Open Web Entries

[Toon]

LogoSauce™ - open.web.id

LogoSauce™ - Open Web ID

[Toon]

and a more colourful one

LogoSauce™ - open.web.id

[Kimran]

I really like the 1st one, so simple but effective

[Toon]

Was asked to enter this one as well, any thoughts??

LogoSauce™ - graficas sestao

[LaurenMarie]

The first one reminds me of the wings one you did a while ago (for a caravan company was it? I can't remember). The orange "tail" also looks like FF; hehe, I see someone else saw that too. The green one looks like a basketball. What about something a little more square? Square says technology to me, probably because of circuit boards. I like your type and your colors, though. That lime green is not something you see in logos every day.

Can I be "mean"? You know I'm not trying to be mean, but I feel like I'm saying bad things about all of these logos you've presented. You are obviously a talented logo designer; your designs are constantly picked for those contests. But what I'm seeing is that many of the symbols you design are quite complex. That goes against my personal opinion about what makes a good logo: it has to be simple, memorable, scalable (especially down small) and describable. I know gradients and transparency are a trend right now, but I really don't think they work for logos. I do see that you include a single color logo below the really detailed one. I almost prefer those; though the colorful, detailed symbols are quite eye catching.

What do you think, Toon? What is your philosophy regarding logo design and what makes an outstanding logo?

[Toon]

As long as they can be used small and used in print and as a monotone there's nothing wrong with using grads etc. I test all my logos for print purposes as I work in a print studio as well as a design studio I know better than most what will work and what won't.

I hate designers with no print or pre-press knowledge I have to redraw those types of designs all day, I however am not one I won't offer a design unless I can guarantee it is printable on a variety of media.

[Toon]

An example of the BT logo which I run millions off every week, on old continuous presses from the early 80's.

It's very old fashion to think that logos need to be flat now, especially in the digital age, they ram this fact down the throat of 16-21 year old designers in every type of design education but they are taught by 40 year olds who have lost touch with the technological advances being made.

It was only 5 years ago that illustrator struggled with transparencies and now look at the sort of high res vectors you can output.

It's important not to get too caught up on what is standard as the people that set them usually don't except that standards change.

[LaurenMarie]

---

ADVERTS - NOT VISIBLE TO MEMBERS

---

As long as they can be used small and used in print and as a monotone there's nothing wrong with using grads etc.

Good point. And I like the idea of having a more visually interesting logo for larger purposes like on a letterhead.

I guess you can call me old fashioned! I like to design simple logos and I personally don't think with gradients and transparencies. Perhaps I need to learn? It's not that I don't like them, they just haven't worked their way into my design process. Hehehe, most of my professors were in their 30's, though I had a couple (my logo instructors, go figure!) who were 50+.

Standards change, yes, but those criteria I listed above for logos I think still stand. They are universal enough to allow for changes in design trends and technologies. Do you agree?

And that BT logo works with transparency and all at small sizes?