Often clients and designers end up over designing and over complicating a logo to the point that it becomes something less than memorable -- not more -- defeating one's intention. Having a symbol, a company name and a tag line often achieves a negative result (read that too much to remember) and we subliminally find it less esthetically pleasing.
Less involved usually means:
- Better Recognizability -- The simpler the logo the faster the brain recognizes it -- and the more versatile it is.
- More Flexibility -- Paring a logo down to it's simplest form is usually the ideal solution to achieve readability when reduced to very small sizes print or resolutions for the web. Years ago, a publication I produced marketing materials for had hired a designer to create a new logo (actually a more modern version of the old). The logo worked beautifully on the over-sized cover of the magazine. Unfortunately, I had to use it on direct mail pieces and insert cards and when reduced to an appropriate size for many of those pieces, it looked insignificant next to an address! Consequently, we had to create a modified version of the logo to work at smaller sizes -- not an ideal solution.
- More Memorable -- The more appropriate the logo the better we will remember it. Good design is not just flash and glitz it is being appropriate and attractive.
How to keep it simple:
Decide whether a symbol is necessary (or even appropriate). Using a symbol requires constructed context for it to convey its intended meaning. For a landscaper it may be using the color green. Exposure, hence familiarity, is an important factor in creating context. The Bank of America's stylized flag can stand on its own because we have seen it so many times in context -- next to the name Bank of America. Always using the same colors and orientation also creates context. Be aware that some symbols, while looking nice and innocuous, might be offensive to others.*
Not every logo needs a symbol and many top companies forgo using one -- Sony, Microsoft, IBM are a couple that quickly come to mind. Creative use of typography or even the creation of a typeface for a logo is often an elegant way to go and gives instant recognition of your company name. New and small companies can't afford to spend the hundreds of millions in advertising that Nike has done to be able to splash their logo across the world and get that immediate recognition -- without the use of the word Nike.
Don't (and I mean don't) oversize the logo on everything. All elements of a page must work in tandem to have an effective design. Over-sized logos can create a sense of imbalance. If I had a quarter (hey, inflation hit, the nickel is now just a penny with an attitude) every time a client asked me to make the logo larger ...
Use appropriate colors -- garish colors are not appropriate for most industries -- lose the temptation.
Use a tag-line only when necessary. If your company name doesn't identify what you do and the logo placement is not accompanied by descriptive copy then using a tag-line is OK but there are few times when that is the case.
Strive for something unique (yet appropriate) don't copy — especially a competitor. You can reference other logos to give a sense or feel of what you like when in discussion with a designer' but don't have them copy it.
Branding
Once you come up with your logo — use it! Your logo, along with the use of a color scheme and related graphics or graphic looks are what is known as branding. People like familiarity and the more often they see your brand, the more established you feel to them, and the more likely they are to contact you. Then carry the brand to as many of your marketing efforts as possible.
Years ago a very large corporation (not to be mentioned, but referred to in this article) spent untold money ( suggested at millions of dollars) to unify their look on the web. They had hired many designers and web site creators to develop numerous (thousands and thousands) of web pages on many different sites and servers that linked to each other in a rush to have a presence on the web. The sites looked completely different from one to the next and one wondered whether they were on the same companies site at all.
A good logo is usually not inexpensive -- it doesn't have to be expensive either. The phrase "You get what you pay for" often holds true here. Creating a logo is usually time intensive and includes research on your industry and logos in general to prevent duplication. A preliminary discussion of preferences should take place and any preconceived notions should be brought up at this time. Then a good designer creates a quantity (to be discussed) of looks for first review. Subsequently, after a discussion of likes and dislikes, one or two are picked for further development that might stretch to one or two more rounds.
This means the client is involved in the process and ultimately can claim some credit for development and know that the logo is personalized for them. A good logo is timeless and should stand the test of time. Lastly, you should be supplied with a logo in a variety of formats that will be appropriate for the web, your use in computer-generated documents and, of course, for your print materials, and they are not one and the same.
Good luck, and you can see some of my work at, http://www.williamkellydesign.com
*The international Red Cross is actually debating whether or not to replace the red cross symbol (in existence since 1863) with an alternative because of religious connotations of the red cross. The symbol is a reverse of the Swiss flag to honor it's Swiss founder, Henry Dunant. However, the symbol has raised suggestions that it was linked to the Hospitallers, a military order which took part in the Crusades waged by Christians against Muslims. Subsequently, a red crescent emblem (formally adopted in 1929) was used in tandem with the cross so as to not offend in some parts of the world. The Red Crescent is currently used by 33 of the 186 recognized "Red Cross" societies worldwide and in many countries the name of the society in that country has been changed formally to the Red Crescent. A unified red diamond look is being debated as an alternative to both the cross and the crescent.
