On 19.06.2015 07:24, Aaron Wolf wrote: > So, I had my wife (who is not a designer nor a programmer, she's an > ecologist) give her first impressions of the newest logo draft: > > https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mray/Snowdrift-Design/master/mray%20website%20mockups%20/export15.png > > I did this by going through the process from current logo I made, first > logo by mray > (https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mray/Snowdrift-Design/master/mray%20website%20mockups%20/export.png) > and the second mray logo > (https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mray/Snowdrift-Design/master/mray%20website%20mockups%20/export8.png) > > I guess she thinks a bit like me. She felt that my logo (the one on the > live site) is functional but unremarkable and not really professional or > anything. She liked the first mray logo enough, didn't love it, just > thought it was "different" not sure about better. > > She had initial negative reaction to the big S with negative space where > it would be in the snow. She said "I get what it's going for, and that's > fine, but I don't really like it." > > The latest logo she surprised me in how much she disliked it. She > immediately was like "ugh, this is the wrong direction." She said it > looked like a logo Microsoft would make. She felt the hard lines were > incongrous with the rest of the page. The Mimi and Eunice stuff and the > rest of the illustration she likes a lot and emphasized that it's a > cartoon and is somewhat fun, and the hard logo seems out of place. > > She emphasized that Google deals with money and trust and doesn't have a > corporate bank style logo. She suggested the logo should fit in better > with the embrace of Mimi and Eunice and that style. > > She decided that she was okay with the negative space internal S and > would like to see just that be more prominant or use that interesting S > style as the logo. She likes that part but felt it was too subtle. She > wants it to be more organic and fit the smoother snowdrift feel and > character. > > Now, up until this point, I'd been feeling more sympathetic toward > accepting the new logo. I'm definitely someone who likes to listen to > others' views, and while I may have bold views or challenges I present, > I'm swayed by seeing others' perspectives. So, I dunno now… > > I certainly think we need to maintain the right balance between the > seriousness of the political mission we have and the ability to be > lighthearted, whimsical, fun, approachable, and human… > > I don't think we'll achieve perfection here. My ideal would be something > as distinct and iconic as the newest logo but a bit more organic and a > bit more meaningful in terms of the ideas of snow and/or cooperation. I > do *not* hate the new logo, but I do see my wife's view that it seems > incongruous with the rest of the design. >
Thanks for your Feedback, responding to the issues and opinions raised I want to note that I think they are relevant, regardless of design background. I share the notion of style differences between page an logo as a problem. But this is a downside of the page that needs to be rectified. The logo needs to represent the project/company and the page should fit to the logo. I am partially to blame here myself, because the material you get always mixes both and was created simultaneously. My own requirements for the logo is to be as perfect as possible: appropriate, dynamic, distinctive, memorable and unique. A major shortcoming in any of those is an instant no-go. No matter how good the other requirements are met. That's what disqualifies all but my latest logo version for me. Your feedback on the logo mainly addresses the appropriateness as problematic. And I agree. A. I see that a visual cue towards the idea of a snow drift lends itself to be incorporated. But I tried and the best thing I could come up with does not work good enough. My conclusion is that this remains a nice-to-have that is a major obstacle; it's searching for a interesting way to make the invisible visible which is demanding, but too ambitious for us when our thing is an idea. There is just too few to be gained by having a visual of an idea that connects to the name which is a metaphor. I think it is more important to have a really good logo without that instead. So by leaving that trail of thought behind I could focus on the other, more important attributes. Looking at the competition also makes me confident that we are not breaking a rule by accepting that compromise btw. B. You also address the appropriateness concerning sharp edges and the overall "corporate bank style", which misses the "lighthearted, whimsical, fun, approachable, and human" side of what Snowdrift.coop represents. I may put more effort into finding a way to make it more approachable from a non-corporate perspective, but can't promise too much unless it gets decided that we need to ditch my current suggestion. Robert
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Design mailing list [email protected] https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design
