# In need of logo help



## Peanuts (Jan 10, 2008)

deleted


----------



## Ls3D (Jan 10, 2008)

Numero Uno, feels balanced VS some of the top heavy designs.

-Shea


----------



## Sideburns (Jan 10, 2008)

hard to say....1 or 3.


----------



## Holy Ghosted (Jan 10, 2008)

Peanuts I like number one, clean nice and you get the point without having to look for it.


----------



## mvpphoto (Jan 10, 2008)

My vote goes to #1. I don't like the "blocks" above your name, it overpowers your name. You want people to focus on your name, not the graphics. Good luck with the new company.


----------



## kundalini (Jan 10, 2008)

I chose #2 because of the semblance of balance.  However, I would probably omit the diamonds.

I consider these ordinary(ish) and I would expect something -out of the- ordinary from you.  Please don't consider my comments as a slam, but perhaps as a re-examination of who you are and what your intent is.


----------



## Peanuts (Jan 10, 2008)

Thanks for all of the feedback!

Kundalini: No offense taken at all!  Actually I appreciate hearing that   I am thinking for the first year I am going to keep the logo simple and reassess in a years time - by then I hope I will be more founded in my style and the type of photography I am in.  That way I might possibly hire a logo designer and won't drive them batty with my indecisiveness


----------



## kundalini (Jan 10, 2008)

Fair enough.  As Oprah would say "You go girl!"

I'm sorry, but that sounds waayyy too lame coming from me.

Whatever is good for you Brittany.  I have no doubt the logo you choose will be the one you need, regardless of the poll.


----------



## PaulBennett (Jan 11, 2008)

Play with dropping the Brittany in the corporate sense.  Think you may find the single 'ESTHER' to be more elegant and less of a mouthful, plus easier to remember.


----------



## AprilRamone (Jan 11, 2008)

I like #5 because the red makes it stand out more and is less boring.  
I agree with Paul about playing with the Brittany part of your name.  Maybe a nice signature type of font would contrast nicely with the block lettering you have going on.


----------



## ianm (Jan 11, 2008)

if it's still worth chipping in - no 3 caught my eye straight away


----------



## Alex_B (Jan 11, 2008)

voted 3 ... but the red is quite heavy, thqat is my problem with all the ones with lots of red area.

could have voted 4 also, if spacings in photography weren't that wide. I dislike 2, since it looks like tracks from a tank in the mud


----------



## Kipper (Jan 11, 2008)

I plumped for #4 as it is not too far removed from the watermark which  you mentioned was staying no matter which one was chosen.


----------



## boomersgot3 (Jan 11, 2008)

ilike #1 and agree also that no first name sounds better. But don't listen to me as I use my first name


----------



## Chris of Arabia (Jan 11, 2008)

Anne-Marie and I both went with #4. I feels more balanced as some of the others somehow. The ones with the big blocks of colour are much too heavy in my view.


----------



## ianm (Jan 11, 2008)

4 is neat - damn, i want to design stuff again  but the creative industry sh*tted on me, wasted a year trying to get back in, so now i'm going into IT.


----------



## elsaspet (Jan 11, 2008)

I like the first.  It's simple, classic, and easy to read.


----------



## Peanuts (Jan 11, 2008)

Thank you _sooooo_ much for the responses!  (Although I was hoping you guys could just make up my mind for me )  I am still flip flopping, but I have decided against 2 (for the reason Alex mentioned and the fact that is kind of 'tunnel visions' it towards the centre, as well people have asked if I shoot primarily film when they see it)

To those mentioned eliminating or scripting Brittany - let me say I have thought all of those things myself.  Out of all honesty, I despise my name, and considered using Esther Photography (already exists all over the place though), Esther Laona Photography (my name for 5 days... before the father's indecisiveness kicked in... apparently it is genetic), however, the problem is I can't imagine the number of times I would answer the phone, "Hello, I would like to speak to Esther regarding photography" "Thank you for calling, this is Brittany, I run Esther Laona Photography" "What?"


----------



## butterflygirl (Jan 11, 2008)

I have to agree with most - Number 1 - did you design these yourself - I have yet to come up with a "professional" logo - bah. 

Also I've been meaning to ask you Peanuts - what type of camera do you use? I love how your colors just pop - or is that a special pp tech?

Thanks!


----------



## bellacat (Jan 11, 2008)

I really like #1. I have had the hardest time with using my name as well so I am not much help in that department. I opted to make up something completely new for my biz but now find myself thinking about going back to the idea of using my name again. Its a really hard decision in my opinion. Sorry I am rambling...I vote for #1


----------



## Skyhawk (Jan 12, 2008)

I'll 'fess up--I'm the lone "dislike them all" vote.

Guess it's an occupational hazard from being a retired creative director who's overseen the design of hundreds of logos, and in the process, "trashed" tens of thousands.

So the following observations are not intended to upset you or infuriate you--just my honest feedback for a very important, critical piece of self-identification for your business.

"Photographer" conveys artistic--even commercial photographers, and your logo just doesn't convey "artistic." Probably several reasons why it doesn't, in my opinion.

1. Serif typefaces typically work best for conservative or "left brain" type businesses/individuals. Not always, but it's normally a safe route, even though you'll rarely meet the business that will ADMIT to being stodgy or conservative.

Sans serif typefaces often time offer you more freedom and expression when you manipulate them.

If you are love with the typeface, you might try some vertical scaling up to around 130% - 150% of the "B" and the "E." Or you might try scaling them, but using them as a dropcap.

2. There's no design in your logo that can lend itself well to extension such as  pens, shirts, caps, camera straps, lens caps or any other doo-dads that we call "premiums."

