This is my "final" logo design for an awareness campaign focusing on the alternative form of graffiti that has been growing in popularity called "light graffiti"
...an investigative journalism show on a local TV company in a city that doesn't care about spelling and punctuation. In 1985.
Or am I missing something? Doe "xpose" (without the e at the beginning and the é -- note the accent -- at the end) mean something in the universe of "light graffiti"? Did you choose the name? If so, why?
Is "light graffiti" done electronically? If not, why the pixelation above the "x"?
Don't get me wrong, it's a cool logo, even though the lack of an accent over the "e" at the end makes me twitch (because, you know, [e]xpose and [e]xposé are two entirely different words, not that anybody gives a flying fig anymore). I just don't think it addresses the scope of your company's work, as you've described it. Again, though, it may well be that I lack some crucial understanding of what that work entails.
Sorry, I should have explained the whole project. Its aimed at creating an alternate form of graffiti. "Light Graffiti" is accomplised by moving a light source or sources around in front of a camera set to a longer exposure. You can create many of the same forms using light trails that conventional graffiti artisits create using spray paint. Another part of the campaign is to create a public portal (specific to this art) these artists can upload thier work to. As far as the name, it is contrived from areas of the campaign.
1. Using a long exposure to capture the work.
2. Artists can get their work exposed by uploading to the site.
3. The actual long exposure photography exposes non-existant light trails to the human eye.
The pixelation is used to bring fourth the concept of digital art being exposed on the web.
That should sum up the overall concept of the project and hopefully shed some light on the logo design.
____________________________________
Graphic Designer - Multimedia Designer
...why some of keep harping on getting proper descriptions of the project? I wish you had provided this essential detail right up front. Would have saved time and nerve-endings :-)
That said, I'm still having a problem with the "exposé" name for something that doesn't involve investigative journalism, or tabloid gossip or something like that. The word seems to have nothing at all to do with the actual project.
Good point about the difficulty of reproducing this logo on tee-shirts, caps, etc. and also about the relative size of the pixelation.
Good-looking logo, but I still think it works best as the bumper for the IJ segment of a TV news program, not for a project (and what a COOL one it is!!!) involving electronic graffiti and universal enjoyment of it.
One thing you might want to think about visualizing in the logo somehow is that this form of graffiti doesn't deface anything, and that, as I mentioned just before this, it can be shared with such a wide audience, rather than just folks in the 'hood.
Disclaimer: I make a distinction between graffiti (which defaces) to art work intended to reclaim a deteriorating wall for art's sake, and to help define or build community. I'm not sure if you make the same distinction, in which case, some of my reactions to this might not be valid. (They might not be anyway, but there you go ;-)
First of all it's kind of a great project. Gratulations. The logo... Well, that's a a good start. First of all, I think xpose is ok, but I would emphasize the X part. Then the logo is too detailed. From my point of view a logo should work in 2cm as well as 2 meters. There are a few very thin lines that in certain techniques fail. First of all, embroidery or metalworking artist will curse you if you ask them to make something with this logo (like gifts for your site visitors or even an online shop). The pixelation is good in concept, but the pixels are too small. I would make them bigger, like in the Xerox logo.
But then again it's a great project and good logo start. It only needs some work invested...
Also too many ideas in one logo. The main wordmarks with the graffiti typeface is one, the buildings are another and then the pixelated fade is yet another. I would drop at least one of the three - my recommendation is loosing the buildings and make the word mark fade out in the pixelated style, but bigger pixels.
I think this logo is the best looking one out of all the recent critiques.
That being said, the above people have all made valid points. My main gripes would be that the X gets a little lost and the balance is a little heavy on the right. As suggested above, a bigger X would look nice and probably fix the problem of it getting lost, but may throw the balance off even more. As for the pixelated effect, I think it's a little weak since the squares are outlined. I thought it was some tablature music for a guitar at first glance (don't outline the pixels). Also, Instead of using a gradient, maybe keep the square pixels solid (with no outlines) and achieve your fade out by the amount of negative pixels that eat into the colored portion. Somewhat like a halftone dot on a gradient, except with square pixels. Maybe you could pixelate your whole skyline. That would help simplify the detail as recommended above, while still keeping your 'cityscape' feel.
Just wanted to say thanks for all the feedback on the logo. This was my first time posting and am glad I did and will continue to post work in the future. I feel it is very important to hear feedback from a wide range of audiences and not just classmates or other employees.
Sorry, but this does not appear to have anything to do with graffiti, or light.
If the concept is about 'light graffiti', but you then have to explain what the phrase actually means before anyone understands it, then I think you have a problem.
Also, if you are going to keep things as is..
..Why not make the 'x' more visible - it looks barely there.
And then do the same on the other side - Make part of the 'e' pixellated, to balance the sides, and might also help with the accent issue.
You could also use a graffiti font that's not too graffiti-ish, I guess.
Great logo for...
...an investigative journalism show on a local TV company in a city that doesn't care about spelling and punctuation. In 1985.
