"Art of Social" logo

johnwdcooper

New Member
I am building a dating/coaching website called Art of Social. Where people can learn the art of romance, human connection, love etc. (for men and women but mainly men)

I have paid a designer to make the typography/logo.

What does everyone think of these 2 responses?
(I have had a go at my own response - I wrote "my design" next to it. It's low resolution but you gey the idea)

Thanks!
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2017-06-29 at 17.01.37.png
    Screen Shot 2017-06-29 at 17.01.37.png
    45 KB · Views: 33
  • Screen Shot 2017-06-29 at 17.01.22.png
    Screen Shot 2017-06-29 at 17.01.22.png
    55.3 KB · Views: 33
  • artofsocial.jpg
    artofsocial.jpg
    186.2 KB · Views: 33
The second one in particular is much too sober for the kind of service you're offering. Did you ask for a type-only logo or is that what the designer offered?

I think what you want here is to emphasize the word "social" more than "art". If you make something really artsy out of the word "art" (like the first logo does) it's really going to feel like you're selling paintings or other creative work. Perhaps tell the designer to make use of negative space to make the word "social" stand out a bit?
 
I didn't ask for type only.

It seems a bit basic for what I asked/paid for.

Should I be concerned? Is there anything I can say to guide him to do a premium job on this?

Ive paid him £300 for a logo. <removed>

Any help would be beneficial


The second one in particular is much too sober for the kind of service you're offering. Did you ask for a type-only logo or is that what the designer offered?

I think what you want here is to emphasize the word "social" more than "art". If you make something really artsy out of the word "art" (like the first logo does) it's really going to feel like you're selling paintings or other creative work. Perhaps tell the designer to make use of negative space to make the word "social" stand out a bit?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It really depends what your brief was to them. Did they provide any sketches/visuals first for you to choose from?

Let's ignore the second one, that took them five minutes tops and reminds me of the 70s book the Joy of Sex for some reason (showing my age!).

At least yours has a semblance of an idea and I think could work with 'Art of' in a different font and smaller than social (I think the emphasis should be on 'social'). It might look better with 'The' in front too.

The first one at least they've tried to make a 'joining together' mark, but it's not very friendly, it looks like some kind of chemical company.

A heart in there somewhere would be the obvious route to go, but maybe too obvious. Could the A be intertwined with the S in some way?
 
For me, it lacks a softness that I'd probably explore given that it's for a business/service that's all about human interaction. The font choice feels wrong (too industrial), and the shape above doesn't look like anything in particular. It's not really unique enough to use as a logomark, and those gradients need getting rid of. A robust logo shouldn't rely on colour or gradients, it should work as a solid shape because you won't always have the option of displaying it in full colour.

Perhaps the designer has a thought process behind it that needs explaining because I personally don't see a solid concept behind it. I don't want to be rude about this person, but from what you've shown us I don't think they're very experienced in brand design, or just design in general.

Should I be concerned? Is there anything I can say to guide him to do a premium job on this? Ive paid him £300 for a logo. <removed>. Any help would be beneficial

As a designer that charges just under £300 a day, I certainly wouldn't be happy to charge £300 for these. They lack a concept, finesse and general creativity and look like they took all of 10 minutes to knock up. It could be that the designer in question spent days working on some ideas and these are the final outcomes, and if that's the case then it's worrying. You could try and steer them in a direction with feedback from others, but some designers just won't give you a premium result because they simply lack the skill and knowledge to do so.

If you're not happy then you need to discuss it with the designer, and if you feel you're not getting what you paid for, then can either ask them to produce more concepts or take the financial hit and find another, better designer.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
@Paul Murray has pretty much said it all. Using the feedback, you can try to steer the designer to produce something that is not just premium but professional but I fear you will be wasting your time. £300 for logo design is a fair price but what this designer has produced is certainly not worth £300 (nowhere near). I will give the designer some credit and not assume he spent 10 minutes or so on your designs, as I'd like to think he went through the process that a professional would such as Research,
Brainstorm & Moodboard, Plan/Design Ideas, Quick Sketches (Layout, Composition etc.), Initial Designs, Further Development which would obviously take a lot longer than 10 mins, but what he has presented to you does not look like he did any of these things. I believe he/she lacks the experience, knowledge and skill-set to produce the quality of professional logo design.
 
Paul's pretty much spot on and I'll also say this you could have got a lot more for your money if you'd have used someone from here. I wouldn't say the 'designer' spent more than 30 mins on those two designs and I have no idea what they're for as a business just from looking at it.

You said you hadn't paid for the designs earlier, if that is the case I would seriously be talking to the 'designer' because to me the work he's offering at £300 is a joke.
 
Thanks guys. I responded with your advice and said that I wanted to see more initial concepts/sketches.

Hi John,

I've had a read through the posts and a look at the concepts.

