Font Choices for a Plant Related Logo

The Crit Pit
, ,
#42

I definitely think you ought to simplify your mark; take the concept of “plant that surfs” back to it’s roots (pun acknowledged) and try a different approach until you find one that you can communicate clearly without being so reliant on your color pallet. A wave made of plants? A leaf that is a surfboard? If you’re committed to a nautilus, the curl of a nautilus shell has a similar fractal pattern as an unrolling fern. The point being, if you’re trying for something unique, you’ll get more mileage out of a clever concept than a complicated execution.

EDIT: And I suppose it’s worth repeating, the colors shouldn’t have to clarify what the mark is - the shape should stand on it’s own, and then the colors add an additional layer of information. If the colors need to compensate for the shape, you should re-tweak the shape. Think of it like trying on pants - these ones will fit if you suck your gut in, but you shouldn’t have to suck your gut in to make a good pair of pants fit. Get a different size.

1 Like
#43

Both can work great. However with the 2nd logo, the font is unnecessary in its extra details, as it can take away from the shape logo which already has a a wavy/plant design. It’s just unnecessary. A font like that works best if it needs to stand alone because of its unique slabs and serifs.

I think with your most recent post you’re just going further away from what it should be. Here’s a little tip: use the same sans serif font or another sans serif font and simply add a slight and superficial slant (italicization) to it.

1 Like
#44

Thanks for taking the time to write all that, I appreciate it.

I think I understand you: and you’re totally right in that common interests, relationships and activities are other factors which are important and worth considering when determining a design direction if you have that data at your disposal.

If you think my resoning is flawed, how would you determine which of the two proposed design direction is a better fit?

#45

With this logo, that’s hard to answer because, like I mentioned in another post, I think it’s flawed. The colors are illogical, the logo is bulky, crowded and complicated with too many ideas cobbled together, and the typography is awkward. I don’t see any improvement from the first version and. For that matter, I think the subsequent redos took the typography from awkward to clumsy.

I think your suggestions about focusing in on the target audience were very good. I’m just questioning that this logo or the audience for the product is something where the audience’s age is all that relevant to the logo design. And even if it were, there’s nothing about the this logo or the typography that, to me, suggests one age or another. It’s pretty age-neutral as I see it, which seems appropriate.

My long-winded post mentioned that age can often be a factor to consider for various reason, but I don’t see plant or surf information as being one of them unless the company had a specific reason for it.

To me, more important things to consider would be what’s unique about this particular plant-surf product (whatever it is) and who might be interested in those things. If it turns out, the product focuses on, say, a young, eco-centric crowd of free-thinkers who seek out sustainable, organic solutions to everything eaten, well, that provides a direction that includes age. In that case, I’d be inclined to give the logo a more trendy, simple, fresh sort of personality coupled with simple, casual, airy typography. I really don’t know enough about the company to say, but I think your suggestions about identifying the target audience and tailoring the logo to resonate with them is spot on.

We could get into another discussion about the personality differences between grotesque vs geometric sans type too, but let’s save that for another time. :wink:

1 Like
#46

Not to pick nits but I’m an old guy who might be interested in eco-centric, freethinking, sustainable, organic solutions to food. Again, the topic isn’t age specific. The older I get, the more I find that to be true. Ad-focus-wise, yes, as B mentioned above, but not so much if what you want is clicks.

Quite honestly? I do a web search with any question I might have. The results don’t show me logos, they show me partial answers. I click on the one that gives me the most likely answer first (and it may not be the top hit.) If the site happens to have a logo in comic sans? Oh, well. Not caring. And that isn’t just for gardening. It goes for everything I look for on the internet. Even looking for goods, though for goods, I’m more likely to do a search and look at images rather than web words. No logos there either.
Is that a weird thing? Or does everyone else do the same thing?