The more you post, the deeper the hole you are digging for yourself in this thread. This elite designer's attitude you got going there is nerving.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
My First Job. Critiques/Ideas needed!
- Thread starter MacDaddy901
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The more you post, the deeper the hole you are digging for yourself in this thread. This elite designer's attitude you got going there is nerving.
i actually like the last one in your first post, but i do have to agree, how does the cymbal correspond with the company/product etc. but keep it up.
It is a good start. My main concern is it being too horizontal. If they want to put it on a vertical business card it is going to get real small. Maybe try to arrange it in a more square format...try to visualize it being used in letterhead or on a car door magnet. You could still use the horizontal version, you just need to make sure that both versions, if you choose to have 2, give off the same "feel" and they would still be recognizable.
As others have said, black and white first, then color can be added later.
Try some other fonts in the same format...keep fiddling with it, even when you think that its done.
Heres a great website from David Airey...
I use it all the time. Its a great resource for inspiration and education.
As others have said, black and white first, then color can be added later.
Try some other fonts in the same format...keep fiddling with it, even when you think that its done.
Heres a great website from David Airey...
I use it all the time. Its a great resource for inspiration and education.
I disagree. He had an example, he was asking for tips! Thats like someone coming in with an algorithm asking if anyone knows how it could be improved. MANY programmers would love to help.
My thoughts exactly. And he isn't the only person like this. Many of the designers here have that attitude from what I can tell. Same goes for some designers I have worked with. You can spot them from a mile away, so many have that elitist attitude and an equally bloated ego and give off that "you may be a programmer but thats nothing compared to my design skill" attitude. Its frusturating to say the least. Programmers welcome everyone looking to learn because the more programmers there are, the better software we will all have. Designers get this attitude like every 'new' designer to the scene is going to steal their business or something and this wall of hostility pops up. Stressful dealing with that mindset.
You're coming to people when your work is 50% finished. It's not like it's almost there, and you only need a few eyes to help with the finishing touches. What you're essentially doing is this: Through asking questions, you're going to edit your work, take more of the advice, and just continue until you have something that has had a professional touch on it.
You're going to get this reaction from any field where something needs creativity, and an understanding of fundamentals, to create something that works. This understanding of colours, shapes, and people's perception has come from over a century's worth of observation and research into this type of thing. I know this because my graphic designer friend told me what I was thinking when I saw a particular pattern, and he was pretty spot on.
And no, you can't learn creativity, but this only means that a creative person will become something even better than someone NOT creative, but has had the same learning experiences. Do you really think Michael Jordan always had it in him to become a great basketball player?
Perhaps he did, but not until he learned how to develop skills, how to train, and understood the different offensive and defensive strategies used by different coaches. It wasn't all natural talent. There's someone else out there who has put in just as much effort, and ended up being a REALLY tall accountant.
Sorry to be harsh, but designers study for years to become knowledgeable in their field.
I have studied digital media and design for 5 years and have had over 8 years experience in the industry. IMHO design isn't just learning the software, it's about colour, type, position, layout, etc...
Design is about skill and knowledge. I am not saying it can't be self taught but there needs to be some research.
You need to explore the idea and brand concept behind what you're trying to achieve.
Ask
1) What style best articulates the brand?
2) What would make the concept a unique and memorable one?
3) What colours best identify the business?
4) What font treatment gives the best message and style?
I have studied digital media and design for 5 years and have had over 8 years experience in the industry. IMHO design isn't just learning the software, it's about colour, type, position, layout, etc...
Design is about skill and knowledge. I am not saying it can't be self taught but there needs to be some research.
You need to explore the idea and brand concept behind what you're trying to achieve.
Ask
1) What style best articulates the brand?
2) What would make the concept a unique and memorable one?
3) What colours best identify the business?
4) What font treatment gives the best message and style?
I wasn't addressing this specific OP so much as your rosy view of programming forums, of which I have a much wider experience than design forums. Helpful people abound, but certain kinds of neophytes invariably end up not thinking so.
Honestly, and I'm possibly really about to not make some friends here, sometimes it seems like designers end up with a bit of a complex that might amplify that reaction. I don't actually mean that as a criticism at all, because I think it's a bit justified. Everybody seems to underestimate what goes into good design, and most people seem to think just anybody can sit down and do it, that they shouldn't have to pay money for it and so forth.
