Jump to content

What do you think of this logo?


nyjet88

Recommended Posts

yeah the 2nd one def looks better...i think the only thing off is the professional look of everything except the hammer...maybe you could redesign the hammer add some more detail and make the lines smoother (hats the best way i can describe it)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

not totally sure how to put it into words, but the first thing I'd do it try to make the whole thing tighter, more concise, less empty space. that's the main issue with the first one, and why the second (of the three) is stronger... you've eliminated the lower half of the circle and made it more effective... why not eliminate the top half too? or shrink it down so it frames the text, whereas now it dwarfs it.

i agree, the hammer could use some further clarification... try introducing a light source and some shadows... not gradients, but darker areas...

you've got a start, now keep hammering away at it ...

(sorry, couldn't resist the pun) :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

not really....that font takes away from anything good in the design. type shouldn't be the last thing chosen with building a logo. it's the part that people read and know who you are. that font is just plain ugly. couple that with the poor use of italics, and you have some major type follies in that logo. should there be separation between "residential & commerical" and "fully insured"? i assume they are 2 separate points, but they read as one.

also, i find it strange that the hammer in the original is so remedial, while the rendering of the building in the second is so stylized. is the hammer just clip art? is the building clip art? is it appropriated from some other work? it just seems odd to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

not really....that font takes away from anything good in the design. type shouldn't be the last thing chosen with building a logo. it's the part that people read and know who you are. that font is just plain ugly. couple that with the poor use of italics, and you have some major type follies in that logo. should there be separation between "residential & commerical" and "fully insured"? i assume they are 2 separate points, but they read as one.

also, i find it strange that the hammer in the original is so remedial, while the rendering of the building in the second is so stylized. is the hammer just clip art? is the building clip art? is it appropriated from some other work? it just seems odd to me.

I agree about the font. Do you have any suggestions of what to use?

The hammer wasn't clip art. It was made in Illustrator as well as this building.

Do you reccomend any good fonts?

Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

not really....that font takes away from anything good in the design. type shouldn't be the last thing chosen with building a logo. it's the part that people read and know who you are. that font is just plain ugly. couple that with the poor use of italics, and you have some major type follies in that logo. should there be separation between "residential & commerical" and "fully insured"? i assume they are 2 separate points, but they read as one.

also, i find it strange that the hammer in the original is so remedial, while the rendering of the building in the second is so stylized. is the hammer just clip art? is the building clip art? is it appropriated from some other work? it just seems odd to me.

*crosses arms* I liked the font...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of them look very professional. They look as if all the elements were layered on top of some shape wherever they fit instead of really integrating the hammer, the name, and the tagline.

Yeah but think of what you see on the side of a majority of construction trucks.

To the the designer: I think this is perfect!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of them look very professional. They look as if all the elements were layered on top of some shape wherever they fit instead of really integrating the hammer, the name, and the tagline.

Yeah but think of what you see on the side of a majority of construction trucks.

To the the designer: I think this is perfect!

But................do you want to look like everyone else or do you want to stand out?

The correct answer is pretty obvious on that one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of them look very professional. They look as if all the elements were layered on top of some shape wherever they fit instead of really integrating the hammer, the name, and the tagline.

Yeah but think of what you see on the side of a majority of construction trucks.

To the the designer: I think this is perfect!

But................do you want to look like everyone else or do you want to stand out?

The correct answer is pretty obvious on that one.

Thanks. That one was a laugher, Nesi. Just because the majority of construction logos suck doesn't mean they all should. I think 'perfect' implies that the logo is good. I'm not sold on this logo being perfect, or good. Just because the majority of small/medium business logos suck shouldn't give artists a reason or give them extra motivation to turn out garbage that's as bad if not worse than what exists already. As an artist or designer, your job is to make the world better looking, easier on the eyes, no? Telling him him logo is perfect doesn't help him. It's counterproductive to say the least.

nyjet: The Trade Gothic Bold that you used in the original is a good starting point. It's one of the all-time great fonts of the modern era. You see all over the place. What about using a hammer silhouette as the 'T' in 'Atlantic' and just using a wordmark?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of them look very professional. They look as if all the elements were layered on top of some shape wherever they fit instead of really integrating the hammer, the name, and the tagline.

Yeah but think of what you see on the side of a majority of construction trucks.

To the the designer: I think this is perfect!

But................do you want to look like everyone else or do you want to stand out?

The correct answer is pretty obvious on that one.

Thanks. That one was a laugher, Nesi. Just because the majority of construction logos suck doesn't mean they all should. I think 'perfect' implies that the logo is good. I'm not sold on this logo being perfect, or good. Just because the majority of small/medium business logos suck shouldn't give artists a reason or give them extra motivation to turn out garbage that's as bad if not worse than what exists already. As an artist or designer, your job is to make the world better looking, easier on the eyes, no? Telling him him logo is perfect doesn't help him. It's counterproductive to say the least.

nyjet: The Trade Gothic Bold that you used in the original is a good starting point. It's one of the all-time great fonts of the modern era. You see all over the place. What about using a hammer silhouette as the 'T' in 'Atlantic' and just using a wordmark?

Tempest:

Thank you for the honesty. I am starting out in this business and do have a good eye for it. Even myself, I did not like the logos. I made it but did not like it. When I make something and like it, I know it's good. But for some reason I am having major problems with this one. I will definitely try the wordmark idea...didn't even think of that. Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

not really....that font takes away from anything good in the design. type shouldn't be the last thing chosen with building a logo. it's the part that people read and know who you are. that font is just plain ugly. couple that with the poor use of italics, and you have some major type follies in that logo. should there be separation between "residential & commerical" and "fully insured"? i assume they are 2 separate points, but they read as one.

also, i find it strange that the hammer in the original is so remedial, while the rendering of the building in the second is so stylized. is the hammer just clip art? is the building clip art? is it appropriated from some other work? it just seems odd to me.

*crosses arms* I liked the font...

We all know what you like.

What about using the rough framework of a house, the 2x4s and roof trussing, as an "A", and building from there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.