ANM 324 Project 3
Creating a logo is often one of the first jobs a designer has to do. Key to success in logo design is clearly understanding the “image” or “brand” that the company or organization wants to communicate. A logo is typically used on a variety of substrates (types of material) and applications from business cards to billboards. The most successful logos are effective on any surface.

Here’s my general grading criteria for this project:

95-100-Logo has captured the essence of the organization and the technical rendering skills are excellent.

90-95-Logo is very well done there are some minor flaws in concept or execution

85-89-Logo is good but may not completely communicate the essence of the company in either type resonance or design elements

80-85-Logo has technical and design issues that will prevent it from being effectively used on a variety of applications. Such as too complex to be scaled down and clearly “read”.

70-80-Logo is not effective is communicating the essence of the organization .. significant technical flaws

70-below very late work

Note on logo critiques: Because I have provided extensive feedback on the logos the final critique will just highlight the strengths and weakness of the logos and which logo(s) I thought were most effective in each group.

Late -10

No Group Critique -5

Anita Kunz Group

I think this logo was one of the most challenging because of the unusual mix of themes with Solar and Rocks. The challenge was how to combine these in image and type. Our grout took two different routes one with the rock music theme and the other one playing off the word Rocks. From a branding perspective I think Lisa and Laura are the most successful. Laura’s sun and type are clear and bold and a more commercial looking…Rocks with a $ sign, may be received by viewers as expensive vs. economizing. Lisa’s is a bit more playful and consistent with the organization’s more relaxed and engaging approach to solar power. The sun, however, is a little awkward with rays not well drawn or arranged. Anthony’s image of the guitar is fun and memorable but the solar/sun concept is not as well depicted in the guitar as it could be…what if there was a solar disk (gradient) behind the guitar base and the guitar was in a contrasting color almost in silhouette? Type is clear and readable in all but Kayla’s. Her logo is fun and playful but there’s a lot going on that’s difficult to capture at a glance. I do like the plug-in sun…this might be more effective simplified, without the blue shapes, and name scaled up to ensure readability at smallest sizes. Laura’s logo….the top choice.

Rosenwald Group

The Rainforest Action Network was complicated by two elements. The name is quite long and demands a lot of visual space to display and the Rainforest theme has to come across clearly. I think everyone used some element that we recognize as associated with the rainforest. Ariel’s tropical frog is very clear with the toucans in Kathie’s and Sam’s a close second in being easy to understand. I like the complexity of Alana’s drop with forest inside as well. Tassie’s flower looks tropical…the monkey is more playful. From a identity point of view I think Ariel’s is most effective logo…type might be arranged to make Action more readable but it’s graphic and memorable. Tassie and Alana’s logos are also bold and memorable…I like the type linking to the vine and flower in Tassie’s. The type does not scale-down as well in Alana’s logo. I think sticking with just the name might be better in terms of giving the organization lots of flexibility with different applications. Kathie and Morgan have emphasized the initials which the organization does use in there website but their logos, along with Sam’s (love the toucan art) are much more complex and demand more than a glance to take-in. The current logo for RAN is ultra simple so I would take a lead from that, as a designer, and go for the most simple and direct approach. Top logo goes to Ariel.

Kroencke Group

Urban Ecology, to me, is challenging but it has the clearest objective. Your logo must tie urban life to environment. So, which logos are most effective in communicating urban life and the environment? We’ve gone two directions with abandoned cars and buildings. Shannon’s car looks like it’s being taken over by the environment but it’s still drivable..wouldn’t it at least have the wheels stolen? I do like the font and compact style that would make it scalable. Elliot has a more playful approach that might be attractive to youth in the urban neighborhood…well drawn and incorporating the wheels with the word ecology is creative but there’s a lot going on with critters taking over the car…looks like it’s on the move too. This is a difficult logo to “capture” at a glace. The urban cityscape has been depicted in Caitlin’s, Michael’s, Rodolpho’s and Candeda’s. Rodolpho’s is very complex and those small buildings just don’t translate well at small size…better if just one block of buildings filled the circle. I would keep the text to a minimum….I think you’re trying to put too much into the identity. Caitlin’s has an interesting combination of several elements….the wheel is confusing (I think it’s a steering wheel) makes me think more of driving through a city…perhaps trying to get more into the logo than necessary to identify the organization. I think Candeda’s and Michael’s (and Shannon’s) are the most successful in linking urban and ecology. Both Candeda and Michael have integrated what appears to be an apartment with growing elements. The amount of type in Candeda’s makes it more complicated to read at a glance and all the type won’t be easily read if scaled down…keep it simple. Michael’s is simple, links the concepts and will scale well on billboards or business cards….most successful!

Frazier Group

This logo provided a challenging concept to tie surf with environmental protection. First, my apologies to Tamara, she used the original project page at the start of class which was updated later for this project. I should have caught during reviews but we had a solar org this time and I just didn’t catch it. Her logo is effective in linking sun and solar energy with the clear depiction of solar panels. It’s simple and effective. It’s only natural that the sea or surf would dominate the logo. Nancy and Rachel chose slightly less direct imagery with an underwater scene and an hourglass. The coral is well drawn but may not relate quite as clearly to the surf theme..I do like the style of type Nancy chose. Rachel’s hour glass is a much more complex logo with the element of time represented with sand and surf. I like the concept but feel like the scale of the hour glass tends to dominate the logo and the type is lost…thin scrip fonts don’t scale-down very well so this would be difficult to read at business card size. Adam, Nick and Kimberly chose to emphasize the literal surf theme with waves. The strength of all is enhanced by the use of font styles that are strong and easily read. Nick’s is most simple. The footprint adds a human element but the single print at this scale tends to detract from the energy of the wave…. what if there were foot prints walking into surf…I think this would be more dynamic and engaging. Kimberly and Adam have designed more complex scenes that are playful and commercial. Excellent use of type in both especially in Kimberly’s. Claris logo looks totally professional. The graphic is beautiful and depicts the sand, sea, and surf environment that the organization strives to protect. Type is nicely integrated with the logo into a strong visual flow. It’s a winner and top choice.