CC Logo

[DoublyDan]

So I just finished my Color Theory class and I chose as my final project to make something that I could use for my upstart business.

I used a complimentary color harmony (orange and blue).

I got an A for the final project but I'm wondering how my peers feel about it.

Also, I am wondering if I should use the background on a biz card/my site/other promotional material. I was thinking about a gradation to fade it out so that it doesn't compete with my images...(It wont be in the same area as my images, maybe just the header).

One with the BG and the other without. (I just previewed this post and the top image seems a little blurry, please disregard that as it is an Illustrator file and therefore can be scaled to any size...Maybe its the compression from the servers?)





Now I get to enjoy a photography class.

[staceylking]

Really like the background-less logo. It looks much more professional.

The background, while intriguing, is very busy. I can totally see it as a cool fade-in or fade-out accent, but not under your logo. Or perhaps as a page background, much like this site has blue surrounding the white main area.

[texkam]

Congrats on the A.
1. Your BG texture fights with your symbol. "photography" is too small.
2. Could you explain the design rationale?

[shutterfire]

I really like the second one! the first one is great but my eyes get lost in the pattern.

[DoublyDan]

Thanks for the feedback.

Stacey I believe you are correct about the white bg making it look professional.

I probably will not use the bg at all.

The design rationale...well...

The assignment was the main reason I went with the bg. We had to design something (anything we preferred) to incorporate a majority of techniques that we learned in class.
I chose to incorporate some transparency, vibrancy, a color harmony, depth, form and lines.

The transparency (forgetting about the bg) comes into play on the main text. You see how the forms (the layered objects, I will refer to them as layers for simplicity) intersect with the main text. The illusion that is created here is transparency, which also creates a sense of depth.
The vibrancy is most effective with complimentary colors. That is why I chose to use complimentary color harmony.
There are only two hues used here an orange and a blue. The blue is 225 degrees on the hue, saturation, brightness scale and the orange is 45 degrees. The other colors are derivatives from those original hues by adjusting the saturation and brightness (values) levels.
The layers also create a sense of depth by starting with the least saturation and brightness towards the bottom and going up from there. This makes the layers look like layers (hopefully).

The background is there mainly so my final project doesn't look empty, but all the basic techniques apply to that portion of the assignment as well.

If you were referring to why layers? All I can say is that I got into photography while studying to become a Mechanical Engineer. I was excelling in my Math and Physics but was so bored out of my mind because it is so structured and everyone is so anal. I took a few classes in art and media and loved what I could do in Photoshop. I started to become a Photoshop junkie but then needed more photos to work on. So I started shooting and fell in love with photography! The Layers name originated with Photoshop's workflow. Now it signifies the laundry list of things that have to be right in order to get decent photographs (exposure, ISO, Aperture, camera, lenses, focal length, lighting, poses and on and on and on). So photography for me is about living a layered life...not to mention business savy, marketing, family, school, etc, etc.

Sorry about that but I was just trying to fully answer the design rationale but didn't know which angle you were coming from.

I hope that I answered your question...i probably dug too deep on the answer...let's just consider that my introduction to the community.

[DoublyDan]

I also have these that I started but through recommendations from the instructor chose not to use.

1

2

3

4

[texkam]

Very good. A nice concept. Some nice things going on in the B/W version. You might want to continue to refine.

[staceylking]

Looking at it again, I like the design and color choice in your original post (again, the one w/o the bg), it's very clean, eye-catching and bold. I like the gradation of the 'layers' in that one.

When I first commented, what your logo conveyed to me was that your upstart business was more as a designer, where your primary tools would be photoshop and illustrator, perhaps some flash. Perhaps you'd be designing flash photo galleries, or photoshop actions, or vector photo borders. In that context, the logo is very appropriate. I love it.

However, in the context of PHOTOGRAPHER, gotta agree with Mark that 'Photography' is WAAAAY too small. If your upstart business is actual PHOTOGRAPHY, it looks like you're purposely emphasizing a photoshop tilt. So what that implies, IMO, is either you're a conceptual artist that just happens to use photographs as your canvas, or that photoshop is what makes you a good photographer. Looking at your website, I'm pretty sure neither of those is true. Definitely make 'Photography' a more prominent feature of the logo.

But even then I'm not totally feeling it, honestly. 'Layered' is a magazine familiar to most Illustrator/Photoshop junkies, and the abstract layer swooshies do nothing to dispel any unintended connection.

Perhaps, and this is a totally wild thought, you might consider going a different route on the logo and putting a different spin on Layered Life with the logo itself, perhaps... with a stylized onion as the graphic element. Or slice of pie. Both of those would imply a more lighthearted approach to your photography (which may or may not be what you want). Really anything not photoshop/illustrator-related that's a recognizable representation of something important to your 'Life' would give the 'Layered' part a different/deeper meaning.

[DoublyDan]

Stacey thanks so much! Very thought provoking.
This is the type of feedback I was hoping for.

