Weekly Discussion Thread: Do you need help with your logo / watermark design?

Agnieszka

Many of us struggle with logo / watermark design ... I think it's an important part of your website & blog as it's our own little signature.

I thought I'd start a thread where you guys can post your logo, and hear what others have to say, or show us some of your new designs in case you're thinking about creating a new one for the new year, and get some opinions.

Be critical of your signature, don't make it look too old if you have a modern wedding photography approach. Everybody has a different shooting-style, have your signature underline your style / approach.

Things to think of when you're creating a new logo:

• Choose the appropriate font
• Do you want to use a icon instead of your name? (don't forget, people still need to find your website / contact information ...!)
• How does it look on a very bright / dark photo?
• Where do you want to place it? Always in the same spot?
• Is is large enough, or too small?
• Check how things align!

Let's get it started .... anybody willing to share their logo for discussion? :lynnma

P.s. Post a pic with your logo on it (photo + logo) :thumb

>> Shhhhhhht. Wanna see the other weekly threads? Click HERE.

Moogle Pepper

It is actually small in comparison to the actual photograph. I like its simplicity, I think it is about 500 x 500 (the actual image), though I forget. In a brighter photo, it is obviously visible, but in a darker one it is it closer to obscurity when I change the opacity in the photo.

But I am thinking about making a new one. Thinking of something even more simpler but still recognizable.

Agnieszka

I like it Ted, thanks for sharing.

If it were me, I'd do 3 small changes to it:

• Align your website info / link with the TN (right now the .coM jumps out of your "TN-frame")
• I'd also align the top part of photography with the corner of the "T" (move it a tiny more to the left)
• I've seen your logo in action before .... (some others maybe haven't ... it would be nice if you could post a pic with the logo on it). I'd actually also loose the "gray background / frame". I don't see a need for it & like this it would look like a cool stamp

... just my 2 cents

Moogle Pepper

Oops! Should have posted an example!


Mmm... wine... I tend to leave it in one of the bottom corners. Out of the way and stuff.

Hmm... I should align them, huh? I'll get to that tonight. I'll try white or transparent.

Agnieszka

Moogle Pepper wrote:

Hmm... I should align them, huh? I'll get to that tonight. I'll try white or transparent.

As I said, that's just my opinion I'd also make it a bit bigger, so people can read your link / name ... Also consider doing the same logo with your text in white, so it pops more on dark images (like the one you posted)

mmmatt

I'll throw mine out there. I don't think I will change in the near future though. Not because I'm stubborn or think it's all that, but I do think branding is important and I want to stay consistent while LightCraft is still in its infancy.



on a pic



I do have a somewhat related question though!!

When delivering my image DVD's to my clients I give them a full res set and one low res for web use with a watermark. To do the conversion and add the watermark I set up an action and then run the action from bridge using image processor. Only problem is I can't find a way to make it work with an image... only text, so I just have my web address across the bottom instead of my logo ;like I would prefer. So can someone tell me how to design an action that will insert a logo image into the same spot on both landscape and portrait images? that would be cool if someone could help me there!!

Matt

Agnieszka

mmmatt wrote:

I'll throw mine out there. I don't think I will change in the near future though.

I do have a somewhat related question though!!

When delivering my image DVD's to my clients I give them a full res set and one low res for web use with a watermark. To do the conversion and add the watermark I set up an action and then run the action from bridge using image processor. Only problem is I can't find a way to make it work with an image... only text, so I just have my web address across the bottom instead of my logo ;like I would prefer. So can someone tell me how to design an action that will insert a logo image into the same spot on both landscape and portrait images? that would be cool if someone could help me there!!

Matt

I'll throw in my 2 cents again ... just to get some discussions started here

I like your design. Like in Ted's case I'd loose the background (box). I don't think it ads anything, and think it would look cooler without it ... I'm a believer in less is more, can you tell? UNLESS it IS actually part of the design / rather than just a box in the background (if you know what I mean) I'd leave it out.

I don't know much about logo-actions in Bridge ... anybody? ...

l.k.madison

Oh, I'll play!!! I could always use help with this.

When I post online, right now, I'm just stamping "Madison Squared Photography" in transparent shadowed letters through the middle of it and it's so boring.

I will admit this thread pulled out a *tiny* bit of creativity, but as per usual, once CS4 started up, my mind went blank.

Two ideas using the same image.



OR..



I'd like to keep the website on there somehow, the M2 doesn't *have* to stay, hubby votes for it, though.

Since it's my husband and I together (hence the "squared") it can't be overly girly, which he thinks the first one is. The comment he made about it probably isn't forum appropriate .

And I have the same question about using an image in an action, I've been wondering the same thing myself.

tenoverthenose

I've been working with a design team for a while now working on my company's branding. They're doing an awesome job and bringing new levels of creativity to play here to get something that represents me and my work. It's still not complete, but this is a tough process! I'll post something once we get it working

Moogle Pepper

So I did a retinker and this is an example of the new idea.



I.K. Madison, I kinda like the first one cause it is visually simpler than #2. Though I like the size and portion of #2.