A strong, successful logo will have a lot of legs and can be used in a lot of applications. You might find yourself in a "trade" with a client who actually produces neat/unique premiums that you could hand out to clients and potential clients. Always best to have a design element within the logo (think of the Nike swoosh or the "apple"  in Apple Macintosh) that can easily be incorporated into other applications--and in color or B&W.

Here's just a basic example that I threw together on Illustrator to show how variances in typefaces combined with a "design" that can be the "logo" can help in giving your brand/service a personality and a uniqueness.

The "B" is just a simple paintbrush stroke, the sans-serif typeface used for "Brittany Esther" steps just far enough out of the expected to suggest creativity, while the widely tracked "photography" suggests "clean, precise, neat."





Not trying to do this for you or say "my idea is better," but instead just wanting to try and show how the elements can and should all work togther to build and commmunicate a personality that is reflective of your creative side, while not disparaging your business side.

I'm going to be in and out the next few weeks, but if you want help or feedback, I'll be happy to try and help you out best I can.

Regards,

Jeff


----------



## dipstick (Jan 12, 2008)

I actually like the one in your watermark example with your name on one line. I don't see that as one of the options, but I'll vote for it anyhow! :thumbup:


----------



## Puscas (Jan 12, 2008)

I'm not trained in this field, but I agree with Skyhawk. 
To me they all look very business-like, as if they were made for an accountant agency. Modern, but still an accountant agency. (that's my nice way of saying 'boring'). I've seen some of your work and it's far from boring. 

Skyhawk's idea is too 'florist on the corner' for me, but I like him offering a different angle on this. 

oh well, just my $0.02 

good luck!


pascal


----------



## Peanuts (Jan 12, 2008)

All feedback is good feedback  that is why I put the last option in there so I really do appreciate the extra insight.

I am definitely not 'in love' with any of these so let me tweek on it and go from there.  I might be PMing you skyhawk on more feedback given your expertise in this area.

Butterflygirl: I shoot with an XT, 20D, and on the odd occasion a Mark II although the 20D is my primary shooting camera, however for weddings my backup to the Mark II.  I have used a P45 on the odd occasion but... I wouldn't be putting that in my resume anytime soon   Regarding post processing I will PM ya


----------



## AprilRamone (Jan 13, 2008)

Not trying to jack your thread Brittany, but I just wanted to let anyone else who is needing to come up with a logo know about the gal who just got done designing mine.  her name is Amy and she was so fast and easy to work with and she is VERY reasonably priced too.  I got my logo, the pieces that make up my logo so I can use them in other marketing, and a watermark for $210  And, she gave me jpegs, PSD files, and a Vector based file so I can blow it up for a large banner eventually.  I went for two years with a logo that I made myself, but decided that I needed to buy one and I was very happy with her service.  Her website is candyapplestudios.com


----------



## Peanuts (Jan 13, 2008)

I would love it if you could send me some of her information  I still think I am going to battle through it myself, however if all I end up with is a blank sheet of paper I ahve somewhere to turn 

One other note, I went to your site (using safari here) and I noticed that your logo in the bottom is actually so large it goes outside of the window and covers up the typed name


----------



## AprilRamone (Jan 13, 2008)

Peanuts said:


> I would love it if you could send me some of her information  I still think I am going to battle through it myself, however if all I end up with is a blank sheet of paper I ahve somewhere to turn
> 
> One other note, I went to your site (using safari here) and I noticed that your logo in the bottom is actually so large it goes outside of the window and covers up the typed name


 
Lol...all this talk of logos I just remembered that I still hadn't switched my old one on the site (after the splash page) and when I uploaded the new one the first time, it was huge so i resized it and uploaded it again.  Now it looks good in my browser.  But, I'm wondering if you saw it before I put the smaller one on?  Will you let me know if it's still like that for you?
Thanks so much for letting me know in the first place.
Amy's website is www.candyapplestudios.com


----------



## Peanuts (Jan 13, 2008)

Ah yes, I recognize her work. Thanks

Strange, now it is smaller. Must have just been cached data. So yup, you are all good now!


----------



## AprilRamone (Jan 13, 2008)

Thank you for letting me know


----------



## keith204 (Jan 13, 2008)

Peanuts said:


> ...To those mentioned eliminating or scripting Brittany - let me say I have thought all of those things myself. Out of all honesty, I despise my name, and considered using Esther Photography (already exists all over the place though), Esther Laona Photography (my name for 5 days... before the father's indecisiveness kicked in... apparently it is genetic), however, the problem is I can't imagine the number of times I would answer the phone, "Hello, I would like to speak to Esther regarding photography" "Thank you for calling, this is Brittany, I run Esther Laona Photography" "What?"


 
Remember that the text you use for your logo will also go everywhere else on your website in HTML.  Why am I saying this?  Google.  

Often, when people will get to know you, they'll think "I forgot her website name"... and they'll google 'Brittany Esther Photography'.  That's what happened at the racetrack for me.  People can't remember w3bolivar worth a darn, so i've had plenty of hits from people googling "Keith Kelly Photography"  Because of this, I've restructured my web pages so google can best index them.  There are definitely other ways around this, but for simplicity sake, I think Brittany Esther is great.

Graphic - I too like the one in your watermark.  Maybe you could move the blocks down, just like they are in #1.  That'd be simple, and the graphics wouldn't seem overloading.


----------



## TamiyaGuy (Jan 18, 2008)

I think no. 1, closely folllowed by no. 5. You might want to think about using a slightly different font than Times New Roman, though. Not saying that it doesn't look good in TNR, but it could be improved a bit. And it would look a hell of a lot more unique. Good luck with your business!


----------



## Peanuts (Jan 18, 2008)

Thanks for the reply.

It actually isn't TNR (although similar) it is Trajan Pro ( I think that is the name?) which is slightly more elegant and what I have used this far for wedding albums


----------

