Blogads Logo Contest

Logo name: Connecting the blogosphere with advertisers
Creator: Ken Lonseth
Explanation: When looking at the final 9 submissions ask yourselves this: which ones are unique, which ones meet the submission guidelines, and which ones have the most staying power? Sure there are some in the final batch that look “clean” but those are not the ones people will remember. Of the final 9 how many can you describe in 4 words or less? More often than not, the logos that look appealing initially are also the least memorable. If you’re going to stand out from the rest of the corporate web, then pick a logo that stands out from the rest. My submission stands out, no question about it. In my final revision I dropped the tagline and .com parts, tightened up the spacing a little as well as brightened up the orange. The logo should be scaled down about half size in order to fit in the current BlogAds site layout. Any revisions or further applications across any media of this logo can be easily done in the future if need be. Thanks for the contest, it’s been fun.
hyperlink / comment (4) / see in blogads

add comment

If you are commenting on a logo, please focus on concrete suggestions for improving the logo. Cheers or jeers won't get published.

comments

This is the best one by far. Oh, it's mine? Ooops...
(Ken Lonseth at 2005/10/01 09:34:53.621 GMT-5)

We, of course, are going to have to agree to disagree on you comment ;) However, in regards to your post in the weblog, I dont' see the "versatile" changes you made to be very useful to Henry. Even though those changes were easy for you, they probably wouldn't be easy for someone at blogads to make. A logo really shouldn't need to be altered in order to work in different applications. Surely they're not going to want to have you make changes to the logo every time they want it on a different size media? (I'm thinking of the several variations you used.) And, surely you're not willing to do all that work for free anyway? I dunno, I think it's fun, and probalby the best of the hand drawn versions, but I still think that a lot of that fine-line detail (which is about the most obviously hand-drawn portion) would be difficult to scale.
(Brian Ford at 2005/10/02 10:44:57.254 GMT-5)

Good debate going on here by the way. I’m trying to remain un-biased, but it’s getting pretty hard now I’ll admit. There have been some good remarks about the versatility of this logo, and if there’s time to put something together that shows it, I will do so. In the mean time, you’ll just have to take my word for it. No, it won’t scale into a 234x60 box very easily, but to be fair the link Carm gave demonstrating his logo in an online ad is illegible unless I need new glasses. http://www.graphicnet.com/blogads/ad.jpg ADS shows up, but BLOGS is just an orange mess. (making the logo black for the smaller sizes would remedy this) Show me one major company that doesn’t have more than 4 versions of their logo when trying to accommodate for the different “standards” online as well as offline. There are very few. I can just as easily ask Carm what he’s going to fill up that negative space with on a 120x240 banner or on a 200x200 square. No, Brian I do not have time to “tweak” BlogAds logo for them every step of the way, and the logo should have most of the flexibility built in. This is a very good point. But as a person I remain very flexible to my current employee and to my freelance clients, and within reason will do little tweaks for them if need be. Carm’s logo is the easy compromise in whatever meetings/discussions Henry has about these finalists. I still think mine is the less corporate looking. And I stand by it being versatile and flexible. It’s the bomb and would look great on a mug.
(Ken Lonseth at 2005/10/03 23:34:01.378 GMT-5)

Love It!
(Amir Meshkin at 2005/10/21 02:52:05.250 GMT-5)