# Which Logo works?



## zendianah (Jun 19, 2007)

1. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




2. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





Or try again... ???


----------



## guitarmy (Jun 19, 2007)

My personal preference would be to keep the text in the same area (ie. shorten the vertical axis of the 'Zen' and put 'Photography' under it). This way the logo is contained with the black bar, and makes it more versatile for us on various mediums, colors etc. Of those two, I like the second better. The flower on the righthand side of the first one is somewhat unnecessary, what with the sun logo already there.

My 2 cents though. I dig the concept!


----------



## zendianah (Jun 19, 2007)

guitarmy said:


> My personal preference would be to keep the text in the same area (ie. shorten the vertical axis of the 'Zen' and put 'Photography' under it). This way the logo is contained with the black bar, and makes it more versatile for us on various mediums, colors etc. Of those two, I like the second better. The flower on the righthand side of the first one is somewhat unnecessary, what with the sun logo already there.
> 
> My 2 cents though. I dig the concept!


 

Are you saying,,, try making photography smaller to fit under Zen in the same black box?  I dig that Idea.... I dont like the flower either... to much..


----------



## tataencu (Jun 19, 2007)

i think the second one is better, but i also go with the idea of putting "photography" on the black box...i'd love to see how that would look


----------



## zendianah (Jun 19, 2007)

Does the sun on the E work?  And is this what you mean by photography in the black box?


----------



## NJMAN (Jun 19, 2007)

I like your concept zendianah! I think the flower is just too busy right on top of the "e". What do you think if you put the flower on the left, and make it large enough so that it spills off the black frame, and then put a drop shadow around it so that it stands out? I think that would make everything fit well, and your flower would sort of be the anchor for the whole design. 

NJ


----------



## marthemar (Jun 19, 2007)

I like the photography part in the black a lot better, but agree the flower does not look right over the e.


----------



## zendianah (Jun 19, 2007)

Ok.. Gotcha.. Thanks for all the advice.. I wasnt sure I like that either...   The flower on the E .. But I had to try


----------



## zendianah (Jun 19, 2007)

NJMAN, MARTHAMAR How about this one?


----------



## Eric Piercey (Jun 19, 2007)

I'd say use a photo. That design is pretty and all, but it doesn't promote your credibility as a photographer in any way. Also plain it down a little. You want people thinking you're all business, not some kid fresh out of art school trip -hopping through fields of daisies with their iPod blasting. Don't kick my ass I'm in Denver too.


----------



## guitarmy (Jun 19, 2007)

Eric Piercey said:


> I'd say use a photo. That design is pretty and all, but it doesn't promote your credibility as a photographer in any way. Also plain it down a little. You want people thinking you're all business, not some kid fresh out of art school trip -hopping through fields of daisies with their iPod blasting. Don't kick my ass I'm in Denver too.


 
Hahahahahaha. That was hilarious.

I was bored and did a quick mock-up to show you what I was trying to get at.






But as someone else mentioned, perhaps a photo or something like that might work better than a stamp-ish sun. Remember, that sun will be forever linked to your company.


----------



## NJMAN (Jun 19, 2007)

zendianah said:


> NJMAN, MARTHAMAR How about this one?


 
Personally, I love it! Whether it has a photo or not. Not everyone has a photo in their logo, and if its on a web page or website, they will see your work anyway. Go with designs that you like and portray who you are.  Nice job Zendianah!


----------



## killcrazy (Jun 19, 2007)

guitarmy said:


>



so far this one has been my favourite  something doesnt sit right with the Z though, maybe make it a little taller above the en and it may be better. 
also, i would move the swirly bit up a bit, and cut off lots of the black on the left. just my 2p


----------



## zendianah (Jun 19, 2007)

Eric Piercey said:


> I'd say use a photo. That design is pretty and all, but it doesn't promote your credibility as a photographer in any way. Also plain it down a little. You want people thinking you're all business, not some kid fresh out of art school trip -hopping through fields of daisies with their iPod blasting. Don't kick my ass I'm in Denver too.


 

Ok Thats funny.. and since your in denver I have no choice but to kick your ass..  

Thats funny because I have an Art degree,,, ha ha ha ,,, but Im not fresh outa of school.. yeaaa... I think I was on Photoshop 2 when I was in school...


----------



## zendianah (Jun 19, 2007)

NJMAN said:


> Personally, I love it! Whether it has a photo or not. Not everyone has a photo in their logo, and if its on a web page or website, they will see your work anyway. Go with designs that you like and portray who you are. Nice job Zendianah!


