Please review our logo

[shaun adams]

We are launching our new website (we currently have big websites in the field) the name is fastprint and we have just finished our logo design

Please see below any reviews would be appreciated.

The company is a fast turnaround printers but we do not sacrifice quality for speed and we want to portray a large company feel.

 

[k100danny]

I quite like it but there is one thing I dislike, not the actual logo but putting your business name in two different colours makes it harder to read.

 

[Dimo]

I like the one in lower case.

 

[Dimo]

Have just done a Google search and there are several 'fastprint' type websites -

fastprinthastings
fastprint.net
fastprintinc
gofastprint.co.uk
fastprint-uk.com
fastprint.pf
ocfastprint.com
fastprint.ca
fast-print
fast-print publishing
chinafastprint

If it were me I'd be creating a unique name.

 

[garyk]

I like the one in uppercase

 

[HGSecurity]

Of those two, I think the lower case, but it just feels like there's something missing, it needs more impact but I don't know what, can't put my finger on it.

 

[fisicx]

Neither are much use. I can't easily read the grey text on the big images and it's just a blur on the smaller.

How is is going to look on a 30mm sticker or business card? Take a look on a smart phone when it's 320px wide. Then see how it looks on an embroidered logo on a polo shirt.

If you want to be really pedantic, it suggests the printing is done at normal speed but you have a fast delivery driver.

 

[a1anm]

I like the upper case version. I guess if you ever need a small version of the logo you could drop the tag line.

 

[Daxo]

If I were you I really wouldn't agonise over the logo. It's a waste of time.

I've never rejected or accepted the services of a business based on their logo. It's never been a factor and I'd be surprised if it is a factor for many other people.

In many ways this exercise is meaningless, because your website will not display all these logos will it? Of course not. It will only display the one chosen logo. Nobody visiting your website has the benefit of knowing what your logo COULD have been, they only see what it actually is. And hopefully they won't spend more than a milisecond "pondering" your logo because instead they'll be too busy getting excitied by your print offering and pursuing a purchase.

As long as your logo isn't bizarre, offensive or hard to read then all is well. Just make sure it looks and reads OK at various sizes.

With the above in mind I think that any of those logos would be adequate. My preference is the uppercase, but I wouldn't reject your services if you chose the lower case.

 

[Lolleo]

Dont agree with Daxo. For some people it might be meaningless but for me it spells out attention to detail.

I like the lowercase better but would make the 'fast' same size font as 'print'

 

[Gecko001]

The logo looks fine - both of them. But using an adjective in the name? The first time you are a minute late due to no fault of your own the customer will probably rename your firm "lateprint".

 

[smarterbarcodes]

I do prefer the right hand one, uppercase, though depending how far you are into this, its a really common name website wise inparticular. Although of course it does explain exactly what you aim to do for a customer, there is a lot to be said for originally and a unique name has got to be a good starting point.

I feel a little bit like we are discussing another movie remake, and there are so few original ideas these days.

Just my opinion, I'm sure its not what you want to here, but better to be honest

 

[Mike W]

Lower case for me. More 'in' today.

 

[fisicx]

Dont agree with Daxo. For some people it might be meaningless but for me it spells out attention to detail.

For most people it's meaningless.

There were some tests a while back where logos were replaced with plain text on websites. Nothing happened. It made no difference at all to visitor behaviour. Eye tracking shows most people don't even register the logo of a business when they land on a page. It used to be the first thing they looked at but not any more. One bit of market testing showed people a number of websites and asked them afterwards to describe the logo. Most of the testees couldn't even remember the names of the companies let alone the logo.

Lower case for me. More 'in' today.

So what happens in 6 months when bubble fonts or serif becomes 'in'? Do they change their logo?

 

[jamesosix]

Ok, just wanna add my 10 pence.

First, Daxo is wrong and way off the mark. Whilst your logo may not be a sales driver, it is a unique identifier to your business. If your business takes off do you really want to be changing your logo at a later date after you have ploughed a bucket load of cash into its branding?

Some other key logo points:
1. Your logo should be as simple as humanly possible. Look at examples like Nike and addidas. You know those companies when you see their logo.

2. Your logo should be timeless. Will it still look good in 5/10/20 years time? For this, try not to be in fashion, but just timeless.

3. Your logo should be unique. Again, look at the nike swoosh. They dont even have to put there name to it, because we know whos it is when we see it. Thats ultra unique.

If I had to pick one, I would pick the first one, but lose the tagline imo.

 

[fisicx]

Your logo should be timeless. Will it still look good in 5/10/20 years time? For this, try not to be in fashion, but just timeless.

Really?

Try this: http://www.hongkiat.com/blog/logo-evolution/

 

[Fred_the_frog]

Some other key logo points:
1. Your logo should be as simple as humanly possible. Look at examples like Nike and addidas. You know those companies when you see their logo.

Nike didn't start off with just the tick. For a new business you want it to be simple, but not as simple as possible. If I had a business called 'Freds Frogs' and decided my logo was going to be 'FF' in green, it's simple but stupid. People will see it and think 'I recognise that but can't remember what it stands for'.

