| |
Common logo design mistakes
All too common design errors and missteps.
 While a great deal of out website is dedicated to what goes into making a great logo, over the years we've seen the same design mistakes being made over, and over, again. These aren't logos that were presented in the preliminary stages of a design project then discarded when the mistake was recognized. No siree. These are logos that emblazon trucks, ads, websites and billboards. Designs that are very much in criculation - the owners no doubt being oblivious to the snickers and guffaws of people who view their logo. It's unfortunate too - who knows how much more successful these companies would have been with a logo that didn't look "mickey mouse" (a weird description BTW - Disney's mouse is one of the most heavily protected, and litigated, logos on the planet. In fact, Hollywood likes to use the phrase - "don't mess with the mouse"). In any case, here's a look at some common design blunders, and how you can avoid them when developing your new company mark.
When your logo doesn't look like what you think it does.
Everyone wants their logo to mean something - to represent some vital part of the company, product or service. Fair enough - that’s usually the point of the exericise, though often easier said than done. Creating a graphic image that tells a specific story about a sometimes fairly specialized business activity can be a daunting task and always runs the risk of becoming a mangled visual metaphor. Especially if the logo is designed in a ‘closed loop’ and even more so if created as part of a do-it-yourself project by someone without any real experience in design. Mangled visual metaphors often feature pictograms of human figures (the ubiquitous character with a circle for a head and a three-pointed graphic indicating his/her body) and often the activity being illustrated can very easily be interpreted as something else. This often involves logos that end up looking like naughty bits, or characters participating in activities that are much less than G-rated. No doubt the designers of these logos started out with only the best intentions, but somehow, somewhere, the project went seriously off kilter and the mangled metaphors weren’t caught until the logo was in wide circulation. They knew exactly what they wanted to depict, and in their minds-eye, probably accomplished the task admiringly. They know what they want to see. Trouble is, most people who are viewing logos for the first time have no preconceived notions about what it is they’re supposed to be seeing - and they’ll interpret the logo into an image that they can recognize. And once someone has seen an alternate interpretation of your logo - especially if it’s racy - they will find it next to impossible to ‘unsee’ the naughty version.
Visual Cliches
Your logo features Stars and Stripes because you’re patriotic. You have a globe in your logo because you’re, like global. And yeah, the little tripody figure with the circle for a head represents some dude or another (a whole bunch represents a bunch of dudes working together in tandem). Beams of light radiating from your icon indicates that there’s so much goodness emanating from the portrayed company, it simply can’t be contained within the central graphic and most people will fully understand that replacing a $ for an S in the logo indicates that you’re attempting to portray something to do with finance. Similarly, there’s very few logos where a molar (smiley face optional) can be found other than a design for a dentist. Trouble is, Murphy the Molar is used in a lot of designs for dentists. Some others? Trees represent growth. Swooshes represent hi-tech. A lightbulb represents an idea. Etc. Etc. Etc..
These, folks, are visual clichés, classified as such because they’ve been done, ad nauseam, to death. There’s far too many to list here, but they’re usually the very first thing that pops into your head when conceptualizing a logo for one industry or another. For that very reason, they should be discarded just as quickly. It’s very rare that the very fiest idea that you (or your designer) will crank out is the best idea (it’s called a design process for a reason), and the first idea you have runs a very, very high risk of being a cliché.
Overly complicated logos
True story: we were developing a logo for a town - let’s call it Whereverville - and their bicentennial celebrations. The job seemed fairly straightforward and in the original project brief, the client outlined that they wanted to add a visual reference to a famous landmark - a monument in the city square - to the design. Fair enough. The monument was unique to the town, was where most of the planned events were to take place, and instantly identified the logo as representing Whereverville. The initial round of preliminary designs went to committee (where many concept problems arise) and the request for modifications came back. The monument graphic was “just peachy, thanks very much, but we’d like to add a few more things” to make the logo “wow” (roh-oh).
They wanted a train (lots of people arrived at Whereverville by rail), the train needed a station (obviously) so add that, the community boasted lots of farmers so work in a barn (naturally the barn also needed a windmill), throw in a few cows, some trees, there’s these mountains, and oh yeah, Whereverville looks great at sunset so if you could toss that in too, well, that would be great. And while you’re at it, the residents of Whereverville are particularly proud of the new City Hall so we’d like a fully rendered graphic of that to boot. A few design elements had become a laundry list - a veritable cornucopia of disparate graphic elements, all competing for real estate and attention. The logo was to be used on freebie keychains so one of the planned uses saw the design being reproduced at just over an inch wide, and it was inevitable that every one of the elements would end up as featureless squiggles when reproduced at any size less than, oh I don’t know, 15 feet wide.
