Comments on: 2008-12-19 | Fubiz

By: DChuck

DChuck — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 15:16:00 +0000

I think this logo should be redifined. It lacks a soul… and should lose some weight.

What type is it going to get? Website? letter header? business card? with it’s current situation, I can’t see much more than web usage for this.

By: Mitch

Mitch — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 01:05:37 +0000

Jacob,

I love an in-depth discussion around the grey areas of design theory, particularly logos…thanks for the forum to do so, and for your reply.

By: Jacob Cass

Jacob Cass — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 23:43:33 +0000

Mitch & David,
I can strongly agree with with what both of you have said… My comment was not worded correctly and I can see how it was taken now, I was meaning to say that some logos may not have a visual concept that you can see ( such as an image in the negative space) which is what I was trying to say when saying “not all logos have visual concepts” behind them.

A logo designer does need rational for the choices they make and like you said Mitch, communicate an intended message. But is this what you meant when you said “Am I missing the concept?” Btw, I have since updated my comment.

Thank you both for your feedback and opinions!

By: Mitch

Mitch — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 22:12:44 +0000

David,

Bravo!

In the real world in my experience if you have no concept you have no justification for charging a reasonable rate for a logo. It has become quite easy to get a mac and a software package and call yourself a designer, and there are training programs out there that can make you and adobe genius in a month. The difference between that designer and a truly successful designer (IMO) is the “concept”… the ability to devise and construct a piece of communication that is not only is visually engaging but communicates a message it the hidden skill of design. No disrespect to anyone but if i ever uttered the words “not all logos have visual concepts behind them” i woulnt get paid and i wouldnt get another job…in my experience logos / branding need to be approved by a number of people sometimes a whole board, and without a concept to explainthe logo someone will inevitably say “so why are we paying so much money for this?” The ability for a designer to construct and then explain their concept is what (IMO) makes a great designer.

By: David Crawford

David Crawford — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 14:43:09 +0000

Jacob,

I think it’s a nice type treatment, but I have to disagree that logos don’t need a concept. The designer should be able to explain why he or she did what they did based on some kind of concept, otherwise, it’s just some type on a page. Concept is king, and sure, this logo doesn’t need an icon or the type creating an image in the negative space, but it sure needs a rational of why they made the choices they did.

By: Jacob Cass

Jacob Cass — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 06:39:22 +0000

David,
The logo is a logotype which has been constructed for their website, and quite well too! Like Rafal said, notice how the line goes through the Z, B an I and how the F and U connect.

By: Rafal

Rafal — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 05:19:23 +0000

The logo is not the best, though it is not bad either. The 2 fonts are not a big deal, the way the font was handled is clearly evident that it was well thought out and clean. I love how the f u and b connect. Also, the stripe is nicely handled, it was well thought out as well, I like how it crosses the Z and B in the bottom left corner.

By: jakub

jakub — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 02:20:46 +0000

I’m sorry but I don’t see how this is a well executed logo… two different fonts were used, with no changes aside for a pink strip across one of the words. Maybe I’m missing the meaning…

By: David Crawford

David Crawford — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 01:51:26 +0000

Yeah, I read the tagline. I was wondering what was the concept so that I could maybe understand the design choices that were made.

By: CM

CM — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 22:30:10 +0000

daily ‘close’ of inspiration?! I think it is a vibrant well-executed logo overall~

By: David Crawford

David Crawford — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 16:01:58 +0000

This logo is interesting, but am I missing the concept?