I had to share this nonsense because, from a client perspective, it seems intuitive, simple and straight to the point. Does this affect a REAL logomark crafter? It shouldn’t be a form of competition, like say the fridge to the ice maker. But it will make your life even more difficult explaining why you need to charge a lot more, need time and further explain why it doesn’t need to “look pretty” as much as it needs to be affective!
Always explain to the client the difference between generic doo doo like this creates:
And compare it to major brands and what intention and purpose came behind the design. Remember a logo is not the brand, its merely a representation of said brand. It doesn’t need to be obvious, or SHOW what it does. That is the branding’s job. You don’t use the logo for the heavy lifting, that is the company who needs to create the association between the soul of the brand and the mark.
“The brand ‘Apple’, doesn’t sell apples, yet their logo is an apple…”
It’s ok if you don’t mind you potentially having the same logo/name as a competitor.
Anyone serious about their business will invest in their business.
But logos don’t have to be designed by designers.
Google designed there’s on the 11th hour against a deadline as a last thought.
I’ve spent a year developing logos with clients to the tune of €100,000 - and I’ve designed logos in a 15 minute sitting with the client who just wants a logo.
It’s all subjective to the clients needs at the time.
If they don’t want to invest a logo for their business then that’s up to them. There’s a tonne of crappy logo makers out there.
Jesus Christ Adobe!!! Wtf man. That’s hurts coming from them. Well Smurf when the AI get’s up to speed (Which I think this is all testing to gather data) we are going to have to deal with that amalgamation of design demons that is coming. We cannot be replaced if we are skilled enough, hopefully this qualifies our clients for us so bottom feeders get filtered out.
I’ve designed logos in a 15 minute sitting with the client who just wants a logo.
NIKE was made by a young lady designer on a napkin in a 15 minute coffee meeting. And they are worth billions. Not because the wings of a goddess’ shoes are displayed as a abstract mark, but because she made it simple, clean and easy to digest. Plus it looks sweet on a paid of shoes.
I’ve spent a year developing logos with clients to the tune of €100,000
Smurf you let me know I will do the heavy lifting for a small cut of those purse heavy clients! I am hungry and ready to go when you are…
Adobe is in about its 15th year of market share growth as a primary initiative (as opposed to focusing mainly on professional user needs). Even in the core pro apps (especially Photoshop), more than half the new features introduced during that time have been (meant to be) of “easy button” nature. Free or easy-access tidbits aimed at whetting the amateur appetite for graphics magic are obviously a component of the strategy. The sword of capitalism has many edges.
When you buy a cake it’s whole.
You can divide it into 6 or 8 slices and everyone gets a smaller slice.
If you cut in half you have 2 slices.
If you don’t cut it you have 1 slice.
Just to say €100,000 had to cover for almost a years work
Admin/Receptionist time
2 Designers working ad-hoc
Endless meetings that went on for hours and didn’t have an outcome
Travel to and from their premises
Design itterations
Printed samples
Test samples
Market research
and lots of other things
So the final bill might be €100,000
But there are many things that need to be paid out of that.
I mean from your story to mine is quite a ways away considering the exaggeration. I also heard she was paid $25.00 and later in life Nike gave her an undisclosed amount of stock as they rised so high.