Occasionally some short fuses seem to result. If they're more sensitive to the idea of experience-free newbies trying to do pro work right out of the gate than programmers are, it's probably because a lot more of them pop up in this field, and unlike programming, the intricacy of the task doesn't act as its own sieve.
In this thread I've seen what looked like some good criticism and what looked like perhaps a hair-trigger snark response. FWIW, I've seen much worse amateur logo attempts than what the OP has posted, but what do I know?
I guess thats basically what it boils down to. However I think its common for everyone, no matter what the field, to underestimate the complexities of someones job. I think its natural for many people to assume their job is harder, or more complex than someone else's, but the truth behind that is not necessarily that cut and dry.
I understand all of the frustration coming from designers about this, but i also understand that you have to start somewhere. Anyone that tries to jump into the field is going to realize that its not easy to be a good designer and that you will need some kind of education. They will try and they will probably fail more than once, thus separating the "men from the boys". Those who really want to pursue will take the necessary steps.
Don't just tell an amateur how to do it, but give them some kind of direction on how to get to where they want to be. I dont think that its a bad thing when someone wants to try it, but say Uncle Leroy comes to your house to fix your water heater...well, several cold showers later, you are going to call a professional plumber.
There are different levels of design, some people aren't looking for award winning work, some just want a newspaper ad for a few thousand people to see. Some designers never get past this point, some do. We all started with some kind of dream to do what it is we do.
Don't just tell an amateur how to do it, but give them some kind of direction on how to get to where they want to be. I dont think that its a bad thing when someone wants to try it, but say Uncle Leroy comes to your house to fix your water heater...well, several cold showers later, you are going to call a professional plumber.
There are different levels of design, some people aren't looking for award winning work, some just want a newspaper ad for a few thousand people to see. Some designers never get past this point, some do. We all started with some kind of dream to do what it is we do.
Nice try, but people aren't listening. They can't handle the truth because they think it's coming from elitist designers. I have argued this point but have gotten nowhere but attacked for my point of view. Ha, and they have the nerve to call me elitist!
Nice try, but people aren't listening. They can't handle the truth because they think it's coming from elitist designers. I have argued this point but have gotten nowhere but attacked for my point of view. Ha, and they have the nerve to call me elitist!
I know...
It just gets me how people ask for honest design advice as a professional design then tell you that you're an elitist... Well I know I am put into that category for good reason because I have developed concept from very large brands...
I do understand people want feedback or they are new, however if you can't take critique you just wont last in design... And yes I have had a Creative Director throw my laptop through a window about a bad design, and guess what I was wrong and he was right. Looking back he did turn me into a much better designer and I respect his honesty.
But back to the post....
You need research to make it memorable and a good design, generally I don't use my über fotoshop ninja skills until I am happy with my original sketch.
The following are some very good links for design you might find useful
http://logopond.com/
http://logolounge.com/
http://www.smashingmagazine.com/
http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2009/06/25/10-common-mistakes-in-logo-design/ << Read it
The 'great' Paul Rand did not try to rationalize every element in his logos. I don't agree every line and dot has to convey anything. Logos don't have to tell stories to be successful, and those that try to say too much are also susceptible to failure. What is the message in apple's logo? It's an apple. There is nothing philosophical about it. Just try to keep it simple, make it visually interesting and try to avoid copying others (though it is getting more and more difficult since there are so many logos our in the world)
And yes some designers make me gag with their elitism but it stems from somewhere. Designers are often not appreciated for their craft (mainly by their clients) and many are fighting against graphic design becoming a commodity, so they tend to develop a snobbish attitude and look down on those who do not have their skill and training as "real designers".
To MacDaddy - Just do your best and keep practicing/studying; you have potential.
No designer here, but as a consumer, if I can't look at your logo and interpret exactly what needs to be said, the brand isn't something I want. If I have to scan the text and its typeface more than once, then your wasting my time.
Just look at logos from prominent companies—they are usually concise and simplistic, yet say everything that needs to be associated with their brand.
