On 06/21/2015 08:39 AM, mray wrote: > > > 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. >
Yes, but we've had effectively 100% positive feedback on the Mimi & Eunice design direction and the curvy snowy separations between page sections. I would be greatly disappointed if we hardened all of that to match the edgier new logo. I'd sooner accept some mismatch than have these other excellent design elements go away. > 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. Could you clarify where you find issues with the other options? My original logo on the site right now seems appropriate, dynamic enough, distinctive enough, memorable, and not sure how unique but adequate I think. I would think that the S with snow on top like the current logo could fit all these requirements better if just made into a more unique and stylized S instead of just from the Biolinum font. Ideally, the style would fit well with the Mimi and Eunice page design. I do agree that your latest logo is better in these regards than your other two logos. If anything, I could imagine a more hand-drawn looking version of the latest logo or something to make it just feel more organic and fit the style of the page more. On a side note, these types of thoughts are great for including in a blog post… People would like to read about some of this and the issues. > > 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 the issue is that the simple abstractness of connecting the symbol to the name is relevant in the sense that we want to bring to mind the URL for people to recognize as a site, and to bring to mind the name itself abstractly. I.e. not just the idea of snow but the specific name Snowdrift.coop — which is why I liked the logo incorporating the name; but I'm not insisting. It's just that people even recognizing it as an "S" if they haven't seen any other meaning will bring up "what's that S for?" instead of "what's that logo I don't recognize?" (the latter is hard for people to discuss referentially). Again, just some thoughts to consider, not certain about these being fundamental. > 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. We must accept some compromises and lack of meaning or inconsistency in logo vs page design are both acceptable if necessary. I think most of the competition in this space uses a letter that is unambiguously that letter without being hidden (except for Gratipay's heart logo, but I'm referring more to the mainstream popular crowdfunding sites or other web platforms. Virtually every one of the most successful sites have logos with very clear letters, like Kickstarter, Patreon, Wikipedia's W, Facebook, Amazon… IndieGoGo is a crappy name and they went with a logo that includes the entire name. I guess Twitter is an exception here, but mostly we do not see logos that are just abstract, they are the word or the letter. I think there's a concern about the latest proposed Snowdrift.coop logo that it doesn't make the S easy enough to see. It's something you don't get from a quick glance. > 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. > FWIW, I'm more okay with the mismatch than with the idea of making everything more hard and corporate looking. I also don't really mind the mismatch as much as my wife did. I'm sure people would get used to it either way. I haven't played with it, but I could imagine a hint of snow or something added to the latest logo proposal. I'm not sure there's actually any good enough way to do that. I would like potentially to see what you would do if you had made your own better version of the logo we have live on the site now. All this said *I* don't really dislike the newest logo, but clearly my wife and others aren't on board… -- Aaron Wolf Snowdrift.coop <https://snowdrift.coop> _______________________________________________ Design mailing list [email protected] https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design