Agnieszka

l.k.madison wrote:

I'd like to keep the website on there somehow, the M2 doesn't *have* to stay, hubby votes for it, though.

Since it's my husband and I together (hence the "squared") it can't be overly girly, which he thinks the first one is. The comment he made about it probably isn't forum appropriate .

Oh! I like them both actually ... nicely done!!! Just as a side note: I find that if you want to apply a watermark to a sepia photo it looks much nice if you do the sepia work AFTER you positioned your logo (otherwise the watermark / logo will be in a b&w style, while the rest of the photo isn't ...) Try it out

tenoverthenose wrote:

I've been working with a design team for a while now working on my company's branding. They're doing an awesome job and bringing new levels of creativity to play here to get something that represents me and my work. It's still not complete, but this is a tough process! I'll post something once we get it working

Ohhh, good for you!!! Can't wait to see the result! Are they going to do the full thing for you (website / blog / letterhead / logo design? Keep us posted!

Moogle Pepper wrote:

So I did a retinker and this is an example of the new idea.

Yay! I personally like this version(s) much better One can read your website info / and everyone that will see a pic of yours on the web (with your TN-icon on it) will know immediately who took the shot Don't forget you can also play with opacity ...

Moogle Pepper

Opacity Schmopacity!

l.k.madison

Agnieszka wrote:

Oh! I like them both actually ... nicely done!!! Just as a side note: I find that if you want to apply a watermark to a sepia photo it looks much nice if you do the sepia work AFTER you positioned your logo (otherwise the watermark / logo will be in a b&w style, while the rest of the photo isn't ...) Try it out

Angie, it's not a sepia photo, it's a 120 black and white film scan. He took it for a wedding a few weeks ago, just got around to scanning it, and sent it to me un-edited. I figured that would be the easiest one to play with since it's a square. It's one of my favorites, too, so that didn't hurt it's cause.

I'm leaning towards the second one, myself, but that's just me, less intrusive I guess.

tenoverthenose

Agnieszka wrote:

Ohhh, good for you!!! Can't wait to see the result! Are they going to do the full thing for you (website / blog / letterhead / logo design? Keep us posted!

We're doing the whole thing, well at least logo/branding and a custom blog. I am not sure if the website will make the cut after I'm all done. I'll make sure and post it once we get the logo finished up. All I can say for now is that it's not what you'd expect

Agnieszka

tenoverthenose wrote:

We're doing the whole thing, well at least logo/branding and a custom blog. I am not sure if the website will make the cut after I'm all done. I'll make sure and post it once we get the logo finished up. All I can say for now is that it's not what you'd expect

Yay, sounds veryyyyy promising!

Hey, btw. went on your blog yesterday. You have some goooorgeous stuff on there, wowzer!!!!

marikris

I'm getting my logo done professionally as well. I should get some samples this Thursday, but I told the designer to take her time. No rush. Even though it's killing me lol, I want it to be perfect.

Sigh, if only graphic design was an option from my college. I'm a beast with markers, but Illustrator makes my head hurt. We had a digital intro class where we learned illustrator, dreamweaver, photoshop etc - two-three weeks max on each. So I know enough to make my head hurt.

WillCAD

I love this thread. It's giving me a few ideas...

So far, this one is my fave (though I think you can lose the WWW part and just put MadisonSquared.com in the middle):

l.k.madison wrote:

Moogle Pepper wrote:

So I did a retinker and this is an example of the new idea.



I.K. Madison, I kinda like the first one cause it is visually simpler than #2. Though I like the size and portion of #2.

Ted, I liked your original layout better, but the URL was too small to be readable at the size you were using. This one is much more readable, and the two version thing for light and dark shots is great. Maybe you could jazz this one up by putting the URL on TOP of the TN, as IK Madisson did. I think it would look good on the right side of the URL, with the right edges of the N and the .COM lined up. Just spitballing...

l.k.madison

WillCAD wrote:

I love this thread. It's giving me a few ideas...

So far, this one is my fave (though I think you can lose the WWW part and just put MadisonSquared.com in the middle)

I'll have to try that and see if I like it, we're still playing around with it, honestly. Long story short, my mom had a dream that had "Madison" in black with a red superscript 2 on a banner and on a guitar strap, (that's where "Madison Squared" came from) so I was thinking of taking her idea, but I don't like color in a watermark, so I'll have to play with it and see. The 2 is blue on our website, which works online, but not stamped through a picture.

My best friend is an amazing artist and I asked her to toy with the M2/website combo to see what she can come up with.

<--- is L.K.Madison, not I.K.Madison, I did it all lower case. It's not a biggie, promise.

met

I was so pleased that Angie had decided on this for the weekly discussion thread, because it is exactly what I've been working on and playing around with. Then of course, I didn't have much time to post in here this week - so my contribution is a little late.