IMO the logo should contain the name of the business at least, then once it's more established it can think about removing the name and just having a symbol.

 

[Mike W]

So what happens in 6 months when bubble fonts or serif becomes 'in'? Do they change their logo?

Yes, and then change the colour to pink if more girlies like it, or pale blue if they're City fans...

Don't be ridiculous. It just happens, in my opinion, to look better and more in keeping with today's market.

 

[jamesosix]

Really?

Try this: http://www.hongkiat.com/blog/logo-evolution/

The point was more about not following whats "trendy" or "in". Evolution of a logo over nearly a hundred years is 1 thing, but to follow trends is bad because they change so often.

Nike didn't start off with just the tick. For a new business you want it to be simple, but not as simple as possible. If I had a business called 'Freds Frogs' and decided my logo was going to be 'FF' in green, it's simple but stupid. People will see it and think 'I recognise that but can't remember what it stands for'.

IMO the logo should contain the name of the business at least, then once it's more established it can think about removing the name and just having a symbol.

Again, its not about what it will evolve to be. Nike still use the tick, because its simply and easy to remember. Any business should have their name in the logo, unless of course they are a global blue chip company that is a household name. Of course, in the context of the OP, then yes, he should have his name in the logo, but the point still stands - it should be as simply and as unique as possible.

 

[Mike W]

Op, coming here was probably a mistake. Or should I say, opening up the debate about who you are, what you do etc, so as to invite opinion on what you should really be doing.

Design by committee rarely works. We all like different things, have different backgrounds, different opinions, some justified, some not. There’s a saying I heard a long time ago (among many others): 'A camel is a horse designed by committee.'

If you're not careful you'll end up being a welder in a cheese factory.

 

[Daxo]

LMAO, yeah, right.

As already stated, most people won't spend more than a milisecond "pondering" a logo when visiting a website, and fisicx provided a little more information which supported that overall point.

But, you know, good luck and all that.

Dont agree with Daxo. For some people it might be meaningless but for me it spells out attention to detail.

I like the lowercase better but would make the 'fast' same size font as 'print'

Ok, just wanna add my 10 pence.

First, Daxo is wrong and way off the mark. Whilstyour logo may not be a sales driver, it is a unique identifier to your business. If your business takes off do you really want to be changing your logo at a later date after you have ploughed a bucket load of cash into its branding?

Some other key logo points:
1. Your logo should be as simple as humanly possible. Look at examples like Nike and addidas. You know those companies when you see their logo.

2. Your logo should be timeless. Will it still look good in 5/10/20 years time? For this, try not to be in fashion, but just timeless.

3. Your logo should be unique. Again, look at the nike swoosh. They dont even have to put there name to it, because we know whos it is when we see it. Thats ultra unique.

If I had to pick one, I would pick the first one, but lose the tagline imo.

 

[jamesosix]

Most people wont you are right. But he should, its his business! Things like this make a massive difference to any company image and whilst customers wont give two hoots, they will always choose the more appealing business.

Or to put it another way:
Which would you feel better using to help with those trees that need work:

or

There is a clear difference and the first example tells me "this guy either likes to save a few quid or doesnt care about his logo...well does he care about trees I would then start to think. And what is that wing emblem thing all about? Over complicating the logo.

The second example oozes class and elegance and almost even gives me an ideal image...a great example of a logo in my opinion.

So it really does make a difference imo.

 

[HGSecurity]

At least the tree one tells you what he does - wtf does 'envisage' have to do with it - sounds more like an optician!

 

All valid points, some people take a little too long pondering over the detail of their logo...when in fact there isn't that much difference between the options.

Both are nice, and there's no problem having the tagline and dropping it if you need to for size purposes.

Personally, I like the upper case option, but just because it looks more finished to me, and it flows properly to my eyes.

That said, pick one, flip a coin if you need to - and get on with polishing your content.

 

[fisicx]

Which would you feel better using to help with those trees that need work

The first one is a bloke who sorts out trees so I'd give him a call.

The second one looks expensive and full of marketing bollox so I'd give them a miss.

I'm not suggesting a logo should be ignored, just that people worry about it too much. Do some eyetracking and you will see most don't even register the logo when they visit a website. Can you for example describe the UKBF logo (without cheating and scrolling back up the page).

 

[noo81]

I prefer your first logo, as it is. I think it stands out because of the difference between font size and color.

 

[Lolleo]

So if your missus (or partner) came home with a shirt and jeans picked up in asda for your christmas party night out you wouldn't give 2 hoots? I bet you would.

Its all about the perception of quality whether its concious or subconscious and yes it can only take milliseconds to register if you like it or not.

JMO

LMAO, yeah, right.

As already stated, most people won't spend more than a milisecond "pondering" a logo when visiting a website, and fisicx provided a little more information which supported that overall point.

But, you know, good luck and all that.

 

[dynamic08]

Quite clearly the top logo. I know they can do what I want them to do cut my tree down and I am thinking they will be cheaper than the bottom logo that is "proper naff" do they even cut trees.

