New Logo Idea

[Habitual]

Hey All,

I've been toying with the idea of a new logo on the bottom of my pictures. I like my current logo, but it's not very me.

My other idea is much more contemporary and me, but I feel it could be a little obstructive.

What do you feel? Do you have any other ideas/adjustments that could make this work better?

Current Logo

Nissan Silvia by Tom Cash, on Flickr

New Logo Idea

New Logo Idea by Tom Cash, on Flickr

Thanks guys!

I also like what Alex Penfold does, but don't want to be a rip-off. Does anyone else feel that's a good idea also?

Tom.

 

[Tom]

I like it.

 

[Matt26]

I like the second logo better, but without the black box. Maybe a black shadow instead?

 

[Lal B3N]

I like the font of the 2nd one, but I think the black box ruins it.

 

[Dan@M.A.D]

Not keen on it to be honest, The black looks a bit odd and intruding, Maybe that font without the background would be better?

 

[Ay Ay Ron]

Agree that the box ruins it. Maybe a drop shadow, the text is nice though.

 

[Eddie.]

Text is nice, black box isnt.

 

[Rob]

Text + Dropshadow to make it stand out on light bits.

Best logo I've seen is still adele's, love the placements etc.

 

[brisa4984]

out of those..

the first one

try the bottom one without the black background?

 

[Mr Plums]

I like the 1st one tbh, nice, smart and simple.

 

[Reev]

The black box is terrible. As said, use a drop shadow.

 

[jesus]

I like it, it's eye catching. But that could do the opposite and take the attention away from the photo. The first one is much more subtle in that respect.

 

[mharvey]

I like it, it's eye catching. But that could do the opposite and take the attention away from the photo. The first one is much more subtle in that respect.

This tbf. The logo's better in the second one but it takes attention away from the photo

 

[LIL B]

that's not a logo

 

[Gally]

The second one looks terrible! The first one is much more professional looking, that second looks proper ms paint stylee.

 

[JJ!]

Sadly i cant see these at work as blocked. In the same boat about logo - I put my webiste on mine, but want to have a re-design as its not noticible in some pics due to its transparancy. Will have a look at yours on my iphone!

*edit - just checked on my phone. Prefer the look of the 2nd but maybe in a differnt font.

Mine is in this set:

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.502578866468280.1073741830.149578368435000&type=1

Different approach to yours but think I want something like your black background. As you can see, in some photos it's hardly visible.

 

[.Adam.]

LOL @ that second logo. Looks like something you threw together on Paint.

 

[GBH14]

Must admit, I don't like the second one at all mate. The original one looks a lot cleaner and more professional.

Maybe try the new one without the black background if it is the new font you like.

 

[dunganick]

Think about what you want to use your logo for.

Personally i feel the only point of putting a logo on an image (which undoubtedly detracts from the image) is to protect it and make it clear who the photographer is.

For that reason any Logo you design must also work as a watermark. Watermarks with large blocks underneath them look rubbish.

Just a thought....

 

[Wick]

Best logo I've seen is still adele's, love the placements etc.

Knows it!

 

[GiT]

T-Cash

Prefer the older one tbh.

 

[Habitual]

Holy cow. Never expected 20 replies. Cheers everyone.

I've read and taken into consideration all the comments and I think it's clear that if it isn't even 50% a hit, that it needs changing. So here are some additional ideas.

Thoughts welcomed, again.

Black Box at 40%

new-logo-40% by Tom Cash, on Flickr

No Black Box (White Text)

new-logo-2 by Tom Cash, on Flickr

new-logo-4-50%] by Tom Cash, on Flickr

new-logo-2-30% by Tom Cash, on Flickr

No Black Box (Black Text)

new-logo-3 by Tom Cash, on Flickr

new-logo-3-30% by Tom Cash, on Flickr

new-logo-3-50% by Tom Cash, on Flickr

new-logo-3-70% by Tom Cash, on Flickr

Finally, White Text, Drop Shadow - Basically, my current "Logo" with a different font.

new-logo-4 by Tom Cash, on Flickr

Thanks for the input peeps.

 

[GBH14]

The last one.

 

[Eddie.]

Yep, last one.

 

[Dan@M.A.D]

Last one!

 

[Ay Ay Ron]

Yup. Last one. If not that one then maybe the 30% or 50% opacity.

 

[Rubicon_]

Last one looks good.

 

[jesus]

I like the third one down and the last one.

 

[ukaskew]

To bring up Nicks point again, what exactly is it for? It's not working as a watermark, and it immediately draws your eye away from the subject. Not having a dig, but genuinely interested in why people have them (and that's coming from somebody who has had his photos heavily abused by commercial companies).

The Alex Penfold one is clever because his photos are absolutely everywhere, it's a pain to remove them for anyone who wants to abuse his photos in bulk, and it's subtle enough to catch the occasional chancer out.

 

[JJ!]

I have mine on there as they get shared around the horsey community and want people to know where they came from.

This is mine..

Apologies for hjacking thread - seemed a bit pointless starting another.

Thinking of changing style/font. Opinions welcome.

 

[CrippsCorner]

Stop taking pictures of c***s.

 

[JJ!]

Stop taking pictures of c**ts.

Firstly, f**k right off, insulting people I know.

Secondly, last logo for me works for me Tom - subtle and does not take anything away from the photo.

 

[Habitual]

I like the third one down and the last one.

Yeah, third one down was my favourite and winner on TP too.

To bring up Nicks point again, what exactly is it for? It's not working as a watermark, and it immediately draws your eye away from the subject. Not having a dig, but genuinely interested in why people have them (and that's coming from somebody who has had his photos heavily abused by commercial companies).

The Alex Penfold one is clever because his photos are absolutely everywhere, it's a pain to remove them for anyone who wants to abuse his photos in bulk, and it's subtle enough to catch the occasional chancer out.

It's simply to let people know they're mine without being obstructive. I've already had them cut off when Jalopnik, the Guardian and the New York Times used my pictures last year and I'm not going to lie, it did bother me, but at the same time, this isn't my profession and I just moved on. Honestly, although I understand watermarking and have no doubts I could easily do it with my PS skills, I don't want to compromise the look of my pictures.

It's not that important to me. I only shoot cars and events - I'd much rather the car owner get a decent, unbranded pic of their car than me get that extra website hit.

Secondly, last logo for me works for me Tom - subtle and does not take anything away from the photo.

Cheers man. I quite like your logo, but doesn't it get in the way when you shoot things that are a little lower in the frame? It works well on the above though.

 

[JJ!]

IT does a bit on some shots. I have made it about half the size now and used a differnt font, but keep changing it around!!

Now gone back to original logo as above but made it smaller!

 

[Reev]

As everyone else has said, use the last one.

 

[Brazo]

I have mine on there as they get shared around the horsey community and want people to know where they came from.

This is mine..

Apologies for hjacking thread - seemed a bit pointless starting another.

Thinking of changing style/font. Opinions welcome.

Top left hand corner mate, chromatic abrasion i.e the purple fringing, easily removed in post

 

[JJ!]

Just noticed that! I should have edited the lot before I put them up, but didnt have time! Body/lens has now changed so be intresting to see how it pans out!

 

[Tigger]

My logo is one of those marmite ones - but I do have it on jackets, and even the flap of my lowepro rucksack

It's the first I've had and I like it but I have plans to change it to a cleaner, more professional look