(222 votes, average: 1.56 out of 5)
Logo Of The Day Award Winner:

2011-03-24 | Hype Fest

Tags: , ,

Bookmark and Share

HYPE is an entertainment communications agency that provides brand-strategic writing, publicity and marketing services to a diverse roster of clients in the commercial, and music industries. HYPEFEST is their festival showcasing compelling and entertaining short films, commercials, music videos and promos. See in use.

Credits: Special Modern

Related Logos:

28 Comments to “2011-03-24 | Hype Fest”

Mar 24, 2011 at 5:30 pm

you can’t be serious.

Mar 24, 2011 at 5:31 pm

I agree…..


Mar 24, 2011 at 5:46 pm

No photography in logo please..

Mar 24, 2011 at 5:47 pm

actually not really

Stephen Kistner
Mar 24, 2011 at 5:52 pm

Wow. What went down when creating this? I can understand using a photo as a backdrop for a logo that is not just unstylized type, but using a photo as the primary element of originality in the logo isn’t usually a good idea…

Mar 24, 2011 at 5:55 pm

Poor, very poor.

Mar 24, 2011 at 8:42 pm

I found that logo recently is not that “wow” wonder as if there is no logo submission so logo of the day just post anything he has on hand?? By the way, I do suggested that Jacob should give his opinion about why the logo been selected? :) I love this site, just I am not excited anymore with no “wow” logo :(

Mar 24, 2011 at 9:07 pm

Agree with Jayden, this site is awesome but 8/10 logos are not that great and there is not always one for each day.. maybe you are right with not many submissions??

Big ups to Jacob though for the time he puts into it but maybe some rationale as to why it got chosen would be cool and would help people getting started in logo design to understand what makes it good rather then just a picture and comments saying.. I love this or nah this is dum ha.

Mar 24, 2011 at 9:56 pm

The logo ‘could’ be a very very very impressive vector drawing ;)

But in all seriousness im surprised at this logo selection. Jacob is an amazing logo designer, im curious as to his thoughts behind the choice of this particular logo.

Generate a debate perhaps like the ‘Spade’ logo not so long ago?

Kevin Hughes
Mar 24, 2011 at 11:55 pm

I’m giving it a four.. In context, I do like the way this branding package works. It’s quite attention grabbing to say the least, and to me it definitely gives the feeling of intensity and ‘hype’

The ‘HypeFest’ type works well on its own as well. I’m a fan of the letterhead in particular–the yellow backing with the woman’s eyes staring out at you gives another strong hit of intensity to the branding.

Remember, rules are important to keep in mind–but some of the best work comes from knowing these rules well enough to effectively break them when applicable.

Remy Francis
Mar 25, 2011 at 2:40 am

Rules are meant to be broken sometimes ;o)if we have to. As a designer we have to think out of the box. Now this looks different from the vector-rendered logos and live photos are not normally used in logos… so this one could stand out and be noticed in todays cut-throat world. If it prints alright, the message is coming through. Tho’ I would give it a 5 because it may get confused to look like a poster.

Mar 25, 2011 at 10:05 am

I understood the idea but… No.

Mar 25, 2011 at 11:54 am

I just noticed this page. I did not submit this logo. it’s a little confusing because the original logo for Hype (yellow background with woman’s head)http://specialmoderndesign.com/work/2-Hype-HypeFest
, the public relations firm was created from a public domain (cuban cigar band) image as they were on a shoe string budget when this was created around 1999.

HypeFest is an annual festival for their video and commercial submissions. We did a photo shoot to get the energy of hype and the senses. The style is Barbara Kruger which is kinda at the end of the op art era.

I never heard that a logo should just be vector before. I think there are no rules. Guys, don’t contain yourselves. It was easier to do vector logos when print was the only way to go, but now with the internet it is so much fun to be able to create whatever is appropriate for the brand.

The feedback was great though. It really got my attention.–karen (new web site coming– but here it is now:http://specialmoderndesign.com

Jacob Cass
Mar 25, 2011 at 12:38 pm

Thank you all for your comments and let it be known, that I do read every single comment that goes onto this site. Unfortunately due to time limitations, I can not reply to them all.

In the case of this logo and questions directed towards me… I choose not say ‘why’ I chose a specific logo every day, but in general I judge each logo based on concept, execution, context, creativity, versatility and memorability and then decide to feature it or not. I also don’t have the time to write editorial for every logo featured. Instead I try my best to curate a vast mix of styles to portray how flexible and adaptable this craft is. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and hey, sometimes you have to see the ‘bad’ to appreciate the ‘good’. This is in the eye of the beholder.

