View Full Version : Logo Critique B/W Comps

Sep 19, 2007, 11:32 AM
Designing a new logo for a client of mine, and would love some feedback.


Comments are welcomed!


Sep 19, 2007, 11:43 AM
I really like number 3 on the left.

Sep 19, 2007, 11:48 AM
For the use of commentators:

1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10

#1: I get that it's a globe, and the company's initials are worked into the Lat Long lines, but it still looks like half a basketball.

#2 Needless to say, this is the only one that clues me into what the company does. Either add the words to the others, or drop them from this one, if you want to judge logos only. I prefer this one, it is more literal to search, the basketball is smaller, and the text connotes "executive" "high end" "conservative" "reliable".

#3: Two holes on an extremely challenging golf course. ;) Look at the negative space
Seriously -- I have seen this type of 2-arrows logo too many times used by freight companies.

#4: Is this a division of AT&T?

#5: What's a Bolek?

#7: Bocce ball!

#8: B.D. is the takeaway image, I don't get it. What relevance does the BIG D have?

#9: Mixed case font is too hard to read, not sure if it fits with the client's industry image

#10: Is this a division of Minolta?

Sep 19, 2007, 11:55 AM
8 looks the best to me.

Sep 19, 2007, 12:08 PM
I like 8 as well. Although it places a lot of importance on the upper ones as compared to the lower, which on a few have the same importance....So I unno about that, but I like the classiness of 8.

Though I agree about number 2, This is the log where I finally found out what the company does.

Sep 19, 2007, 12:09 PM
I also like #2. it has more relavency to what the company does.

In regards to the one ivi7 likes (#8), consider how people will read the hirearchy of the logo and infer that to the hirearchy of the company.

If this firm considers these people as 4 equal partners this may rub the other two partners the wrong way. As it stands now #8 would indicate that Blackshaw/Olmstead has a much higher standing than the other two.

just my 2 cents.

One more thought: While I think #2 is the stronger one, thinking a bit ahead, if you scale the logo down to business card size I think you'll find the half circle "basketball" icon will loose almost all of the linear elements. Perhaps a tweaking is in order?

Sep 19, 2007, 12:12 PM

Sep 19, 2007, 12:16 PM
2, 9 and 10

2 is classic (good for that sort of client, business)
9 is classicstyle symbol but modern font
10 i like the seporators

combine the font and symbol of 9 with the seporators and placement of 10

ppff it is ***** txt for a logo ... i hate that sort of clients

Sep 19, 2007, 01:11 PM
1-is a good design but the LOGO overpowers the names, I also agree about the basketball feel to it, and as I look at it, I am forced to look for the "B". :confused:

2-Looks like this might the winner by a long shot. I like the way you incorporated the first logo design onto this one, and the fact that you stated what the Co. does works well, other wise I would imagine that this would be a law firm or a corporate PI. The professional feel is strong with this one and it makes a bit more sense.:)

3-I have trouble looking at the logo and trying to make sense out of it, The boldness makes this one look strong which is a plus! :confused::)

4-Simple always works.......that's all I got to say!:cool:

5-I have seen this before but I can't place the Co. that uses the same box and the same fonts, This works very well makes the Co. very corporate and makes it look as if it has been around for a long time. I can definetly see this on the usual stationary formats. :):cool:

6-I see no difference between this one and the #7. It seems to simple and very similar. Does not give the importance of Corporate to the company :(

7-See above :(

8-I really like this one, reminds me of the logo that the firm (my job) has. Very proffesional, serious corporate feel, a company that has been around for a long time and a powerfull one on the field it works in! and as stated before simple always works! :cool:

9-this one reminds me of the first one too much! and for some reason I think of mail carrier.....:confused:

10-The MINOLTA reference is rather humorous, but it does not work very well as far as to what the Co. does. :confused::confused:

Thanks for sharing!!!!


Sep 19, 2007, 01:23 PM
Why are Lynch and Koenig joined to each other, but separate from the other two names? The ampersand makes it appear that way, even though my gut tells me that it is not supposed to be that way.

Sep 19, 2007, 02:04 PM
I think my favourite is also #2, however personally I feel that it could be reworked a bit. Firstly I would try something different with the other half of the magnifying glass, as I feel there are two many lines and what try to represent letters. Secondly I wouldn't split up the words, however have them aligned to the left of the logo.

These are just my thoughts...
And some more info into the company wouldn't go amiss.

Sep 19, 2007, 07:15 PM
I like 2, but it looks a tad busy, perhaps refine the graphic or text so it is a little more minimal.

I also like the feel of 9 and 10, clean, modern, but does not tell as much about the business as #2.

Nonetheless, some good concepts there.

Sep 19, 2007, 07:15 PM
My gut reaction, to all of the logos, was that the "&" seems wrong in all of them.
It joins together Lynch and Koenig real tightly, especially with the separators between the other names - I keep reading it as "Blackshaw, Olmstead, Lynch-Koenig.
I like #2 best, although without the bullet between Olmstead and Lynch.
Also, the magnifying glass probably needs to be simpler if the logo will be scaled down much/reproduced/faxed/etc.

Sep 20, 2007, 01:04 AM
Why are Lynch and Koenig joined to each other, but separate from the other two names? The ampersand makes it appear that way, even though my gut tells me that it is not supposed to be that way.

Agreed, thats what I notice the most. But #2 for me.

Sep 20, 2007, 10:38 AM
For me, and this is only ME! I feel that it lacks in many aspects of how to really bring forth a LOGO that is both noticeable and that will get costumers in the door.
It's only a logo creater but it does nothing for the real purpose of the logo.....stationary. Yes you can use it, but it's HOW will the logo be used in the letter head, what the BC will look like, the type of paper for the BC, and the letterhead. This is just minimal, there is more to a logo than just a "click, drag, and drop" program.
I do like/recomend this program to those who again can't/won't use a Braphic Designer but if you want your bussiness to outshine there is no better way to do it than to use a Graphic Designer!