Washington Baseball

[sekuloguy]

i no im a newb but i gotta say that i don't like anything, about and I would just start over, because this concept was doomed from the start.

[P.I.L.L.]

[Jigga]

At this point, I don't think it's clear that the white circle is supposed to be a baseball, nor that the red curved lines are supposed to be stitching.

I can easily tell the white circle and red letters are supposed to replicate. The problem is that it just doesn't look right. Teams don't usually put their whole logo on the cap and this just isn't very good logo to start with.

Mr. Joannou, I think you have beaten this particular concept to (near) death. I certainly will applaud your persistence, but IMHO, you need to just go back to the drawing board. You tried, it didn't work, so try something else. However, your next concept of Washington baseball should definitely that ball/dome logo!

[FiddySicks]

The only thing bugging me about this whole package is that I don't see it leading to anything.  I could understand when you were trying to make a design proposal for the Nationals, but now it just seems strange that so much effort is being put into some generic logo for a nameless, unaffiliated franchise.  It is looking a lot better than before, but I just don't see what kind of pay-off all this effort will make.

OK but how many concepts have you made and have expected to submit them to the owner of a professional team? If anything maybe he can use this as a fantasy concept for a team, so its not completely wasted

[Sec19Row53]

Your decision to add shades of grey at the bottom of the ball make it look less like a ball.

Your addition of an outline between the D and C, but not all the way around the ball, only serves to make the thing busier.

The chopped off line on the D should be angled in some way, shape or form, because the rest of your logo is angled.

[VitaminD]

You were closer to something usable about 4 or 5 iterations ago. At some point, you crossed the line between revising and overdoing it. It's hard to know when to say when, but I just have nothing left to add on this concept. It's really been done to death.

[LMU]

The only thing bugging me about this whole package is that I don't see it leading to anything.  I could understand when you were trying to make a design proposal for the Nationals, but now it just seems strange that so much effort is being put into some generic logo for a nameless, unaffiliated franchise.  It is looking a lot better than before, but I just don't see what kind of pay-off all this effort will make.

OK but how many concepts have you made and have expected to submit them to the owner of a professional team? If anything maybe he can use this as a fantasy concept for a team, so its not completely wasted

Yes, but I'm referring to the fact that he's been tinkering with this thing for months.

[P.I.L.L.]

You were closer to something usable about 4 or 5 iterations ago.  At some point, you crossed the line between revising and overdoing it. 

in the previous iterations, DC letters were too "funky" as one other poster noted... ie: not clearly defined, and the ball was lost... updated 9-2

[leggman01]

i liked the "funky" dc letters much better - i liked that the baseball was "implied", not beaten into the viewer's head - this latest version doesn't look as good to me as early versions - if i lived in dc, i wouldn't buy that hat, and it certainly will never fly as a proposal to the new owners...i think your previous version would have been one i might buy (still wouldn't have flown as an mlb logo, but much closer than what you have now)

[sekuloguy]

STOP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It doesn't work. Start over. or not at all.

[fiasco!]

christos, what you are trying to do with all these changes is please everybody, and there's no way you can possibly do that....ever.

are you changing the logo because you don't like it, or because you think a bunch of logo snobs (not a rip, as i am one too) think it needs to be changed. if it's because we keep saying we don't like it, then you are doing yourself a disservice. you can't possibly please a group of people that will bash designs made by the most sought after graphic artists in the world.

if you plan on selling these designs on the street on hats and shirts, you had it a few versions ago. the average fan doesn't have the eye for design that this group has. the average fan will buy a shirt with 'washington' written in times new roman, they don't really care.

that said, i really think you have to stop with this 'washington pro baseball' project, before you drive not only us insane with it, but yourself.

[P.I.L.L.]

christos, what you are trying to do with all these changes is please everybody, and there's no way you can possibly do that....ever.

are you changing the logo because you don't like it, or because you think a bunch of logo snobs (not a rip, as i am one too) think it needs to be changed.  if it's because we keep saying we don't like it, then you are doing yourself a disservice.  you can't possibly please a group of people that will bash designs made by the most sought after graphic artists in the world.

if you plan on selling these designs on the street on hats and shirts, you had it a few versions ago.  the average fan doesn't have the eye for design that this group has.  the average fan will buy a shirt with 'washington' written in times new roman, they don't really care.

that said, i really think you have to stop with this 'washington pro baseball' project, before you drive not only us insane with it, but yourself.