I think the first, as a concept, is quite appealing and could definitely go somewhere. I really wouldn't be too concerned here as the impression I get is that your guy does have an eye for design, perhaps he's just a little inexperienced in terms of his process.

Personally, I would disagree with what some people are saying here about £300 being 'a joke' (which isn't a dig, Levi). Check out Paul Rand who designed the NEXT logo for Steve Jobs back in 1986 - for a mere $100,000. He only offered one concept. It's entirely subjective.

It would of been useful to see the brief that you provided him with. A good brief really is essential. The main thing is keeping your target audience in the crosshairs. It's not about what you want, or what he wants - it's what your audience want. Who exactly are you trying to attract? Middle aged men with a high income? Or young adults who have just graduated?

To say that any of these ideas are bad, or unworthy, without proper context, really just demonstrates a lack of finesse – in my humble opinion.

He seems to understand the art of simplicity, just keep communication light and maybe halt the process if you need to reach a higher degree of clarity. Basic is not necessarily bad - and a logo alone will not facilitate success.

Feel free to reach out if you need another perspective.

Joe
 
Hi John,

I've had a read through the posts and a look at the concepts.

I think the first, as a concept, is quite appealing and could definitely go somewhere. I really wouldn't be too concerned here as the impression I get is that your guy does have an eye for design, perhaps he's just a little inexperienced in terms of his process.

Personally, I would disagree with what some people are saying here about £300 being 'a joke' (which isn't a dig, Levi). Check out Paul Rand who designed the NEXT logo for Steve Jobs back in 1986 - for a mere $100,000. He only offered one concept. It's entirely subjective.

It would of been useful to see the brief that you provided him with. A good brief really is essential. The main thing is keeping your target audience in the crosshairs. It's not about what you want, or what he wants - it's what your audience want. Who exactly are you trying to attract? Middle aged men with a high income? Or young adults who have just graduated?

To say that any of these ideas are bad, or unworthy, without proper context, really just demonstrates a lack of finesse – in my humble opinion.

He seems to understand the art of simplicity, just keep communication light and maybe halt the process if you need to reach a higher degree of clarity. Basic is not necessarily bad - and a logo alone will not facilitate success.

Feel free to reach out if you need another perspective.

Joe
Thanks joe
That was a hearty and warm message!!

He actually sent through a bunch of new designs as explorations. And they showed a helluva lot of effort. It turns out what he sent me was just a temporary thing, to show me an idea. But it wasnt bypassing the exploration stage. It was good to go through this with everyone, because as a result i got more clarity from designer.

thanks everyone.
 
Personally, I would disagree with what some people are saying here about £300 being 'a joke' (which isn't a dig, Levi). Check out Paul Rand who designed the NEXT logo for Steve Jobs back in 1986 - for a mere $100,000. He only offered one concept. It's entirely subjective.
The difference with the NEXT logo is you can actually tell some 'time and effort' went into finding a solution, even if, like me, you don't actually like the design of it. The posts by the op don't show work that have that same impression for me and a few others on here although it does appear now that the OP's designer had more ideas (or made more after being contacted - devils advocate) which maybe should have been shown first or instead of the original designs.
 
Ok - the NeXt logo -

It wasn't just 100,000 for a logo.

It came with a 100 page document explaining the usage of the logo - how it can used, the correct angle, size for replication and lots more - it came with Brand Guidelines essentially.

Thought, exploration and execution was forefront in the design of the NeXt logo - http://www.printmag.com/featured/paul-rand-steve-jobs/


In saying that, Jobs asked Rand to supply various different logos and he'd pick from them - and Rand told him that he will get 1 logo and it will cost him $100,000 regardless whether he used it or not.
 
The difference with the NEXT logo is you can actually tell some 'time and effort' went into finding a solution, even if, like me, you don't actually like the design of it. The posts by the op don't show work that have that same impression for me and a few others on here although it does appear now that the OP's designer had more ideas (or made more after being contacted - devils advocate) which maybe should have been shown first or instead of the original designs.

For sure, Rand was switched on, and I'd agree with you on the look of it, though it was a different era. As he demonstrates, there's so much more to a logo than the aesthetic of it... The presentation and articulation of it are key, and a logo is by no means a solution for success. It's more like a symbol of the belief that's invested into what it represents. Hence my comments on the lack of context that was provided.

Suppose I just wanted to make sure that John didn't spiral into doubt about the whole thing, based on what had been said. I've been in the shoes of this designer before. It's a learning curve – a never-ending one. I brought up the $100k that Rand charged to make a point about the monetary value being subjective. You could charge £50 a day, I might charge £500, and still deliver the same level of quality.

I've got nothing but support for creatives, we should all support each other, it's challenging enough as it is climbing over each other to get to the next project. Felt a lot of empathy for the guy.
 
Back
Top