Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: Logo's

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    50

    Logo's

    Just looking for some opinions on a logo and header image I just made. Someone made the point that on the header image, the kissing couple didn't look right, but I thought it looked quite good. Any criticism would be appreciated.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails header.jpg  

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    50
    And the logo....
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails logo.jpg  

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,262
    I agree - I can't really see if the person on the right is male or female and the kiss definitely looks like a "screen" kiss - not genuine!

    Apart from that I can't see what the significance of the image is to the site.

    Just my 2 cents!

  4. #4
    Yes, the image doesn't compliment the header, instead, it distracts the user and makes them want to know why the picture's there.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    50
    OK, I'll replace it with something a little more 'corporate'. Other than that though, what are your opinions on the images?

    Cheers.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,991
    I like the header, however, the logo is not the best.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    353
    why don't people understand gradients are bad for logos?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    50

    Unhappy

    What exactly is wrong with the logo and what is this problem with using gradients?

    Anyway, here's a revised version of the header, any better?
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails header_.jpg  

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    50
    Anyone got anything a little more specific to say with regards to the images? I can't see the problem with using gradients on logo's, and to be honest it's a pretty subtle gradient anyway. Perhaps if someone could explain.

    Thanks a lot

  10. #10
    I don't see anything wrong with using gradients but it's the matted layer that's worsening the effect. Perhaps removing the matted layer and have a drop shadow to the text would look more classy in my opinion.
    WHO AM I? CLICK HERE!

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    50
    What's this 'matted layer' you talk about? There already is a drop shadow in there, though it is very subtle.

  12. #12
    Make the drop shadow darker to stand out.
    WHO AM I? CLICK HERE!

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    50
    OK, here's a similar concept with a different colour and a different style of shadow. Is this any better/worse?
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails logo2.jpg  

  14. #14
    Yes, it looks nice now. BTW what type of Font did you use? if you don't mind me asking
    WHO AM I? CLICK HERE!

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    50
    It's a font called "moderna". As far as I'm aware it is an original and can only be found on the web site of it's creator, but I can try and find the link for you if you like.

    Out of interest, do you prefer the blue on that second logo? I'd still appreciate opinions from others on this.

    Ta.

  16. #16
    Thanks for the info, I have one TTF called "modern" it looks similar. The blue looks good on a white background. Maybe reviews from others will help you to decide.

    Good luck
    Last edited by cactus; 06-28-2002 at 04:07 PM.
    WHO AM I? CLICK HERE!

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    11,059
    Jonny:

    Your revised logo with the blue and the more defined drop shadow is definitely better. Just one thing, and this is probably just me, but it almost seems that that "V" also starts the second line of text. ie, "Vinternet..." Does anyone else see that or do I just need some sleep? Maybe it's because the word "internet" is not capitalized and is so close to the V.

    Regarding your header, definitely definitely better without the kissin' couple. Funny, though. You've received comments in this thread asking what relevance a kissing couple has to your site. While it looks better in your revised version, I would ask what relevance an old typewriter, a cityscape and a walking airport ramp have to your site. It just seems nowadays that there's alot of gratuitous use of images that really have no relationship with the subject matter of the site.

    Don't get me wrong. The header looks nice. But I do think that if you gave more thought to relevant imagery on your site, it would be more effective.

    Good luck.
    Vito
    DemoDemo.com - Flash tutorials since 2002
    DemoWolf.com - 5,300+ Flash tutorials for hosting companies, incl. Voice tutorials

  18. #18
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    50
    With regards to the city scape, it is a photo of office blocks which in my opinion is relevent to any corporation. Just my opinion. The new photo above is actually a photo of a laptop computer, a typewriter and a phone and did seem appropriate in its original form, perhaps it is a little more difficult to pick up details in its edited form.

    By the 'walking airport ramp' I guess you mean the train station. That was included because of the way the photo was taken. The angles and the lines given off it look quite impressive, at least I think so. I'll be honest, this was included for aesthetics rather than relevence. At the end of the day, if I can get accross the point of the site in other ways, does the relevence of the photo's in the header really matter that much?

    Looking at the logo, to me I see no confusion with the word 'internet' due to both the massive drop in font size (and use of a different font) and the fact that anyone looking at the site will be familiar with the word and should, in theory, realise that the V has nothing to do with it.

    Of course if Vito isn't the only one who sees these problems, I'll have to revise it a little. Anyone see similar things?

    Cheers.

  19. #19
    I think the revised logo and the revised header look very good now. Nice Work.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    353
    If you plan on using a logo for print purposes, gradients are never good. That's one of the lessons i learned from good ol' Tranz.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    50
    Yeah, the question I was asking is why are gradients so bad? You're probably right, but I'm just interested to know for future reference.

    Cheers.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    3
    Gradients are a pain if you plan to print the logo onto paper. Unless you use exact color mixes like Pantone it might even turn out completely different when you print it compared to the browser. So unless you: really know what you're doing with the colors, or never intend to print the logo, try to limit or avoid gradients altogether. =)

  23. #23
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    50
    Ah, I see what you are saying, thanks for explaining that. However, having just printed a letterhead onto paper using a basic laser printer, the results have come out pretty much as I intended. Does this still mean that those with inkjet printers for example might have problems? If so, it looks like I'll have to have a bit of a rethink.

    Cheers.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •