Thread: Is this so bad??

Hey guys

I have spent a few hours working on a logo/namestyle concept for a local business (party-planning) and while I saw it as a massive improvement on her original logo, the business owner was not keen on my design, even though in my eyes, it meets her requirements. She wanted an air of sophistication while keeping it simple and was keen to have a cocktail glass as a part of the design. Also needed the name of the business to be prominent. I even made sure it worked in reverse colour scheme as she preferred a black background.

I know that clients are not obliged to automatically like everything we put to them but seeing how she felt it was fine to use the abomination that was designed for her before, I'm struggling to understand how she couldn't approve my design (I'm trying not to sound like I'm blowing my own trumpet but I am sure that my redesign is better than the original).

I know that I should be taking rejection a damn sight better than this - but being jobless for so long and struggling for choices in taking my design career further, this has been a major slight in my already-fragile confidence.

I know my design is not some ground-breaking concept but for the size of her business, I feel it would work well and fulfils everything that she needs. Is it really so bad??

(I have linked her original logo - the one with the glass in white was "designed" by a designer and she changed the colours in the alternative one. My redesigns are also attached in both white and black reverse).



Designed by a designer for Cocktail Queen



Colours changed by the business owner herself



My design



My design in reverse

Do you really need the glass and crown? The type mark works well on its own. The extra artwork is just clutter, and defeats the possibility of any real symmetry or composition.

The glass and crown was really there to satisfy the client's wants. I would be happy to do without it, I prefer making namestyles.

i like the 3rd one

If I'm honest, whilst the original logo is pretty ugly and yours are a vast improvement, I wouldn't say your designs answer the brief. They don't say sophistication to me. It's just way too busy. The typeface, the glass, the olives on stick, the crown, the eyes and eyelashes for the e's etc.. There's just too much going on.

I like the shape of the glass. It could be thinner in some places but it looks good. I'd stick with that on it's own and a nice sophisticated looking typeface with it. None of the extra bells and whistles you currently have.

You should also remind her, she came to you for a logo. Sure, it's great when clients have their own ideas but I wouldn't just do what she wants. Offer her some alternatives that you think work better.

Way too much going on and none of it hanging together particularly well (lose the tricksy stuff going on in the lettering for starters).

On the broader point, I don't think you're doing yourself any favours at all by expecting criteria like (and I know I'm paraphrasing here) 'better than the shit logo you had before' and 'good enough for a poxy little business like yours' to result in a happy client.

I appreciate the blunt comments Dave. In truth, this is not so much a client as just someone who mentioned on their Facebook page that they had a new logo but their friends didn't like it. So I simply offered to knock one up for them (sorry Arrivals, for not making that clear previously).

My frustration simply derives from the fact that it was dismissed out of hand. My comments on her logo and the company were borne out of a heavy knock to my confidence.

My design was possibly an amalgamation of attempting to fulfil everything that she wanted in the logo.

Originally Posted by Dave L

On the broader point, I don't think you're doing yourself any favours at all by expecting criteria like (and I know I'm paraphrasing here) 'better than the shit logo you had before' and 'good enough for a poxy little business like yours' to result in a happy client.

Also to clarify, the comment I made about "the size of her business" was in reference to my belief that if you are a smaller business, it is more beneficial to use clear indicators of what you do and to include the company name as part of the logo rather than a less-obvious abstract graphic. It was in no way an attempt to undermine the business size or its status.

Although I do accept that I was a tad belittling of her previous logo, that comment came from her willingness to use that previous logo for over a year and yet turn my logo away without much thought (hence the reason for this thread in the first place). Again, it did come across as being arrogant but the true intention was far from it - I'm hardly in a position to be arrogant about anything.

Here in lies the problem with working for free. As they're not paying for anything they can just say no to anything that they see. If they're paying for it they're more inclined to look at other ideas and work together towards a final solution.

Originally Posted by ARRIVALS

Here in lies the problem with working for free. As they're not paying for anything they can just say no to anything that they see. If they're paying for it they're more inclined to look at other ideas and work together towards a final solution.

That's true, I suppose I could take that little slice of wisdom from this.