 

I like it to.... My biz card has photos on it and my HORRIBLE website which I am not going to ask for critiques.. I know its bad.. Im saving up for a good website..  

Thanks for the compliment NJMAN,,, I lived in Jersey for 10 years..  


Thanks everyone for working with the logo and helping out.. Not everyone likes my trippy logo.. Im thinking up more ideas and I will post later..


----------



## zendianah (Jun 19, 2007)

killcrazy said:


> so far this one has been my favourite  something doesnt sit right with the Z though, maybe make it a little taller above the en and it may be better.
> also, i would move the swirly bit up a bit, and cut off lots of the black on the left. just my 2p


 

hmm I kinda like that 2.. MAybe I'll use a diff font for the Z since it does look a little funny


----------



## guitarmy (Jun 20, 2007)

Yeah, the Z looks a little funny to me too. I think it's because I just extended the bottom horizontal portion of it, so now it's unbalanced. Play around with fonts and see what you like! Think of what message you're trying to get across and choose a font that displays that. 

For example, I associate elegance with handwriting/script, strength with heavy blocked sans serif fonts, etc.


----------



## Jim Gratiot (Jun 20, 2007)

> I'd say use a photo. That design is pretty and all, but it doesn't promote your credibility as a photographer in any way.


 
I strongly agree... a logo is not a place to be all cutesy... it's a place you should put your VERY BEST PHOTOGRAPH so hundreds/thousands of people will see it.  A cutesy design is not going to get people through your door... a great photograph will.


----------



## zendianah (Jun 20, 2007)

Jim Gratiot said:


> I strongly agree... a logo is not a place to be all cutesy... it's a place you should put your VERY BEST PHOTOGRAPH so hundreds/thousands of people will see it. A cutesy design is not going to get people through your door... a great photograph will.


 


I don't typically see pictures in a logo... My business card and website will showcase my photos. Is there something Im missing?  Is there any examples out there where a picture is on your logo?  I really want to know... I just found out that its better to name your business your name.. Ex : jane doe photography.... I wish I did my homework.. 

Jim do you have any examples?


----------



## Jim Gratiot (Jun 20, 2007)

> I don't typically see pictures in a logo...


Zen:

That's because the (often misguided) web designer mentality has taken over the world. When you're marketing your business, too many people try and be clever... but that often isn't the same as doing what sells. Most photographers don't use pictures in their logo... which simply goes against common sense, since they're photographers. 

Since your logo will appear everywhere, it is the perfect place to showcase your _photography_ talent, not your _graphic design_ talent.

Check out Joe Dombrowski's signature -- this is sort of what I'm talking about:

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/member.php?u=4619


----------



## zendianah (Jun 20, 2007)

Jim Gratiot said:


> Zen:
> 
> That's because the (often misguided) web designer mentality has taken over the world. When you're marketing your business, too many people try and be clever... but that often isn't the same as doing what sells. Most photographers don't use pictures in their logo... which simply goes against common sense, since they're photographers.
> 
> ...


 

Thanks Jim.. I see what you mean. I appreciate your comments.. I have learned so much from all of you. I cant put into words how I appreciate the comments... Bad, Good, indifferent... Doesnt matter. I appreciate it. With every bad critique I get... I get better...


----------



## guitarmy (Jun 20, 2007)

Jim Gratiot said:


> Zen:
> 
> That's because the (often misguided) web designer mentality has taken over the world. When you're marketing your business, too many people try and be clever... but that often isn't the same as doing what sells. Most photographers don't use pictures in their logo... which simply goes against common sense, since they're photographers.
> 
> ...


 
I might be arguing semantics, but I see that example as a banner, or a form or advertising - not as a 'logo'. Just me though.


----------



## Jim Gratiot (Jun 20, 2007)

> I might be arguing semantics, but I see that example as a banner, or a form or advertising - not as a 'logo'.


 
I suppose that's true, in some cases... but why not modify the banner into a logo?

My basic point here is... in Zen's case, if she replaces the artsy sun graphic with an artsy _photograph_, her logo will be stronger.


----------



## zendianah (Jun 20, 2007)

Jim Gratiot said:


> I suppose that's true, in some cases... but why not modify the banner into a logo?
> 
> My basic point here is... in Zen's case, if she replaces the artsy sun graphic with an artsy _photograph_, her logo will be stronger.