THANKS Joel... and others, for your honesty. I went back and fixed (what I didn't like) about the one people seemed to respond best to... minimilism... ofcourse it may still need some tweaking, but somehow I think (hope) it's "done", whatever that means ;~) if I can look at it for a week w/o messing w/ it... I leave it alone. sometimes that takes a while

[P.I.L.L.]

UPDATED 9-3

I realize most here are tired of this, especially when it "devolved"... the main reason was that the DC letters were TOO curved (around the ball) previously, and not quite legible as DC from a distance... but the "implied" ball is back on track, and I'm only undecided on the "C", and whether it should have the hanging part, or diminished as the other top side of the "D" ?

[P.I.L.L.]

UPDATED 09-07

[Sec19Row53]

I know I shouldn't reply, because then maybe this will just go away, but...

You now have two C's in your logo due to that outline you've got going on between the D and C.

[P.I.L.L.]

the white ( incomplete ) outline is mostly to show the ball... and also connect the D & C. anyway, that's how it was before

[Francis10]

the white ( incomplete ) outline is mostly to show the ball... and also connect the D & C.  anyway, that's how it was before

I'm not exactly sure what the incomplete outline is supposed to show... if you're trying to use it to convey a three-dimensional aspect to the ball, it doesn't work next to the flat letters. I'm also unsure as to why you chose the thickness you did for the left side... usually lopsided outlines on a sphere are also most commonly used to show lighting or perspective, but yours does neither.

I echo the comment about the second C... this logo, with letters and outline in white, looks more like CDC than anything else. Maybe the Center for Disease Control is looking for a logo designer...

The contrasting blue you have on the grey DC hat helps this, but the issues with the incomplete shadow still stand. I think you need to backtrack several steps and go back to the primary lines you're trying to use, and think about adding accents from there. You've muddied things far too much.

[Jigga]

This is tired, I know; but drop the ball from the caps. It's completely throwing off your design. You need to develop the different parts of the concept separately. The DC wordmark was better 3 or 4 iterations ago, but your insistence to have that damn baseball in there is causing your concept to digress. The idea in and of itself is a good one, but the execution is flawed. If you want to "convey" a baseball, just draw a damn baseball! Then once that's done, take the "DC" letters and slap 'em up on the cap. For the "Washington" wordmark, it just doesn't look right, I don't know why. Well, the letters don't match, they look like they're thrown together, but other than that, I don't know why they don't look right.

However, and I will say it everytime I comment on this concept, that ball/dome is sweet. But give your team a name already and work that into the ball/dome design. Nationals would be fine, Senators would be great, just pick a name and make a logo to fit the name. To me, that's why this concept will never be up to snuff and will never even be what YOU want it to be. It's aimless, unless you want the damn street vendors to sell generic Washington, DC shirts and hats with your logos on 'em.

Mr. Joannou, this design can't be all things to all logos, you have to committ to a direction, then follow it to the best of your creative ability.

[RedFalcon7]

like the blue red and grey... the white shouldnt be all black, that defeats the purpose... no w on the helmet, get rid of the shadow underneath it and rather than the entire wordmark on the sleeve you should just put the logo above it

[P.I.L.L.]

The contrasting blue you have on the grey DC hat helps this, but the issues with the incomplete shadow still stand.  I think you need to backtrack several steps and go back to the primary lines you're trying to use, and think about adding accents from there.  You've muddied things far too much.

thanks for the C.C... this puzzle's much closer to being solved.

As for not using the name "Nationals"... ( as stated previously), I've had some legal issues w/ MLB Properties, and I don't need the hassle. It will be presented to the new owners w/ Nationals name. and the white uni w/ only black is a tribute to the original Nationals team, which wore a simple black W, on a white cap.