Remember when I posted an early version of our logo and asked for input? You gave me loads, and now we have a new contender. Our team likes this one, and I'd love your take....here it is:
We have it in red as well, and black/white, etc. But how does it strike you?



Comments (16)
It looks like "Media Federated Publishing" - I like the color but I don't like the logo with words stacked on one another. I have found the best logo's out there tend to read left to write on one line.
Posted on October 26, 2005 17:57
It looks like "Media Federated Publishing" - I like the color but I don't like the logo with words stacked on one another. I have found the best logo's out there tend to read left to write on one line - stylized font - Federated Media Publishing.
Posted on October 26, 2005 18:00
How would that work on a page? Seems like it might be tough to fit into a header space. And that it might be hard to read anything but FEDERATED when it was shrunk down.
But I guess it just depends on where ya use it.
Posted on October 26, 2005 18:36
Yeah, that kind of jumbled text always reminds me of those doors that open when you're close:
"Automatic Caution Doors"
Posted on October 26, 2005 20:53
Immediate reactions:
I love the general style, very old/classic look
But as others have said, reads as 'Media Federated'; the ordering is very counter-intuitive
And I'm not sure black on green is particularly easy to read
Posted on October 27, 2005 02:08
As it stands now, people's eyes are immediately drawn to the color that is most differerent from the green, which is white.
So, I think it may just be a color thing. Swap the black and the white colors, so "Federated" is white and "media publishing" is black and people will probably read it the way you're looking for.
Of course, that change could be ugly as sin, but give it a try.
Posted on October 27, 2005 09:09
Not quite it for reasons cited above: The order of words doesn't work.
I would use a machine-stamped typeface like, um, Machine, or something similar. A hard-edged slab serif that gives the feeling of something made in a factory in 1927 by guys with big cigars and parts of fingers missing who sneezed black metal dust every night into their pillow.
Made it rougher. Make it more industrial. But make it:
FEDERATED
Media Publishing
Posted on October 27, 2005 09:27
i think it is like disturbingly 1970s. perhaps we need to punch it up a tad. i agree. we should either go totally industrial, sort of like "built tough" in ford trucks as being molded from molten steel. or we go very hollywood studio concept from the 1920s. i think it doesn't reflect the true nature of the company
Posted on October 27, 2005 09:38
BOORRRIINNGG!!!!
Sorry ... it's just so non-descript. And make it much smaller (like a business card) and you won't be able to read that text.
Why not make a smaller, brighter version with FMP in it, and then print 'Federated Media Publishing' below or to the side?
Posted on October 27, 2005 12:23
Looks like a label for a pack of smokes, not a cutting edge company. However, I do think its better than its predecessor (no offense to the creator :-0). Man, this makes me want to dust off the ole design chops and get the creative juices flowing again. Good logo design is hard, in college we would literally come up with pages of thumbnails in order to get a decent design. Its a tough process. I also tend to lean towards strong graphical imagery vs a logo that is typeface driven. Any thoughts on getting a class at SF Art Institute to do it as a class project or something? We did that in college for a hot sauce company and the results were incredible - some absurdly talented kids. The cream truly rises to the top at that point. You never know when you may stumble across the next Saul Bass.
Posted on October 27, 2005 17:04
I think Logo looks a bit old fashioned...
I would also suggest using bright red color and keeping the logo simpler. Why not just FMP and the description/punch line beneath it.
Posted on October 28, 2005 00:43
I think there are two basic issues.
1. The logo doesn't seem to know what it wants to "be". Meaning, it seems to be reflecting or emulating a style(s) but it's not clear and muddles the message. The outside shape seems to speak power tools or fast food but the type is more insurance commpany.
2. The best logos seem to speak something, even if it's just the littelest, subtlest something about your business. I don't think that is working well here. Is there some key differentiator that makes your business stand out against competitors? Or, if you are alone in the marketplace what is the thing that makes your business (I apologize for using this stupid word here, but it's pre-coffee AM) "sexy".
If you have to do this in-house then first, spend some time investigating fonts. Research here is critical to making the thing work. Check out fonts.com to broaden your skope. A good font should give you the a decent foundation to start on. And do not be afraid to have a logo that is mainly type, look at examples of some top companies, there logos may never make it to the Louvre but they are memorable (Verizon has basically a "check mark" with type. which cost them hundreds of thousands of dollars to create but thats another story, google it).
Lastly, if you have some resources, read cash, then please invevst in a designer to build your image. As a growing company this (IMHO) is no place to just get by with what you can do in house. You will be living with this image for a long time, it's important for it to work "for you" not just embellish your letterhead. If money is tight look for a local designer, freelancer etc. Even a student, but pay him/her! Hire the person who asks the most questions about your business BEFORE designing anything; avoid the ones who have a preconceived idea of what your mark should be before meeting you.
Good luck!
PS. I actually do like the green you've chosen
Posted on October 28, 2005 07:06
Blah. Very blah. Ugh.
Posted on October 28, 2005 07:18
I like it, very much, font and color included. It reminds me of a can of motor oil, or a farm implement logo. But, like the others, I read it "media federated publishing." I think it is distinctive and memorable, but I'd re-order the words.
Posted on October 28, 2005 09:02
second vote for boring. i can see where it was headed but it needs a lot more OOMPH(or similar non-descript value) that would make it more compelling.
i'll also vote for confusing text sequence. it's like those monogrammed shirts that have the first initial, followed by the last initial, followed by the middle initial. stupid.
like if your middle name were 'julio'
aTj
Posted on October 28, 2005 10:59
Love the style (fits great with the name), but think "Federated" needs to be on top. Not so sure about the black and white text on the same color background; that's tough to do. It also needs a bit of polish...just a little touch that emphasizes the style a bit more.
But, the good thing about the direction you're going here is that you can get it close (probably a little closer than it is now) and tweak it later when you have a bit of time and money to spend on such things. The style is so strong that it will look/feel about the same even with a bit of tweaking.
Posted on October 28, 2005 16:04