 

hmmmmm.. let me try that and repost tommorow... Let me know which one works... I have the perfect photo


----------



## zendianah (Jun 20, 2007)

Ok Jim... 

Heres another logo with a picture. What do you think?  Its late I hope someone gets this. I would hate to start a new thread. I appreciate the help.


----------



## zendianah (Jun 21, 2007)

bump


----------



## zendianah (Jun 21, 2007)

bump


----------



## zendianah (Jun 21, 2007)




----------



## zendianah (Jun 21, 2007)

I didnt mean to bump twice... Sorry


----------



## Seefutlung (Jun 21, 2007)

zendianah said:


> Ok Jim...
> 
> Heres another logo with a picture. What do you think? Its late I hope someone gets this. I would hate to start a new thread. I appreciate the help.


stick with the flower ... problem with photos is that they stereotype ... so here one would think all you shoot are kids.

I like the photography as an extension of the Z ... move the Zen to the left so its the first think people read and the flower to the right half (or so) in the box half (or so) out of the box.

Gary


----------



## adstudio3d (Jun 21, 2007)

Hey was just going through the thread...

Not to step on anyone's toes, but a logo is a visual representation of your company, not an advertisement of your product or skill...
It is used so that when someone sees it, they remember it.

Look at some of the most successful logos around like Nike or McDonald's.
They are very simple, but EVERYTIME you see just the arches or that little swoosh, you remember what it stands for. This is why companies do not use photographs because they are not as memorable as a "Logo". Your goal in creating a logo should be to make it easy for people to remember who you are through your logo. Use it on all of your photos, business cards, letter head, anything you create or send out, and on any advertisements along with your photos. This is how you will build "brand awareness".

Well... I think I wrote enough.
I was going to ask, I have a few minutes of free time would it be ok if I edited your logo a little bit, it would be much easier to just show you than describe what I think.


----------



## zendianah (Jun 21, 2007)

Seefutlung said:


> stick with the flower ... problem with photos is that they stereotype ... so here one would think all you shoot are kids.
> 
> I like the photography as an extension of the Z ... move the Zen to the left so its the first think people read and the flower to the right half (or so) in the box half (or so) out of the box.
> 
> Gary


 

I agree.. I dont only shoot kids. and This makes it look like I do.. Thanks for looking at the thread


----------



## adstudio3d (Jun 21, 2007)

Ok, since I got permission and have some free time here you go:








I think that the Black box was weighing down the logo. With a name like Zen Photography I think earth tones were more suitable since they refer to the overall "Zen" feeling. Let me know what you think, I did not want to change much but hopefully this will inspire you a little and point you in the right direction.


----------



## zendianah (Jun 21, 2007)

adstudio3d said:


> Ok, since I got permission and have some free time here you go:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 


WOW !!!  Thank you !!! I love the colors !!! Now Im inspired. !!  Im excited to work on this.. 

To me.. This is very balanced .. Thank you.


----------



## adstudio3d (Jun 21, 2007)

No problem. Glad I could help.
May I make a couple suggestions?

The font used for Photography is a little "grimey"
I think it would be more effective if you use a cleaner or more elegant font.

In the flower, the very small dots may be a little bit over the top. When the logo is shown large it will look good, but when you use the logo in small places, the little dots will not even be visible. To keep the logo consistent the little dots should be taken away. 

Just my opinion though.
Thanks for letting me take a stab at your logo btw...


----------



## Jim Gratiot (Jun 21, 2007)

> Not to step on anyone's toes, but a logo is a visual representation of your company, not an advertisement of your product or skill... It is used so that when someone sees it, they remember it.
> 
> Look at some of the most successful logos around like Nike or McDonald's.
> They are very simple, but EVERYTIME you see just the arches or that little swoosh, you remember what it stands for. This is why companies do not use photographs because they are not as memorable as a "Logo". Your goal in creating a logo should be to make it easy for people to remember who you are through your logo. Use it on all of your photos, business cards, letter head, anything you create or send out, and on any advertisements along with your photos. This is how you will build "brand awareness".


 
I am going to respectfully disagree here...

Brand awareness is fine when you have a 48 billion dollar advertising budget, stores on every street corner, and television ads running around the clock. 

But when you're a local photographer trying to sell your photography... then brand awareness for brand awareness' sake is a waste of time, energy, and money. 

This could be a complete discussion in itself -- and I'm sure you can find advocates on both side... but when you're a solotographer on a limited budget... you should be focusing on *selling*, not branding.



