Do Photographers Really Need a Logo?

[d2creative]

I thought I'd bring this up just for discussion's sake.
I see a ton of logo posts in this forum. It seems like the natural thing to do... come up with a name and then design a logo. I saw something somewhere recently where the general point was that photographer's don't benefit from having a logo. The point was look at any famous photographer like Annie Leibovitz for instance. And if you look around your area at established successful photographers, most just have their name set in a typeface and call it a day.

I feel any business can benefit from a logo but I don't always think a logo is necessary to be successful. I'm a graphic designer and we are always drilling into our clients the importance of branding. Personally, I wouldn't dream of not having a logo for myself. I just couldn't do it. But I guess I'm biased in a way. And it's fun for me.

So what do you think?

And speaking of which, I just updated my logo to go along with the new long overdue website my brother is working on for me.
I wanted to give the logo a bit more of an updated, classier look while still keeping the fun aspect.

[J Eddington]

I like the new font. AND a Graphic designer without a logo would just be SOOO wrong!

[JohnT]

There's a very nice studio down the highway from me, and the owner/photographer does not have a logo per se. His name is set in Papyrus, and he gets so much business that he keeps a short list of referral photogs, of which I am one. I've yet to come up with a logo for myself; I just have my name set in a typeface that I think looks good. Maybe one day I'll get an "official" logo.

[carrbowl]

I would love to get a logo...unfortunatley it is just not on the financial priority list...bummer

[Steelsun]

Logos are an integral part of branding. Having a logo will not hurt (unless it is tacky or ugly), not having a logo can hurt.

Big names/famous people are their own brand and may not need a logo.

[d2creative]

Originally Posted by Steelsun

Big names/famous people are their own brand and may not need a logo.

But do you need a logo to become big and famous?

[CaptainTom]

I think that if you are just using your own name as your business name, a logo is not that important. Although, in a sense, when you decide what type face or color you are going to present you name with, you are creating a basic logo.

John Smith Photography is a logo !

[HotHolly]

Logos and branding go together. They also help people to remember you. It helps with product recognition and can create brand loyalty. I held a wedding workshop last summer. After words we went out to eat and talked about branding. 1 person in that group took everything we talked about and ran with it. Its about a year later and there is no way you could see her logo and not associate it with her bridal fair booth, website, blog, etc. She tied them all together tightly and created a cohesive brand using polka dots and the color turquoise. Totally HUGE difference than NOT having any of that. I saw her stuff before hand. Last year when we met her, she only had the logo. So it all started with the logo.

[cooltouch]

I really like the "O" in "Lemon" -- that's a good example of creative logo design.

As to the importance of a logo, I'm of mixed opinions. I can see the clear benefits of having a logo for branding purposes, but only if it is creatively done, and somehow ties in directly with the subject. In that respect, I think you've done a good job.

Best,

Michael

[z-monster]

Originally Posted by carrbowl

I would love to get a logo...unfortunatley it is just not on the financial priority list...bummer

Having an actual sign created or designing a logo?

HotHolly is right on. A logo is nothing more than an attention getter. Something to be remembered by in one form or another. I may not remember the full name of that lemon photo company but I do recall that their logo was a blue lemon.

[Steelsun]

A logo is a mnemonic.

It's alot easier for us (humans) to remember a single symbol (logo) than a string of symbols (letters and words).

A logo is not needed, but is very helpful.

After you see several names that all sound alike in a few hours (John Smith Photography, Photos by Jim Jones, Betty's Portraits, Samson Studios, etc) they all start to merge and be forgetful.
But you will remember a logo as being more distinct. That Blue Lemon above is a good example, it will stick in your mind better and next time you see it there will be a link back to your previous encounter. The same won't happen with "John Smith Photography" no matter what the font was. "Was that John Smith Photography or Jim Jones? I forget. Nevermind, here's Blue Lemon, I heard of them before."

[CaptainTom]

I agree.

How about remembering just one letter, and one number ?

Plus, if you look really closely you can see the Virgin Mary in the number three ..

[jonnydonut]

Originally Posted by CaptainTom

I think that if you are just using your own name as your business name, a logo is not that important. Although, in a sense, when you decide what type face or color you are going to present you name with, you are creating a basic logo.

John Smith Photography is a logo !

yes, and please remember to use comic sans, more business for me.
"logo" no, but some sort of identity mark is important, logotype or combination mark. Even if just using a typeface, you need to tweek it a tad.

[toverman]

Nobody needs a logo.

For photographers, though, working in a visual medium, it can't hurt to have a visual identifier to strengthen a brand. But just like the photos in a portfolio, it needs to be a good logo. "Good" being defined a million different ways.

[Steelsun]

Plus don't forget - a good logo also makes a good watermark.