What do you think of this logo?

[^^Gord^^]

Ok, technically not a photography post but I think it's still the best part of the forum for this.

Spent the last 2-3 hours trying to come up with a logo to use on my photos as I want to move away from the border I'm using at the moment. This is what I've come up with.......

Number 1

Could you give me your thoughts? Good? Bad? Ugly?

Cheers!

 

[Banish]

looks fine, but personally I would make all the letters the same size ?

 

[^^Gord^^]

looks fine, but personally I would make all the letters the same size ?

Number 2

I think I prefer the first design but thanks for the feedback.

 

[A.N.Other]

I like the concept, but I think the logo should be symmetrical, really. It looks a bit weird at the moment, especially with the air intakes (I take it) at the sides of the cockpit being different sizes and the nose not being above the middle of the tail.

 

[^^Gord^^]

I didn't really want it to be symmerical. It makes it look too 'constructed'; if that makes sense?

I did give it a go but I'm really struggling to get it lined up as the photo it's taken from the aircraft it beginning to role as well as being off centre. I haven't got many underneath Harrier shots to work with.

 

[greedy123]

surely a logo is meant to look constructed...

 

[^^Gord^^]

I like the concept, but I think the logo should be symmetrical, really. It looks a bit weird at the moment, especially with the air intakes (I take it) at the sides of the cockpit being different sizes and the nose not being above the middle of the tail.

Ah! Looking at it some more I know what you mean about the air intakes. The bulge you see on one side is the air refueling probe. I might be able to remove that.

surely a logo is meant to look constructed...

Not always. This logo came from a real photo rather than being created from scratch.

 

[^^Gord^^]

Number 3

Any better?

 

[A.N.Other]

I didn't really want it to be symmerical. It makes it look too 'constructed'; if that makes sense?

I see what you mean. However, the end-user would assume that a shot from underneath should be symmetrical, so at the moment, it looks like you've taken a symmetrical image and made it into 'italics'. If you're wanting to portray that it's come from a photo rather than a blue-print, then I'd suggest you use something more like you've got in your sig - obviously a fighter, but a slightly different take on the norm.

 

[^^Gord^^]

Ok, here is a different take on it....


Number 4

 

[^^Gord^^]

And another!

Number 5

Number 6

 

[muttclugg]

I prefer the one in the 5th picture. The last one looks a bit big and seems to draw me away from the picture I think.

 

[greedy123]

I prefer the one in the 5th picture. The last one looks a bit big and seems to draw me away from the picture I think.

+1

 

[A.N.Other]

Yup, 4 or 5 for me. I definitely prefer the new logo, though

 

[^^Gord^^]

Cheers guys, you are really helping me out with your feedback.

Is the Typhoon too big in number 4? It's my pick so far but five is getting more picks by the people I'm asking.

Wish I could have made a poll!

 

[Amp34]

I'd say number 6, but with the writing size of the rest (so no 4 but with the typhoon central to the 'F').

Being picky I also have issues with the 'k' at the end, it looks too thin.

 

[^^Gord^^]

Number 7

Number 8

99.6% decided on Number 8 which I think ties up with what Amp34 is saying.

 

[Sirrel Squirrel]

no. 8 for me

 

[Amp34]

Yep no.8

If it were me I would maybe try it all in lower case, so the 'F' is an 'f' and curves at meeting the plane. Having said that it's another tiny pointless detail, not sure it would look better though.

 

[A.N.Other]

8 is nice