Getting paid ≠ Doing a favor
Just look at logos from prominent companies—they are usually concise and simplistic, yet say everything that needs to be associated with their brand.
Getting paid ≠ Doing a favor
I like this one the best from an investor's perspective.So far this is what I've come up with.
I like the subtleness of the run chart and the way the words curve. Nicely done.
I would focus on this one and see how you might improve it.
That much is certain.
No offense to you designer types, but not everything needs to be artsy fartsy. Sometimes simple and straight to the point is the best.
Oh, and the plus in the circle. That is a definite no no from an "investors" perspective. Too gimmicky. Looks like something Madoff would have done.
Well said.
The key for any design is for it to apply to the industry.
Reminds me of a story if you will allow me. Engineers are a wonderful breed. They can design anything. But sometimes, they forget common sense over technical issues. An example was the original F-16 controls. The stick did not move. Rather it was a pressure sensitive stick. The more pressure the more the airplane responded. Well the test pilots tried it out and found that without feedback to the pilot coming from stick movement the pilot had no idea how much input he was giving the control system.
The result was the control stick was changed so that it moved like a normal one that provided feedback to the pilot. You see, the engineers figured that the static pressure type stick was more accurate and thus would work better. However, they forgot about the pilot and what he needed to fly the aircraft effectively.
Getting back to design. Customers are the key. It has to mean something to them for the design to work. And if it has a bad design for the industry it is going to turn away customers.
BTW, real world example is the Drobo. It won't be selling here in Japan with that name.
Disclosure. I am not a designer. However, I have committed large sums/resources to those who create the designs.
As someone who develops software for a living, I am a bit bothered by the comments that suggest that we programmers don't know what it's like to be in a market flooded by self-taught amateurs who devalue our jobs by providing inferior but less expensive solutions. As someone who has often been affected in one way or another by having labor outsourced to offshore developers with almost no training and with no understanding of how to craft code and whose sole advantage has been their cheap labor, it irks me that providing programming advice to people who are just starting out isn't seen as the same thing as providing design advice to amateurs.
Providing people with no talent with all of the assistance they need to complete a job instead of making them do it themselves isn't good for anyone except the untalented sponge who is using the free assistance to make money. However, providing assistance to someone who is genuinely trying to improve benefits the profession because, with work and some luck, they'll actually get better, do good work that is seen, and so the public maybe won't end up thinking crap work is acceptable work.
I like the version sushi likes, but I have no design talent. It'd be nice if those who do have talent either provide comments to help (which many have done) or didn't comment at all, because all of the "you need to pay your dues" comments come across poorly. Yes, spending time and money on school will make most people better, but often people want to see if they have the base ability and interest to enter the profession, and something like this $20 job is a way to do that.
ETA: These are my opinions as a person, not as a moderator. I'm not saying that no one can comment in a negative way here. I'm just saying it'd be nice, IMHO, to hear less of the "you're not a trained designer" stuff.
Providing people with no talent with all of the assistance they need to complete a job instead of making them do it themselves isn't good for anyone except the untalented sponge who is using the free assistance to make money. However, providing assistance to someone who is genuinely trying to improve benefits the profession because, with work and some luck, they'll actually get better, do good work that is seen, and so the public maybe won't end up thinking crap work is acceptable work.
I like the version sushi likes, but I have no design talent. It'd be nice if those who do have talent either provide comments to help (which many have done) or didn't comment at all, because all of the "you need to pay your dues" comments come across poorly. Yes, spending time and money on school will make most people better, but often people want to see if they have the base ability and interest to enter the profession, and something like this $20 job is a way to do that.
ETA: These are my opinions as a person, not as a moderator. I'm not saying that no one can comment in a negative way here. I'm just saying it'd be nice, IMHO, to hear less of the "you're not a trained designer" stuff.
There are some very successful designers out there who have fallen bass-ackwards into the profession without any formal training.
David Carson comes to mind. Love him, hate him, really hate him, or vehemently hate him, he pretty much singlehandedly changed typography the way we know it.
I fall into the "vehemently hate him" camp. I don't even consider him a good designer. But I can't deny that he's successful. Damnit.
David Carson comes to mind. Love him, hate him, really hate him, or vehemently hate him, he pretty much singlehandedly changed typography the way we know it.