The designer handling the gig voiced concerns about the complexity of the logo - and the predictable headaches - but was overridden (client knows best doncha know) so each of the requested elements was sketched, rendered and added to the increasingly complex graphic (of course, creating this myriad of illustrations expanded the time line significantly, so in addition to a skyrocketing production times, we also had an increasingly impatient client on our hands). Once the revised graphic was completed, it went once again to committee, where it was decided that well, maybe the logo was now too complicated, and maybe we could pare it down to just feature the monument from the town square. For those not paying attention, that was two weeks ago, when the prelims were handed in. But now the client was frustrated - “this is taking longer than we expected”, as was the designer who’s perfectly rendered barn, windmill, cows and train would never see the light of day.
Moral of this story - the simpler the better. Designers sometimes criticize The Logo Factory for designs that sometimes lean towards an ‘illustrative logo‘ style, so we’re not as arbitrary in applying this ‘rule’ as others, but generally speaking - the simpler the logo the more chance you have of if being remembered, and the less headaches you’ll have in various applications, especially when used as smaller sizes.
Here’s a bonus too - if you still plan to use a complex illustration in your new logo and you’re using outlines, do not use lines that are a consistent thickness. This is a sure-fire way to have your logo look like ‘clip art’ or, if you’re a designer, have your client complain that your work looks like ‘clip art’. Vary your line thicknesses and your illustrative logo will take on a entirely new dimension (we’ll be taking a more in-depth look at this is in an upcoming ‘Studio Tips’ feature).
Swooshes, swishes, globes & swirly things.
While people have generally clued into this one, there’s still the occasional outbreak (and some online logo design outfits still seen to be hopelessly addicted to slapping swooshes on everything from dentist to pet shop logos). Swooshes (or swishes) were all the rage a few years ago (looked all high-techy and stuff) but now, they’re a design element that translates exactly into “I dunnoh - didn’t have any other ideas”. I’ve seen portfolios at online logo design sites that consist of one swooshy logo after another - for all practical purposes all these logos are identical, it’s just the names that have been changed. Not that we haven’t had issues with this ourselves. Hell, in the late 90s, we were guilty of adding a few swooshes here-and-there (okay, maybe more than a few) when the ‘dot-com’ boom was all the rage. At some point the ‘thou shalt not swoosh’ was added to the TLF lexicon and while it took a little 12-step rehab, we’ve managed to stay on the ’swoosh’ wagon. If you take a look, there’s a few online sites that still need a ’swoosh’ intervention…
Bad Spacing & Text Issues
Whenever words are typed out in any design software package, the program ‘guesses’ how close the letters should be to eachother. This is known as Kerning (or more accurately in this case - ‘auto’ Kerning). Alas, these are only estimates and some programs do it better than others (Microsoft Word, though not a design program, is the worst, Adobe Illustrator is better though not perfect) and what looks good on your monitor will look hideous when enlarged to billboard size. The only way to effectively space typography is by ‘eyeball’ and by hand. Some letter combinations - V & A for example - require tighter spacing than say, M & N. Setting up correctly spaced typography is critical - poorly spaced letters will register in the viewer’s minds eye as an amateur-hour logo, even if they can’t quite put their finger on what’s wrong. And yes, this also includes the ‘tag line’ of your design. These are the group of words, usually small, under the logo that invariably describes what the featured company does, or how good they are at doing it. I’ve seen taglines with default kerning through which you could drive a Mack Truck. And while we’re talking about fonts, for the love of gawd, if you’re going to use off-the-shelf fonts (perfectly acceptable) there are certain type faces that were never meant to be used as display. Chauncery Script is one (shudder). Papyrus was cool (about six thousand logos ago). And oh yeah - a logo (and tagline) with anything more than two font styles risks imitating a ransom note…
Not using vector-based design software.
Creating a bitmap logo in a pixel based design software is only going to lead to headaches and invariably, uneccessary expense. Same applies to logos developed using so-called logo design software available at the local office supply store. You won’t be able to enlarge your design due to resolution issues. You won’t be able to add your logo to other artwork (unless it’s been designed with a transparent background and even that comes with issues). You won’t be able to change colors without a series amount of work (and even then, with unpredictable results). And spot color reproduction? Forget it. Take a look at your logo assets - if you don’t see a file with the extension .eps (vector) .ai or at the very least .pdf (vector), it’s time to see a designer who will introduce you to the joys of vector based logos. And Microsoft Word? Nuttin’ to do with design…
The 'War and Peace' logo extravaganza.
While it’s always nice for a logo to actually ‘mean’ something (i.e. – this color represents growth, this dot represents our product) sometimes clients wish to write ‘War-and-Peace’ with their logo’s metaphors. The most memorable logos are also the most simple. Any memorable complex logos are often highly rendered illustrative logos (see above). Dozens of swooshes, dots and colors – all professing to ‘mean’ something will not mean anything to the first time viewer. Any logo has a nanosecond to grab someone’s attention. The simpler – the better.
Design by Committee.
