Comments on: 2009-03-21 | Kate Rose

By: Wendy

Wendy — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 14:02:29 +0000

I like it. Very clean and unique.

By: Graham

Graham — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 09:17:38 +0000

I really like it.
I think it’s nice and clean – not the usuall.

Well done!

By: Kristin Andrews

Kristin Andrews — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 13:43:03 +0000

@miro you have a point with the old antique box camera — something I overlooked. Great observation.

By: Jamie

Jamie — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 12:46:51 +0000

I actually like the long stick legs…makes these birdies unique. They also remind me a bit of a tripod, which goes with the whole photography thing.

By: Jacob Cass

Jacob Cass — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 03:18:50 +0000

Paul,
Yes they do however they were just two examples, there are literally thousands of other examples I could have used, well known or not so well known, I was just making a point that a logo is for identification. In saying that though, I can agree with you that a logo which associates itself with the business can help for first time viewers.

By: SuperDave4eva

SuperDave4eva — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 01:55:28 +0000

While I agree with Jacob that a logo does not necessarily have to portray what a company does, I must also chime in with a few of the comments above that I don’t see the branding power of two stick figure birds. Then again, if the photographer loves it and it works for her… that is really all that matters.

By: miro

miro — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 16:48:03 +0000

I really like the logo. I think it’s very modern and clean.
The long legs of the two birds remind me of the old antique box camera that came with a stand.

By: Paul Randall

Paul Randall — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 11:09:29 +0000

Jacob, those companies you mention have spent millions on advertising, and the logo is on all of their products – giving them a much better chance of having their logo recognised.

It isn’t neccessary to have a logo reflect the business, they are in, but it can help the association of a product or service to a new person seeing a logo for the first time.

By: Jacob Cass

Jacob Cass — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 00:27:18 +0000

James,
A logo design does not need to reflect what a business ‘does’, a logo is for identifying a company. Think about the Apple or the Mercedes logos for example, none of these signify that they are a IT or car manufacturing company – they identify the company.

I am not sure if this is what you meant by “I don’t see how 2 birds illustrated is an accurate logomark for a photographer” but I thought I should clarify anyway.

Thanks for your comments.

By: James Hsu

James Hsu — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 21:51:15 +0000

Reductive, yes. Recognizable, yes. However, I don’t see how 2 birds illustrated is an accurate logomark for a photographer. Doesn’t seem to hit home with me.

By: Lisa

Lisa — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 15:37:46 +0000

This opinion might be the result of working all night and the coffee not kicking yet but I think it’s sweet. Shortening the legs might make it cuter but it’s darling as it is.

By: EJSchultz

EJSchultz — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:45:11 +0000

I am with DChuck (again) on this one. Looks like the cover of a kids book. But if folks are recognizing it, who am I to criticize?

By: Kristin Andrews

Kristin Andrews — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:09:54 +0000

I think this one is adorable, Kate. Great logo. Shortening the legs might give it that final cuteness factor. Also curious why you decided to go with chicks?

By: Paul Randall

Paul Randall — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 13:20:21 +0000

I think the stick legs put me off the logo, but overall it is quite cute. Mind you i’m not sure I could guess that it was a Photographer’s photo. It seems more arts/crafts.

By: DChuck

DChuck — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 13:13:04 +0000

I don’t really like it.

By all means it’s not a bad logo! far from there. On a purely objective PoV it’s great.

But in my personal bubble, I find it too simple and too childish. Copypasted / resized birds take me back to my first MS Paint tries at Computer Assisted Drawing.

so All in All this logo must be great for its owner, but I wouldn’t use it.