Hey guys, I have been trying to build a new logo, but am not having much luck! I may have to end up outsourcing this, but I am trying not to. I only came up with this one so far:



And here is my current (old) logo:



I like my current one but thought it was a little too generic, since the font used is such a popluar font. I was looking for something a little more custom, and more of an actual logo rather than just text. What do you guys think?

I like the new one. not bad!

I like the new one a lot too! (Nice that your initials let you be "DR. photography!") Would you be able to shorten the bottom extension of the "d" just a tad? Not sure how much flexibility you have on the fonts.

Thanks guys. I cant really shorten the extension on the d because that is a font and that is how it is. I could do something in photoshop to shorten it but not sure if it would look funny. I will play with it a bit and see what I can do

The first one has a "gothic" feel.

The second seems a little off...but I can't say exactley why. I am not a designer, so I don't have a lot of input. Sorry.

You know what, that is exactly what I thought when I fist stepped back and looked at it when it was completed, and I didnt care for that look. Thanks for the input!

Ok I tried something else.....is it too "techy"? this is hard! haha

Where is it?

I see it now!

I have spent hours and hours designing logos. It is really hard.

<- This is my old logo.

No one else have input???I think everyone else is out partying...

I tend to prefer the first one, since it's more legible, but it is pretty darn extended and the breaks in the letterform are pretty distracting. Shoot me an email (mail at bradknapp dot com) and I'll send you a variation that might work a bit better.

I like the top one but maybe not with the mirror effect, just me, I'm into simple.

Hey Dave,

I like the new one, lots. It's edgy and very professional looking. And it's a good update to you old one because it's not TOTALLY different. Folks will still recognize YOU somewhere in there...it's like BEFORE....and AFTER.

Geneve

Here is something very similar to the "techy" one, but much more simplistic:

Click to view attachment

I think we have a winner!!!!

i like the simplicity of the latest one posted.

The last one is the only contender, in my opinion. It's not a logo (well, it has no mark), but the type-treatment is clean and simple.

The last one! The last one!

definitely, the last one. keepin' it simple.

My vote is for this one, so far.

Cheers,

Dave
ModernPics

Thanks to all that replied! I think I am going to stick with this last one that I made, at least until something better comes to mind or I decide to outsource.

Is this bad? Was it better before when it was only text?

the addition doesn't add anything for me, and instead just seems a bit cluttered. you could possibly use it separately, for watermarking, for example, but otherwise, i liked it better before.

Ok I just changed it agian (see post above), and I actually really like this one. But who knows I may change it again in 10 minutes

this is head & shoulders above anything else so far. it looks good, but.. you dont want your logo to be dependant on any kind of background pattern or color - it should be able to stand alone.

Simplify. Simplify. Simplify.

Get rid of the backgrounds, reflections, shadows, color, etc. If you can love it without any of that, then the color should be an easy addition. See how it looks printed out the size of a quarter. Is it identifiable? How will you use it vertically/horizontally? How will it look faxed? Make those decisions before color and effects.

$.02

I'm not a fan of the background, either. I agree - keep it simple. It gets too busy when you start adding and that takes away the allure of the simplicity.

Sorry guys, just to clarify, the background is not going to be part of the logo, it was just there for this specific image that I made. Thanks for the input, it has definitely been helping me!

The D and the R don't look like they're overlapping properly, and I also wish that the end of the R was a little longer.

I agree with Kevin, I like the only text one.

-Jess

Yea I know what you mean about the overlapping...that can easily be fixed in PS...I was just being lazy. I also wish the r extended a bit further. I have an identical font that extends further but it is too thin for my taste. I guess I could try adding a stroke to it to make it thicker though. I will play around with it some more. So far this is my favorite though, it looks good small, large, b&w, printed, etc., so I am pretty happy with this one....at least until tomorrow!

i think dropping the "photography" makes it cleaner. but im a fan of less is more.. besides i think people will know your business is about photography by visiting your site.

How about this one?

I like it, but I would drop the black background.

Here it is wthout the bg....

done.

looks good.. i like that last one, but with the thinner font from above..

Consider adding photography back in underneath the DRP.. It seems strange to have 2 of the 3 letters in the mark explained in the text. Looks nice and clean, tho. If I saw it by itself on a card or something, without you explaining the P stood for photography, I would be confused.


But, then, I'm an idiot.

If you refresh the page I changed it to include photography. I agree it needs to be there to explain, but I also agree with Juliet that it looks cleaner without it. Since the mark has all 3 letters though, I think I need to have all 3 words too. I think I am done.

Dave,

Who isn't a fan of "less is more," but there's a certain amount of information we all need to convey in our mark because we're not all Apple. How awesome would it be if we could just stick some cool little thing on a card, hand it out, and people would frame them, go to our website, and hire us without ever meeting us...

Reality is a compromise.

To me, the new version makes much more sense and is logically balanced as well as graphically--something the prior version lacked.

You duh man.

When I look at this mark, I see OhO....i really liked the previous version where you kept it more simple...kudos to you for your many versions. It can take a long time to get it just right I really like your font choice!

Well, you can't go wrong with Avant Garde. (What my logo is in.. )

Tricky tricky! Swan is the font master The one at the top of the page (the thinner font) is actually Helvetica Nueu though.

+1 . . . I agree . . .

The thinner font may not hold up when the mark is used the size of a quarter or so... I think he's good to go with the medium. $.02

This is exactly the reason I went with the medium....the thin one looks cool when the logo is really big, but when it gets small it is just too hard to make out. Thanks everyone for all the replies!

I've been spending a bit looking at this and I'm just not sure. It's really good, but it still feels a couple of steps below great. I think the thing that's bugging me is the width of the "r". Somehow it feels that it should match the radius of the circle in the d and p. Does that make any sense? I haven't had my coffee yet and doing a logo critique via OSP is always a bit tricky

Ok, you are all going to kill me......but I just threw this together and wanted to see if anyone likes it. Is it too blah?

eeek... not so much.

go back to what you were working on .. it was WAY better.

haha, thanks Cameron. I like the other one better too. What about this one?

Click to view attachment

Nope.. .The d feels cramped because it's hitting the edge of the circle. Nothing particularly clever about it like there was about the drp.

dave,

I like the above. much better.




This is the one I LIKE SORRY FOR THE CONFUSION.

thanks guys, always appreciate the input!