> stick with the flower ... problem with photos is that they stereotype


 
I definitely disagree with this statement. If you were a baby photographer, having a picture of a baby would make perfect sense. If you were a wedding photographer, having a picture of a blushing bride would make perfect sense. In marketing, this is called *targeting your audience*, not stereotyping. If you were a general photographer, you might have a point. But if you're a specialist, targeting your audience is the smartest thing you can do.

Zen... one interesting test would be to print up a small batch of business cards... one with the logo and one with the decapitated baby head photo(sorry, that was my first impression)... then do an informal survey of a couple dozen people around town. See which one gets a better response.

Let us know what you end up with.


----------



## Peanuts (Jun 21, 2007)

I would definitely say stay away from putting an image in your logo. My view of a logo is that you can stamp it anywhere for different purposes without having to change it. For instance, if you started watermarking your images with your logo, having a kids' face poking out isn't going to look very professional - or for instance at the top of a letter. 

adstudio3d's edit looks great and serves the purpose (or at least the purpose I see a logo playing) well


----------



## Jim Gratiot (Jun 21, 2007)

> Having a kids' face poking out isn't going to look very professional - or for instance at the top of a letter.


 
If done well... whey would that look any less professional than a dime-a-dozen logo?


----------



## adstudio3d (Jun 21, 2007)

Peanuts, Thanks for the kind words.

Jim, respectfully, I do understand why you would use an image as a logo being a photographer and you want people to see your work. But at the same time, if you do not specialize in one specific type of photography but tinker around with fashion, child, or product photography your logo will keep changing based on who you are trying to sell to, taking away what a logo is in the first place. Which is why you should have a true logo. I do agree that the best way to sell yourself as a photographer would be to show people your work, which is why your business cards or advertisements should include both an image (specific to the audience you are trying to reach) and your logo. This way you do not need 5 different business cards, 5 different letter heads, but instead have only one.

This is a discussion that can go on forever. Both points are valid to a degree, but should be discussed in a separate thread. In the end, Zen is the one who will make the decision and we should be here for support if need be.

Thank you, Elvis has left the building! hahaha


----------



## Seefutlung (Jun 21, 2007)

Jim Gratiot said:


> definitely[/U] disagree with this statement. If you were a baby photographer, having a picture of a baby would make perfect sense. If you were a wedding photographer, having a picture of a blushing bride would make perfect sense. In marketing, this is called *targeting your audience*, not stereotyping. If you were a general photographer, you might have a point. But if you're a specialist, targeting your audience is the smartest thing you can do...


 
Interesting how you would "definitely disagree" but then immediately re-state what I stated.

Maybe I missed it ... but I didn't see anywhere in this thread where Zen Photography is focusing on a particular market segment. I stated that a photo of a child is stereotyping or a reflection upon what products you are selling ... in this case the photo makes you a child photographer.  Doesn't matter what spin you put on it ... stereotyping or targeting ... if you are only a child photographer then it's a good thing ... if you are more than a child photographer then it's a bad thing.  Targeting is good ... misrepresentation is bad.

Gary


----------



## Jim Gratiot (Jun 21, 2007)

Sorry, Gary, my bad.

I wasn't disagreeing with the statement that photos stereotype (they obviously can)... I was only disagreeing with your conclustion that that was necessarily a bad thing.  

And yes, this thread has probably veered away from Zen's specific situation.  (Sorry, Zen)

Probably deserves its own thread someday...


----------



## Jim Gratiot (Jun 21, 2007)

> This way you do not need 5 different business cards, 5 different letter heads, but instead have only one.


 
Let's suppose that you were a "generalist" who shot weddings, baby portraits, and senior portraits.  All different target markets.

In this case I would strongly suggest that you _do _have different business cards.  For instance:

If you went to a bridal expo, you'd pass out the Wedding business cards.

If you went to a baby expo, you'd pass out the Baby Portraits business cards.

And if you were hanging around at the local mall, you'd pass out the Senior Portrait cards.

And so on.  This might not be as cheap or convenient, but the results would likely be worth the effort.


----------



## Peanuts (Jun 21, 2007)

Just in response to Jim, I have very quickly made a brush out of two of the logos in this thread (zendianah, if you want these taken down, I will do so immediately)

As you can see, the one with the little girl distracts from the main image, and is not able to be changed to white (for darker images), as the girl looks like a ghost. 

