Logo help

M

Maddy

Member
Hello!

maddy-albums-logos-picture27-d-hblue.jpg


I've done this for free yet the client isn't happy. They were worried people wouldn't know what business they were but I think it's obvious. And they said the "D" and "H" wouldn't print properly so would need to be solid colour but it's only a series of lines and not an effect so should be ok.

I thought it was a pretty good effort :icon_tongue_smilie: and worked for the company - what do you think the company do by looking at it?

Also after hours of effort they send me their image of what they think it should look like. Couldn't they have let me know at the start?:icon_Wall:
 
Hi Maddy

The D&H would print fine, depending on the background it was on so I don't know why they said that.

I think they are draftmen, maybe kitchen designers, basically a company that draw up plans??
Not completely sure though.

In terms of design I've seen alot worse, the main problem I have is that is looks quite old fashioned, 80's?
Also don't think the font works for 'Design Ltd' either

Sorry!

What do the company do?
 
They are architectural designers. It is to represent a blueprint and the font is what they use on blueprints.
 
Ok, I can see why you used those items within the design now, but I think they might be a red herring.

I know your probably gonna hate me, but I wouldn't use them and if they have asked you to use them they are wrong, just my opinion obviously.

To me architecture is about beautiful buildings, surface and design. What about focusing on buildings design, maybe incorporate it into a the typography perhaps. David Airey has just completed an identity for an Architectural firm Logo design process for Berthier Associates | David Airey » graphic designer, logo designer and the result great.

Sorry I don't mean to be negative!
 
They deal with plans really not buildings as such which is why I didn't focus on buildings. Thanks for the input.
 
dot design said:
Ok, I can see why you used those items within the design now, but I think they might be a red herring.

I know your probably gonna hate me, but I wouldn't use them and if they have asked you to use them they are wrong, just my opinion obviously.

To me architecture is about beautiful buildings, surface and design. What about focusing on buildings design, maybe incorporate it into a the typography perhaps. David Airey has just completed an identity for an Architectural firm Logo design process for Berthier Associates | David Airey » graphic designer, logo designer and the result great.

Sorry I don't mean to be negative!
Click to expand...
Really like that.



Maddy, for free I think that the client has a bit of cheek rejecting that logo. The phrase beggars can't be choosers springs to mind.

I quite like your design, although the 'Design Ltd' font doesn't quite do it for me. Maybe a creative tweak on a good solid font as the link above did would work. Something slightly bolder possibly.

I guess it goes back to that simple rule that simplicity is king. I understand your predicament and I doubt I could do better myself, but hopefully something I've written will be helpful to you.

Keep at it, Fred.
 
Why do people always insist that a logo should explain what they do? Utter rubbish! :icon_yawn:
 
Eagle said:
Why do people always insist that a logo should explain what they do? Utter rubbish! :icon_yawn:
Click to expand...

I'm with Mark on this. I've designed a lot of logos for clients that have nothing to do with representing their trade or industry. Some folk seem fixated on having something that's related and often end up with an inferior design because of it.
 
For a free logo and designed by somebody who is in the process of learning how to use Adobe Illustrator I actually think it is a good attempt, I agree the font for "Design Ltd" needs changing but once done I think it will look good.

Also totally agree with Mark & Col that it is not always neccessary for a logo to depict what you do, there are many many large companies whose logos don't depict anything to do with what they offer...explaining that to the client and getting them to agree is the difficult part!

Keep going Maddy :icon_smile:
 
Hi Maddy,

The logo's got potential. It just needs tweaking. I think there's too many lines but I think if you used 2 or 3 that would be better. It needs a more modern looking bolder typeface, maybe even use a font that the architectural business use on their plans, that would give some unity with the business and may look quite individual. I would go for sliver on dark blue. It would stand out more and make it more contemporary. I would also make the lines much thinner and possibly vary the thickness of each line, like you would see on an architectural plan. I like the way you have integrated the & sign.

Good luck!


Greg
 
My input

Hello. Well done for being brave enough to allow us all a chance to critique your logo.
The dielined look has some legs, but the trouble with the logo is that you're working with a company name that isn't particularly exciting or evocative. 'Dave & Harry Design Limited' or whatever it stands for doesn't explain what their company does either, so you have twice the job to do in making a couple of initials and the word 'limited' into something great.
It's often easier to design logos/marques for companies that have names like 'tangerine, mint, absolute...' etc. as these imply an element of design savvy and sexiness. It also implies confidence in not having to add a tagline to describe the company's business.
I'd suggest that the 'limited' word gets dropped, as it will appear on the bottom of letterheads anyway as part of the company details and bring the word design back up to the same scale as D+H.
I'd perhaps link the two initials with something architectural rather than the ampersand.
I'd steer clear of 'Tekton' or whatever the typeface is and just go for something solid and bold.

Paul
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top