I'm not a pro, but may eventually try to make a business out of this. So I've been struggling with a domain that I would use if it was just my personal site to direct family and friends to versus thinking long term to if I would want to transition the site to be more professional. I was initially going to go with www.gomollypop.com for my personal domain. (Just www.mollypop.com is already taken.) But then I was debating if I wanted to get something that referenced photography, too. I still don't know. I think I need to make a decision about this before I progress too much further. Mollypop.com fits my personality and general vibe as far as taking childrens' pictures, etc but I'm wondering if mollypop sounds too juvenile for a business name. Thoughts?

This was one of the watermarks that I've been working on. I like it as a watermark, but I'm not sure that I like it as my website header. I was planning on creating a banner in Photoshop with some images and incorporating the name. I still need to work up a few more ideas and post them here for comparison.

Stephan Photos

Here's mine. I just recently uploaded my logo with a customized font. I don't like it and will be changing it soon...I wanted to try giving myself a carbon fiber look...lol.

http://stephanphotos.com/

The KS with the box will stay the same.

Kurt

Agnieszka

met wrote:

This was one of the watermarks that I've been working on. I like it as a watermark, but I'm not sure that I like it as my website header. I was planning on creating a banner in Photoshop with some images and incorporating the name. I still need to work up a few more ideas and post them here for comparison.

I really, really like it!

lisasolonynko

I have been tinkering with my logo for the past 6 months. I would really like to finalize something. Here are the latest ideas. Feedback would be fantastic.

1.




2.



3.



4.



I have tried these on black and white background. They are all easy to read.

My photography focuses on fine art and portraits. I do not focus on one area so I did not want my logo to be subject specific (if that makes sense). My last name is a real bear, and I don't want a "studio name" other than my own. I have to somehow incorporate my name. ARG.

After previewing this post, I see that in #2 the "so" of my surname is bigger than the rest. Please ignore this as it was not intentional.

Anyways, I would love your opinions.

Lisa

Moogle Pepper

I think I like the 1st one the most. It looks more balanced.

lisasolonynko

Moogle Pepper wrote:

I think I like the 1st one the most. It looks more balanced.

Thanks for your input. I'm leaning that way too. BTW, I love your logo...and the newborn pic.

Lisa

lisasolonynko

I just noticed that this thread is in the "wedding" category. Shouldn't it be in "mind your own business"?

Lisa

WillCAD

lisasolonynko wrote:

I have been tinkering with my logo for the past 6 months. I would really like to finalize something. Here are the latest ideas. Feedback would be fantastic.

[SNIP...]

I have tried these on black and white background. They are all easy to read.

My photography focuses on fine art and portraits. I do not focus on one area so I did not want my logo to be subject specific (if that makes sense). My last name is a real bear, and I don't want a "studio name" other than my own. I have to somehow incorporate my name. ARG.

After previewing this post, I see that in #2 the "so" of my surname is bigger than the rest. Please ignore this as it was not intentional.

Anyways, I would love your opinions.

Lisa

I like the text of #2 (minus the extra-large SO, of course). But I think the LS logo from #3 is very nice. I think I'd like to see a version with the text of #2, and the LS logo behind it, about at the OLO part of your last name. Just spitballing; I think it would look good, but sometimes I try stuff that looks good in my head and in reality it does not.

WillCAD

Okay, folks.

Despite the fact that I am not actually a pro photographer, I've been motivated by this thread to try creating my own watermark. Since I've commented on several of yours, I thought it only fair to give you a chance to crush my own ego in retaliation. So here's my first pass; since it's a two-tone logo, I made both a dark and light version.

#1 Dark version, full intensity


#2 Dark version, 50% fade


#3 Light version, full intensity


#4 Light version, 50% fade

lisasolonynko

I really like this. The only nit I might have is the copyright symbol. I know it is supposed to represent the camera flash, but I can't seem to get past the fact that it is a copyright symbol. IMHO it distracts from the flow of the design.

Lisa

WillCAD

lisasolonynko wrote:

I really like this. The only nit I might have is the copyright symbol. I know it is supposed to represent the camera flash, but I can't seem to get past the fact that it is a copyright symbol. IMHO it distracts from the flow of the design.

Lisa

Yeah, I kinda wanted to have that symbol in there somewhere, but the flash area was the only place that seemed to fit even a little with the rest. I don't think it looks bad, but I'll try removing it and see if the overall look improves.

ETA: Here they are at 100% intensity without the copyright symbol. I find that I like the 100% version best.

lisasolonynko

I also like the 100% version. I think it looks fine without the copyright symbol. I think that it stood out so much because it was a darker shade than the camera body. Perhaps you should try having it match the body.

Here is an new version based on your suggestion. What do you think?

Stephan Photos

lisasolonynko wrote:

I have been tinkering with my logo for the past 6 months. I would really like to finalize something. Here are the latest ideas. Feedback would be fantastic.

1.



I have tried these on black and white background. They are all easy to read.

My photography focuses on fine art and portraits. I do not focus on one area so I did not want my logo to be subject specific (if that makes sense). My last name is a real bear, and I don't want a "studio name" other than my own. I have to somehow incorporate my name. ARG.

After previewing this post, I see that in #2 the "so" of my surname is bigger than the rest. Please ignore this as it was not intentional.

Anyways, I would love your opinions.

Lisa

I like this one (#1) the best.