There is a logo every day on week days, not weekends. I occasionally miss one here and there due to other priorities but my aim is 5 a week.

As for ‘photo’ logos, I don’t think this is a limitation or hindrance at all. The possibilities of vector is quite amazing, just have a look at these artworks all produced in vector. Photo logos were also identified as a trend in 2009 by LogoLounge, arguably the largest logo collection that exists to date.

Keep the votes & comments coming.

Will D. White
Mar 25, 2011 at 1:05 pm

While I can agree that photography in logo development has been a trend (look at Aol) I disagree with the idea that its a “good” one.

Production aside, photography is almost always harder to visualize without context – and therefore harder for most folks to remember. When brand recognition is important, a clean, simplified mark (typographic or iconic) is going to be easier for most demographics to remember than an entire photograph. Its why we create logos, and don’t just put pictures of the service or product next to it’s name. Logos simply communicate more efficiently.

Mar 25, 2011 at 1:57 pm

great idea…impressive but possess picture.. if vector then it will work best.

Kevin Hughes
Mar 25, 2011 at 2:40 pm

Just one last comment from me:

Yes, this logo ‘breaks the rules…’
but progress was never made by following the status quo. ;)

Will D. White
Mar 25, 2011 at 2:51 pm

That brings up a good question.

How do we draw the line between:

“making progress by creating new standards”
“being lesser work because it doesn’t follow established design standards”

Back in school and in my first jobs, if I tried to tell my professor/creative director “I think Grid is over-rated, we should put the elements where we feel like it” – I would have been failed/fired. The same goes with a plethora of other design standards, like photography in whats supposed to be the simplest, easiest to remember element of brand development.

However there is a point to made for creating new standards – and I can understand trying to push the envelope in areas other agencies/designers might not go. Even in the smallest aspects its not uncommon to cheat a little and purposely off-kern or not follow grid etc.

For better or worse, so far according to the ratings – this logo is falling in the “lesser work” category – not the “establishing a new standard” category.

Kevin Hughes
Mar 25, 2011 at 2:56 pm

The question, to me, is are these votes tossed in offhand, simply because it doesn’t follow rules, or have people thought about it?

With 50 votes and 18 comments, it’s hard to tell. I’ve already made my opinion clear, though! I will grant that nine times out of ten, the ‘photo rule’ is a good one to have in place–but in this case, I think it works well as a full branding package.. unlike AOL or MySpace’s attempts at it, which just felt slapped together with little thought.

I’m happy to see a debate forming here!

Mar 28, 2011 at 3:55 am

This should end up in the gutter. Shame on the amateur creator.

Mar 28, 2011 at 12:45 pm

i think we can all agree that AOL’s use of photography in their recent logosets was a horrible idea. while i “get” this, i still don’t think of it as a logo.

i see a logo in use over an image. for web or print or whatever – fine. but this in itself is not a logo.

Daniel Evans
Mar 29, 2011 at 10:31 am

At what ratio of photo and text does an image become a “photograph with text”?

If the image of the mouth were ten times bigger in comparison to the type could it still be regarded as a logo?

In contrast, if you enlarge the mark of a typical vector based design it still stands firm as being a logo.

Mar 29, 2011 at 11:24 am

Just wondering who said it was a “logo”? It is an identity and part of a bigger campaign. Yes, the owner of this site chose it to put on his site, but why is everyone trying to fit it in a box? Just food for thought.

Daniel Evans
Mar 29, 2011 at 11:40 am

@Karen With my personal opinion aside (I’m open for debate), surely it doesn’t need explaining that a site branded “Logo of the Day” will indeed be featuring individual “logos” (with no complimentary bells and whistles in their associated campaigns) that should work effectively as a standalone entity?

Mar 30, 2011 at 12:13 am

@Karen, the site is “logo of the day” not “concept of the day”

Mar 30, 2011 at 9:37 am

Right, that’s what I said. The author of the site posted it to be judged as a logo. I’m just saying it’s sematics that’s all.


[...] we just do what is appropriate for the client? Read this conversation about breaking logo rules on Logo of the Day.com that “awarded” this HypeFest logo and posted it as logo of the day. &laquo Easy Web Hosting to set up WordPress Blog for Designers [...]


[...] we just do what is appropriate for the client? Read this conversation about breaking logo rules on Logo of the Day.com that “awarded” this HypeFest logo and posted it as logo of the [...]