Talk about how not to prove a point

Most people wont you are right. But he should, its his business! Things like this make a massive difference to any company image and whilst customers wont give two hoots, they will always choose the more appealing business.

Or to put it another way:
Which would you feel better using to help with those trees that need work:

or

There is a clear difference and the first example tells me "this guy either likes to save a few quid or doesnt care about his logo...well does he care about trees I would then start to think. And what is that wing emblem thing all about? Over complicating the logo.

The second example oozes class and elegance and almost even gives me an ideal image...a great example of a logo in my opinion.

So it really does make a difference imo.

 

[jamesosix]

The first one is a bloke who sorts out trees so I'd give him a call.

The second one looks expensive and full of marketing bollox so I'd give them a miss.

I'm not suggesting a logo should be ignored, just that people worry about it too much. Do some eyetracking and you will see most don't even register the logo when they visit a website. Can you for example describe the UKBF logo (without cheating and scrolling back up the page).

Either way, still shows how much a logo can impact potential sales.

@dynamic08: but you are proving my point that the logo and its design/readability/meaning etc all does matter...which ever you decided you prefer, it shows the impact of what people look for, even at a subconscious level.

 

[jamesosix]

double post- please delete.

 

[dynamic08]

Not totally correct actually I made an effort due to the nature of the post. Generally a logo makes no real difference.

Its the work that goes in to a company and how you market that company not about the logo. It is lovely and dandy to have beautiful logos I have worked hours on them before and spent a few quid.

Trust me I have been involved with businesses turning over very large sums and the logos and branding was pants! The people behind the firm worked tits off though and that's what made it a success.

Either way, still shows how much a logo can impact potential sales.

@dynamic08: but you are proving my point that the logo and its design/readability/meaning etc all does matter...which ever you decided you prefer, it shows the impact of what people look for, even at a subconscious level.

 

[jamesosix]

Not totally correct actually I made an effort due to the nature of the post. Generally a logo makes no real difference.

Its the work that goes in to a company and how you market that company not about the logo. It is lovely and dandy to have beautiful logos I have worked hours on them before and spent a few quid.

Trust me I have been involved with businesses turning over very large sums and the logos and branding was pants! The people behind the firm worked tits off though and that's what made it a success.

Of course it is! I never once said the logo is the only thing thats important to a business. I'm simply countering the argument "it means practically nothing", when it does mean something.

Maybe those people who worked their tits off wouldn't have to go that extra distance if there branding was up to scratch?

 

[The_Bag_Supplier_Ltd]

Love the left hand side logo... crisp, clean and does what it says on the tin. A✰

 

[Daxo]

Actually your below example and subsequent comments are poorly conceived and add nothing to your argument, infact they detract from it.

What your below example actually did was successfully demonstrate the *irelevance* of a logo BUT the importance and power of a straight forward and descriptive business name. Your post successfully demonstrated that a clear and unambiguous business name could be a tangible sales driver for a firm.

Nobody was interested in the bottom example, as nobody was totally sure what the heck "envisage grounds maintenance" actually did. Whereas the "Tree Doctor" told you exactly what the business did.

The Tree Doctor logo could have easily just been black text on a white background, sans tree image or any other type of graphic and most people would still probably contact them rather than Envisage for the reasons already explained.

The logos were irelevant. It was the business name that was the determining factor and thus the sales driver.

Now, that's what I call "branding".

Most people wont you are right. But he should, its his business! Things like this make a massive difference to any company image and whilst customers wont give two hoots, they will always choose the more appealing business.

Or to put it another way:
Which would you feel better using to help with those trees that need work:

or

There is a clear difference and the first example tells me "this guy either likes to save a few quid or doesnt care about his logo...well does he care about trees I would then start to think. And what is that wing emblem thing all about? Over complicating the logo.

The second example oozes class and elegance and almost even gives me an ideal image...a great example of a logo in my opinion.

So it really does make a difference imo.

Either way, still shows how much a logo can impact potential sales.

@dynamic08: but you are proving my point that the logo and its design/readability/meaning etc all does matter...which ever you decided you prefer, it shows the impact of what people look for, even at a subconscious level.

 

[fisicx]

Either way, still shows how much a logo can impact potential sales.

Like Daxo said, it wasn't the logo, it was the words 'Tree doctor' that nailed it.

Do some testing. Drop the logo on your website and just put the name of the business up there in plain text. Use a fancy font if you like or even have it as an image but make it just words. I'd put money on it not making the slighest difference to your conversions.

 

[Conglomer Group]

We are launching our new website (we currently have big websites in the field) the name is fastprint and we have just finished our logo design

Please see below any reviews would be appreciated.

The company is a fast turnaround printers but we do not sacrifice quality for speed and we want to portray a large company feel.

Hello, If I was designing this logo will prefer to chose the right hand side whereas there are some lil bit changes required i.e background color as well as font color in red and white instead of black.

Modify the logo once to review my suggestion hope you like it. Good Luck !!

 

[iBusiness Forums]

I would have love to share my opinions about your logo Shaun, but it seems like the image has already been deleted or moved.