Just a personal preferance. 

Ah.. sorry, didn't downsize them!


----------



## killcrazy (Jun 22, 2007)

Firstly, id like to say that im loving this thread  a nice healthy debate with lots of valid comments, and lots of people clubbing together to offer advice  

now.. to my point  
What exactly is this logo going to be used FOR? as this should be the first question you ask yourself when you design it. 
My "company" doesnt have a logo per-say, but it does have graphical images that depict it. 
Take my sig for example. It has a paintballer, a Bassist, and a model. 
Cos i shoot sports, bands, and models... 
It also has my web address and a little bit of text, aswell as the name of my "company". 

If you go to my website, my sig (minus the text) is at the top of hte page. Its not a logo. but its an image. 

my business card: 





Doesnt have a logo on it, but has a picture (im planning more, with different styles) But it is manly information. simple and to the point. 

The name of my "company" is displayed with a funky font, but basically its all text. and an image. 

At the moment i dont need a logo, because the images im using do the job. 

If your using the image as a letterhead, or for a business card, will it suit all your card designs? or will it clash? 
Does it need text? The nike tick, as already discussed doesnt have text, because whereever its used (pre becoming famous) it will have had the company name near it (may have been in the corner of a letter, or in the background of a business card. 
As people got to know the company, that image then attached itself to the company name. Rather than having an image AND text. 

think im rambling. But i _think_ i may have also gotten some form of point accross. :S lol. 
Think about what you want to use this logo for, and what it will be used in conjunction with. This should help you deside whats going to be on it. 
If its constantly used next to the text of your company name, then it doesnt need text in the logo etc... 

Also, logos can be as abstract as you like. The idea is to draw people to your company by using a catchy design. doesnt neccesarily ave to have anything to do with photography.


----------



## zendianah (Jun 22, 2007)

killcrazy said:


> Firstly, id like to say that im loving this thread  a nice healthy debate with lots of valid comments, and lots of people clubbing together to offer advice
> 
> now.. to my point
> What exactly is this logo going to be used FOR? as this should be the first question you ask yourself when you design it.
> ...


 

Chris thank you for taking the time to write this.  I do, weddings, events, childrens photogrpahy... I don't specialize in 1 thing... Well.. not yet... So.. Maybe type would be the way to go.


----------



## AdamZx3 (Jun 22, 2007)

For what its worth I agree on not including a photo into your logo, these are generally meant to be added to your preferred medium (poster,brochure,card etc..) A logo should look good in black and white as well as it does in color, and I always give it the fax test...send it to a fax machine and see how it prints. The logo and typefaces should represent the company, whether they exude a playful, strong, fancy, or casual business image.

Take this with a grain of salt though i'm not a professional designer yet, still a student


----------



## adstudio3d (Jun 23, 2007)

I guess this debate is going to continue without us Jim. haha!

Zen, There are going to be people on both sides tell you what to do.
It is up to you to decide what kind of image you'd like to portray.

- Using an image as a logo will show skill in that specific form of photography, but will aslo take credibility away from your skill with other forms. Also, if you decide you want to use an image of a bride, a child, and a model all together it makes you look more like someone who does it all... The problem with that is, people usually think you are wonderful at one thing and only do that, or do everything just ok. It will aslo limit you to where you can use it. 

- Using a logo looks more "Professional". We are bombarded by corporate branding everywhere we go. Because of this most people think because you have a logo, you must be professional. The down side to using only a logo would be that you are not showing your work, which is what people ultimately want and need to see when looking for a photographer.

- THE ANSWER!!!
Use Images, and a professional logo together.
This will give people the ability to see your work and also look professional.
Because of the perception a logo gives the client, you can also charge more! Business cards, Advertisements, Brochures, and website are all good places to use images along with your logo. But, when you are billing someone for their wedding or having a model sign a release form you do not want to send them a document with someone elses picture on it! This is where you use only your logo. The people will easily reckognize what the document is for because of your logo. It will also stay in their mind, and if you send out any kind of advertising to past customers they will remember what a good job you did for them and spread word of mouth.

Ok, ok, I think I wrote enough. I think it's time to retire for the nigh... week. I think this solves all the problems.

Hope this is some help to people watching this thread. oh yea, and you to Zen!


----------



## Hfry (Jun 24, 2007)

more Options I would expand on option 2.  but I dunno what market your leaning towards so.. This is a ................ question Good Luck, Bro.


----------