Its funny that you mention flash, photoshop, Illustrator, Layers Magazine Etc. I do love to do that type of work but have gotten away from it the last few years. Really wasn't good at anything but photoshop.

So I will try the lighthearted approach...Onion huh? Don't know...I really need to think about it so I'm not wandering around Illustrator aimlessly. I do love Pie!

[texkam]

Hard work huh? But Daniel, you're on your way. Becoming a good Graphic Designer takes time. First, you have to have the "gift", then you need to be educated in the technical aspects of design. After years of problem solving you'll gain experience and wisdom. It's a process. Of course Photography is similar but doesn't always touch upon the same issues. This is a good example of the complex thought process that goes into developing a corporate image which a logo is just a part of. There is a lot more to it than most people realize. This is why I advise people, even photographers, if your image is important to you, and it should be, work with a good Graphic Designer.

[Emma]

Mark has a good point on this one: sometimes a photog on this board has a great starting point and as many of us are designers also we can help them get there. But so far I'm not "feeling" any of these, as Stacey states it. You're a photographer, and that should be the foremost idea we glean from your logo. Try again :) You may have to start over, but maybe not completely. I like #4 of post 6 best for simplicity sake. Consider using that small logo on top of a BIG photography word.

Here's my blatantly honest critique coming out:

the patterns are very busy and hail back to the days of ye olde time DIY web design or "Wow, I just found PS layer styles, dude, and they're, like, aaaawesome!" Very "plastic digital" looking. The blue and orange are complimentary and work well, however. I design logos b/w and add color later to keep from getting distracted.

Keep it extremely simple. Most logos are all words with maybe a small geometric design. In Google Image search, just type in LOGO to see some good examples, (and weed out what you think is bad). Here's a start
http://strassman.info/brandnames.jpg

Your simple layered design is good, just your typography needs work, and that is an art in itself.

Call a local print shop and ask them to recommend designers to you. If you pay a small fee, they can take what you started with and polish it up. There are many of us online like me who provide this service also, and it's not as expensive as you would think. Even if you go it alone, just a consult is a good idea.

Hope this helps you. It's an extremely important part of your business as rebranding/redesign later generally hurts your brand recognition.

[staceylking]

Originally Posted by DoublyDan

Stacey thanks so much! Very thought provoking.
This is the type of feedback I was hoping for.

I've been a photoshop junkie since an old college friend gave me a pirated copy of 3.0 in 1995. I later earned an associate's certification in design, and went on to work as a model home interior designer for several years, cover artist in the publishing industry for about ten years, web designer on the side all during that time. Over the years, Illustrator and Flash have nudged their way into my skill set, and I've taught classes on all three at UTA. I've designed countless logos for various organizations and companies, but that's honestly not my area of expertise--I'm just a graphic designer, not a logo designer.

I am, however, an advocate of doing it yourself if you have the tools and skills (as you might have gleaned from Pam's ladybug logo thread ). You obviously have the tools, and I'm guessing, based on the above, you also have the skills, too. Paying someone else to do it or to help does not guarantee you a thing. I've seen lots of 'professionally designed' logos that made me scratch my head and go... "Uhhhh....."

I think you can do it.

[toverman]

Logos aside, what is your business name meant to say to potential clients? I don't get it (although I am dense sometimes). If you come up with a creative name vs. using your own name (like I did), I think it should evoke something. You want to set the stage for your work, but not limit yourself if you branch out to other areas later. Does Layered Life do that for you? It might; that's for you to answer.

EDITED: I designed my own logo. Does that make me a bad person?

[DoublyDan]

Thanks Emma and Stacey (again).

T-man, I will give this some thought as I am starting over anyway.

It may take some time due to my busy life and school but I know that I can do it as well. Thanks Stacey.

Go Longhorns

[Emma]

I disagree that you must defer to an expert in this area. Perhaps if you were a plumber needing a logo, I would say hire a pro. I agree that this is something you can do yourself w/o a degree since you have a design background in photography. Most of the time the two disciplines mingle in so many areas. I was a terrible photographer when I was a designer, but after working with others' photos and seeing how a good photo could make a design pop as opposed to when I was using my own, my interest in photography eventually won over. I still work in the graphics industry, but on a more limited basis now.

It's like telling a photographer they have to hire a business manager. It might help, espcially if your poor business skills run your venture into the ground, but can you afford it? Are you capable of managing your own business through trial and error and research and application? Many of my photography friends have strong design backgrounds and are more than capable of designing their own marketing materials with research and trial and error.

I still would recommend a consultation, as you are certain to learn something from it. Not all photogs, and as Stacey said not even all designers, are talented at logo design. At the graphics firm where I work, we specialize in digital scrapbook graphics for consumers and kiosk and software graphics on the commercial side, our first log was conceptually great but executed poorly. We collaborated on another design that was close to approval but still stunk! How could a group of designers be so bad at logo design? Finally 2 of us with Illustrator and business backgrounds stuck our noses in, researched, went to the pros to learn. We did eventually design a logo that we love, but it was a different venture completely!