Perhaps the most difficult project for a designer, and the most frustrating for a client. A large group of people are responsible for selecting, approving and modifying the logo throughout the various design stages. Keep in mind that it usually the loudest (and dare we say – the committee staffer with the largest ego) who invariably makes their opinion heard – not the committee member who has a keen sense of design. Better to select a ‘voice’ for the committee who is keenly aware of your group’s goals.
Art directing the project.
While it’s true the client is king, it’s also true that they are NOT the art director (unless they are, in fact, an art director). When someone is working with an experienced designer, they’re working with someone who is trained in many aspects of design, graphics and technology. By the time the client is viewing preliminary designs, the designer has attempted every variation of that particular design (unless you’re working with one of the 72-hour design sites where the most attention is paid to the clock). The designer has moved the various elements right, left, up and down. Elements have been rescaled, flipped, flopped and moved about in every way imaginable. When you see the design, it’s probably true (unless the elements have simply been Frankensteined together) that this is the most graphically sound presentation of those elements. It’s highly unlikely that micro-tweaks by the client will improve the design dramatically. Moving an element 1/4” to the right will not change a logo from that you don’t like into a design that you do. It’s best to tell the designer that you’re not happy with the design, move on, and work from fresh proposals. If you do like the design, then trust your designer that they have hammered out a design that is graphically (and technically) sound. (I’ve never heard of clients giving mechanics micro-tweak direction. Nor dentists, for that matter). It’s highly unlikely that a logo that does not have the ‘Ah-ha’ factor can be pigeon holed into a design that you love simply by moving bits around. The client needs to nix a design that’s not up to snuff. Don’t worry – any designer worth their sand can take criticism. Or they should be. Whenever I hire a designer I always tell them two things – “don’t get married to any artwork” and “it’s never personal”.
Purse Shopping.
Apologies to my ex-wife (who was the inspiration for the name of this category). Purse shopping is a phenomenon that’s popped up in the last few years – usually when end users are involved in the design process (i.e.: they’re spending their own money). This is when a client sees a variation of their proposed logo and exclaim – “There it is! It’s perfect! Just what I wanted!” Then, purse-shopping kicks in. “Why don’t we try moving the globe down, and to the right”. “How’s about we turn that element upside down” (It’s been requested!). If the client and designer have managed to cobble together the ‘perfect’ logo, your initial reaction will probably be the same as the people you’re trying to reach. Fumbling around for a ‘better’ version of the ‘perfect’ logo will only weaken its impact (see art-direction above) or worse – lose the original appeal together. Most ‘purse-shopping’ is brought on by the client’s desire to get their ‘money’s worth’ and exhausting what they perceive is the time paid for in design charges. Here’s one thing to keep in mind – while it’s true you’re paying for somebody’s time (the designer), you’re generally NOT paying for X number of hours. You’re also paying for that designer to utilize their skill, talents and knowledge of design software to create a logo that will represent your company/service/product for years. Milking the project in order to spend a few more hours, after coming up with the ‘perfect’ logo will only weaken the final product. And it you have to micro-tweak the logo to death, it’s not really the design for you (see art-directing the logo for more).
Copying someone else.
As strange as it might seem, we sometimes get asked to 'copy' other people's logos. While this is a bad idea for a variety of reasons, including copyright and trademark problems down the road, and something we refuse to do (see our copycats section for other design firms who take a less arbitrary stance on this) the bottom line is that it defeats the purpose of developing a great logo in the first place. That logo that you like may be a great logo - for the company that's using it. It won't work for you. While it's very helpful for our designers to view types of logos that you 'like' in order to assess the direction that your project will take, it's best to keep the influence of other people's brands to a minimum. When your company becomes successful, it's always better to have a logo that's completely yours, rather than a mark that can be traced to someone else.
Next Page: Logo design types
| |
Deciding if you need a logo
What makes a great logo
How do I design a logo
Do it yourself logo design
Clip art logos
Free logos
Logo Templates
Logo design contests
Online logo design
Selecting a designer
What's a logo worth?
Cheap logo design
Unlimited revisions
Working with our studio
How long does it take?
Getting started step-by-step
Logo design pointers
Logo design guidelines
Logo aspect ratios
Logo footprints
Common logo design mistakes
Logo design types
Illustration based logos
Text only logos
Icon driven logos
Cartoon logo design
Colors & your logo
RGB colors
Spot colors
CMYK colors
Pantone Matching System
Black & white logos
File formats
EPS file formats
JPG file formats
PNG file formats
GIF file formats
Your logo in a .PDF
Logo copyright
Poor man's copyright
Logo trademark
Stationery design basics
Business card design tips
Letterhead design tips
Envelope design tips
Design assets
Managing design assets
Having your logo printed
Print resolution
Gang run printing
Web friendly logos
Logo embroidery
Logos & signs
Uses for your new logo
Updating your logo
Logo repair or design
|