Or am I missing something? Doe "xpose" (without the e at the beginning and the é -- note the accent -- at the end) mean something in the universe of "light graffiti"? Did you choose the name? If so, why?
Is "light graffiti" done electronically? If not, why the pixelation above the "x"?
Don't get me wrong, it's a cool logo, even though the lack of an accent over the "e" at the end makes me twitch (because, you know, [e]xpose and [e]xposé are two entirely different words, not that anybody gives a flying fig anymore). I just don't think it addresses the scope of your company's work, as you've described it. Again, though, it may well be that I lack some crucial understanding of what that work entails.
Mara
Project info
Sorry, I should have explained the whole project. Its aimed at creating an alternate form of graffiti. "Light Graffiti" is accomplised by moving a light source or sources around in front of a camera set to a longer exposure. You can create many of the same forms using light trails that conventional graffiti artisits create using spray paint. Another part of the campaign is to create a public portal (specific to this art) these artists can upload thier work to. As far as the name, it is contrived from areas of the campaign.
1. Using a long exposure to capture the work.
2. Artists can get their work exposed by uploading to the site.
3. The actual long exposure photography exposes non-existant light trails to the human eye.
The pixelation is used to bring fourth the concept of digital art being exposed on the web.
That should sum up the overall concept of the project and hopefully shed some light on the logo design.
____________________________________
Graphic Designer - Multimedia Designer
-=- www.williambiwer.com -=-
Now do you see...
...why some of keep harping on getting proper descriptions of the project? I wish you had provided this essential detail right up front. Would have saved time and nerve-endings :-)
That said, I'm still having a problem with the "exposé" name for something that doesn't involve investigative journalism, or tabloid gossip or something like that. The word seems to have nothing at all to do with the actual project.
Good point about the difficulty of reproducing this logo on tee-shirts, caps, etc. and also about the relative size of the pixelation.
Good-looking logo, but I still think it works best as the bumper for the IJ segment of a TV news program, not for a project (and what a COOL one it is!!!) involving electronic graffiti and universal enjoyment of it.
One thing you might want to think about visualizing in the logo somehow is that this form of graffiti doesn't deface anything, and that, as I mentioned just before this, it can be shared with such a wide audience, rather than just folks in the 'hood.
Disclaimer: I make a distinction between graffiti (which defaces) to art work intended to reclaim a deteriorating wall for art's sake, and to help define or build community. I'm not sure if you make the same distinction, in which case, some of my reactions to this might not be valid. (They might not be anyway, but there you go ;-)
Mara
First of all it's kind of a
First of all it's kind of a great project. Gratulations. The logo... Well, that's a a good start. First of all, I think xpose is ok, but I would emphasize the X part. Then the logo is too detailed. From my point of view a logo should work in 2cm as well as 2 meters. There are a few very thin lines that in certain techniques fail. First of all, embroidery or metalworking artist will curse you if you ask them to make something with this logo (like gifts for your site visitors or even an online shop). The pixelation is good in concept, but the pixels are too small. I would make them bigger, like in the Xerox logo.
But then again it's a great project and good logo start. It only needs some work invested...
Agree with wszp above. too
Agree with wszp above. too detailed.
Also too many ideas in one logo. The main wordmarks with the graffiti typeface is one, the buildings are another and then the pixelated fade is yet another. I would drop at least one of the three - my recommendation is loosing the buildings and make the word mark fade out in the pixelated style, but bigger pixels.
great start, nice job, just a bit too much.
Nice lookin logo
I think this logo is the best looking one out of all the recent critiques.
That being said, the above people have all made valid points. My main gripes would be that the X gets a little lost and the balance is a little heavy on the right. As suggested above, a bigger X would look nice and probably fix the problem of it getting lost, but may throw the balance off even more. As for the pixelated effect, I think it's a little weak since the squares are outlined. I thought it was some tablature music for a guitar at first glance (don't outline the pixels). Also, Instead of using a gradient, maybe keep the square pixels solid (with no outlines) and achieve your fade out by the amount of negative pixels that eat into the colored portion. Somewhat like a halftone dot on a gradient, except with square pixels. Maybe you could pixelate your whole skyline. That would help simplify the detail as recommended above, while still keeping your 'cityscape' feel.
All in all, it's an attractive logo.
-Shawn
http://www.ssarts.com
Great crit
Just wanted to say thanks for all the feedback on the logo. This was my first time posting and am glad I did and will continue to post work in the future. I feel it is very important to hear feedback from a wide range of audiences and not just classmates or other employees.
Again, thanks.
____________________________________
Graphic Designer - Multimedia Designer
-=- www.williambiwer.com -=-
- Graffiti -
Sorry, but this does not appear to have anything to do with graffiti, or light.
If the concept is about 'light graffiti', but you then have to explain what the phrase actually means before anyone understands it, then I think you have a problem.
Also, if you are going to keep things as is..
..Why not make the 'x' more visible - it looks barely there.
And then do the same on the other side - Make part of the 'e' pixellated, to balance the sides, and might also help with the accent issue.
You could also use a graffiti font that's not too graffiti-ish, I guess.
Just my thoughts..