphic design - A logo should be simple, memorable, attractive, and it should give an idea of what area or industry the businesses is located - So you learn to convey all those abilities and learn to merge them all rhythmically, when you're practising with logo design - and they will come in handy in alot of other areas of graphic design when dealing with businesses.

Forte, the first one you did made a crucial mistake of not being absolutely perfectly constructed. The D was imposed over the F with a big enough misalignment above it that it was easily noticeable with the naked eye. It looks really sloppy, and if you're going to blow it up (You probably may not be) it shows up way more clearly, and looks even worse....Just thought I'd point that out because you should take heaps of care with your work no matter what its for, it's just good practice.
The second one looks better, but still there are a few things that you need to figure out:
* Lose the bevels - The bevel effects may look good, but you have to consider recreation of the logo - i.e, if you decided to put that logo up against a certain background or print on a certain substrate - Would the light effects of the bevel recreate appropriately...? Would they match the light effects of the imposed background image? It's best to have your first logos just flat colour with no representations of light....

*One colour is boring - Especially when there isn't much to look at, you should have a second colour, I'd suggest a dark orange and maybe a darker grey (so long as it still shows up well with the watermarking thing)...Or keep the current grey tone and throw in a orange/yellow/red that fits...
You could put the second colour some where through the logo to highlight the individual letters of the logo and distinguish them more as two different objects sharing space.

...and a suggestion: Maybe the top horizontal stroke of that F should stay horizontal for as long as the one under it, to make it more distinguishable...How many typefaces/fonts have the second stroke on the F sticking out further than the top one? biggrin:
Start the curve of the D a bit further out, maybe make that curve steeper...

You've got some good ideas mang, keep dat shit up....

	(#12)
Tripper is Offline General of the Army Posts: 18,895 Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Auckland, New Zealand	01-26-2006, 04:48 PM It's not a bad logo, in the first year on my uni course, we directly attacked the subject of logo design - It is probably the most important initial area to master if you're getting into commercial (for businesses etc) graphic design - A logo should be simple, memorable, attractive, and it should give an idea of what area or industry the businesses is located - So you learn to convey all those abilities and learn to merge them all rhythmically, when you're practising with logo design - and they will come in handy in alot of other areas of graphic design when dealing with businesses. Forte, the first one you did made a crucial mistake of not being absolutely perfectly constructed. The D was imposed over the F with a big enough misalignment above it that it was easily noticeable with the naked eye. It looks really sloppy, and if you're going to blow it up (You probably may not be) it shows up way more clearly, and looks even worse....Just thought I'd point that out because you should take heaps of care with your work no matter what its for, it's just good practice. The second one looks better, but still there are a few things that you need to figure out: * Lose the bevels - The bevel effects may look good, but you have to consider recreation of the logo - i.e, if you decided to put that logo up against a certain background or print on a certain substrate - Would the light effects of the bevel recreate appropriately...? Would they match the light effects of the imposed background image? It's best to have your first logos just flat colour with no representations of light.... *One colour is boring - Especially when there isn't much to look at, you should have a second colour, I'd suggest a dark orange and maybe a darker grey (so long as it still shows up well with the watermarking thing)...Or keep the current grey tone and throw in a orange/yellow/red that fits... You could put the second colour some where through the logo to highlight the individual letters of the logo and distinguish them more as two different objects sharing space. ...and a suggestion: Maybe the top horizontal stroke of that F should stay horizontal for as long as the one under it, to make it more distinguishable...How many typefaces/fonts have the second stroke on the F sticking out further than the top one? biggrin: Start the curve of the D a bit further out, maybe make that curve steeper... You've got some good ideas mang, keep dat shit up....