I fall into the "vehemently hate him" camp. I don't even consider him a good designer. But I can't deny that he's successful. Damnit.
No offense taken, but as a designer type I prefer simple and to the point. Unfortunately many clients want cluttered designs with overuse of color and special effects. They freak out if they see any white space.
In general, I really value the opinions from non-designers of my work. I often like to get their input before submitting a design.
most of us were trying to get him to remove the unnecessary elements.. a lot of the parts had no meaning to it. but sure, call it artsy fartsy
It happens in every industry: Steve Jobs/Bill Gates in the OS industry, Shigeru Miyamoto with Nintendo, who shaped gaming forever.
You can say it about many professionals although they didn't have a traditional education they still acquired the knowledge about their field of interest.
It wasn't a fact where the likes of Jobs woke up one morning as just decided to "make a computer", it's an unrealistic comparison... They did research and became learned in their chose field either by finding things out themselves or following the more traditional means of education.
With any good professional (not just talking design) they make it look easy, when they do that people generally think it's easy to do.
It's the debate of Chef vs. Cook, there are Cooks who are better than Chefs and visa versa but I would never call a Cook a Chef (especially around a Chef).
It wasn't a fact where the likes of Jobs woke up one morning as just decided to "make a computer", it's an unrealistic comparison... They did research and became learned in their chose field either by finding things out themselves or following the more traditional means of education.
With any good professional (not just talking design) they make it look easy, when they do that people generally think it's easy to do.
It's the debate of Chef vs. Cook, there are Cooks who are better than Chefs and visa versa but I would never call a Cook a Chef (especially around a Chef).
Theres a difference between being honest and being an ass.
It seems some people here dont understand this.
Although I agree with honest vs the ******-factor, this is the design industry, it's full of people with over-inflated sense of worth and egotism. It's like art from that respect.
What I learned from that experience is there's a right way and wrong way to deal with people and design is about proving your "creative judgement" is best way of articulating an idea.
Look at the god-awful London logo, was it designed well? The answer is a simple yes it was it completely fulfilled the design brief and had the holy grail "water cooler factor" (e.g. everyone was talking about it). Did I like it NO, but to date it's still one of the most "successful" logos due to the fact it's recognisable so I cannot argue the success Wolf Olins went for in the design...
IMHO alphaod said it the best, a logo is about communicating a message and enticing people to buy (and keep buying) your products/services.
The box version would be the better option IMHO, personally I would:
1) Use slightly different blue #0095d0 would be a little more suitable.
2) Try some different font options, font choice can make or break a logo. I would try Bodoni, Didot or maybe something like Nilland or Lacuna (which are both free open source fonts).
These threads are lame! I say help him or move on. So many over inflated egos it's painful to read through.
IMO, I think you really need to have an element that captures the eye. What's something that represents this medical company? Choose something that's fresh and unique.
Other than that, I think you need to focus your time designing with some different fonts. I'm just not drawn to the one you're using at all; I think it could really benefit from something clean, and not everything running straight across like that.
When you start designing a logo, take into account that this will go on a website, business cards, brochures, letterhead, etc. It either needs to fit into all of these mediums or you have to come up with an alternative logo to fit certain specs.
Good luck.
Other than that, I think you need to focus your time designing with some different fonts. I'm just not drawn to the one you're using at all; I think it could really benefit from something clean, and not everything running straight across like that.
When you start designing a logo, take into account that this will go on a website, business cards, brochures, letterhead, etc. It either needs to fit into all of these mediums or you have to come up with an alternative logo to fit certain specs.
Good luck.
I just stumbled across this thread, so sorry if I'm late.
Sorry to start a "heated discussion" or whatever in my first post, but I disagree with you here.
Graphic design isn't taught. You can't teach someone how to design. You can teach them techniques, but design is subjective, personal, and can never please everyone...
People think in today's world that they are entitled to be called a graphic designer because they went to an arts college, or did a MA in graphic design or similar, but how does that equate as to whether you should be charging or not? Surely that decision should be made on whether your work and instinct is decent...
Anyway, about the logos. I don't really think they say anything unique or interesting to me. Just an irrelevant shape.
Research research research brainstorm brainstorm brainstorm draw.