Ive decided to rebrand myself. Jrs100000 is unwieldy and make it sound like Im 12 (In fact I was 12 when I started using it as a handle). My new identity is going to be Neon Frog Studios. Ive bought the domain name, email addresses, and will be registering the trademark soon, but I still need to work out my branding.
Here are the logos Ive come up with so far. The backgrounds on the actual versions are transparent, Ive just made them white here so that they are easy to see. I have a full color version, a two color version, and a smaller stamp version that will be used to mark all of my images and sample work. These really need to be flawless and professional looking because they are not something that I do not want to go back and change later.
Overall the toning is quite cool. I think that the frog should be made more dynamic, like kind of a superhero, with perspective really exagerated. An example is the frog leaping at you, back leg swinging. You may wish to view some modern superhero comic action poses to get some ideas. The black 3d writing is kind of distracting - you know the dom.com domain advertisement. Make this into 2d.
Otherwise a fine effort, but fine does not cut it if you want to stand out.
Use a real picture of a frog instead of that 3d one. Change the font to something more readable. If you must keep those drop shadows, at least make them fainter.
Append a “.com” to the end of the name instead of putting a redundant URL right below it.
I’m 12 right now! I hope I never have to change my name…
It does need a neon-like appearance somewhere – on the frog or near the frog. It doesn’t have to be the whole frog, or even parts of it, but you said “neon”.
The arrangement of elements doesn’t easily lead the eye in a single sweeping motion across the whole thing. Find invisible guides for it and rearrange the elements accordingly; kbot’s suggestion of a more dynamic/playful elements may be the key here (good one). Think in terms of the elements “playing” with one another.
Needs more color. Neon? Tropical frogs? Yeah, the concepts demand more color. Pick a “three-tone” palette of saturated tertiaries with a wide analog ranges and a narrow complementary range.
I think the mono version is looking good, you could work on reducing the vertical space between the words and try removing the Caps on the 'N" in neon. Try then working it up into a 2 or three colour logo with a very defined palette. Try using colorsontheweb.com to select a colour combo that works for you
I personally like textured letters. 3d is good if you make it look good. I think you need to add a little more spec to your frog and bend its fingers a bit. A neon glowing frog would look awesome. I also get really annoyed when people think logos have to be simple. I think your logo might look good with a nice background scene. Not complex, mark my words, but just to help with the composition a little. Maybe have your neon frog sitting on a large beautiful leaf in the morning with dew drops shining like crystal droplets from… I think that might look good. For your lettering, if you make it 3d, make it a fuzzy leaf texture with droplets as well, maybe floating in the air above the leaf where the hint of a rain-forest starts to fade out to black. But make sure the letters, or the scene are different than eachother, color-wise, so that you can clearly see both.
One more thing. I think you should make the font a little clearer. For the website, I don’t think it really needs to be put in. I would probably assume the website is the name of the Studios. Not to compare or anything, you can look at my logo (that’s my unfinished website, nothing is going to work). My logo would certainly bow to a logo such as the one I mentioned in my previous post. Oh holy logo!
I think you should look more closely at your frog and pick out the most graphically interesting shape. The hands? Eyes? A side silhouette? Tongue? Fried legs (heh)? Once you decide, emphasize the shape. Furthermore, make every other element (text, typeface, layout, white space, etc.) support that shape.
The reason is because logos are made for instant cognition. As you have it now, it’s a bit complex (note the negative space created by the right leg & arm), and there’s no striking feature yet to draw the eye. It’s also kind of crowded. But: once you discover the prime piece of the frog to use, better ideas will naturally come to you.
I agree with the neon suggestion, too. That frog should look nuclear! :-).
Thank you everyone for the comments! Im putting together a plan of action for the next phase of revisions that I will be working on tomorrow.
I agree that the drop shadows need to go, especially for the smaller text. The text font also could use some work as well in order to be more legible.
As far as making the frog itself neon, some earlier versions did have glowing materials but it just obscured the shape. Ill try playing around with that a little bit more and see if it looks better as a 2d effect rather than including it in the 3d render.
The black and white version I would like to keep in just two colors so that it can be easily (read that as cheaply) printed, but I do like some of the ideas for adding color to it. I may end up making yet another version of the logo so that I have a three color for use online and a two color version for printing.
Im also planning on changing the thumbnail version so that it is based off the black and white logo rather than the full color one.
Im not sure that I want to add a .com to the main logo or just assume that people will find my URL based on the name alone. Helping people find my website is a major purpose for this logo so I dont mind doubling up the text a little bit if its required.
Here are the updated versions. Im not so sure about the black/white/green version. Im probably going to have to rework that one or just get rid of it entirely.
You may want to use less colors, make it simpler and do it all in 2d. There’s a reason most successful logos are simpl, 2d images with few colors. It’s because you can use such a logo on all kinds of mediums, without it looking too different and hurting brand recognition. Also simpler logos tend to portray the idea of brand better then more complex, full-color ones (at least for me, and I imagine other people too given how few full-color logos there are). I think they’re easier to instantly recognize (because of their simplicity) or something like that.
Looks like you’ve got a good concept going there. I took some creative liberties to see if I could help you with your logo ideas. Like others have said, the more simple, the better. The actual company logo really should be as simple and identifiable (to your company) as possible. Whatever else a company wants to do for advertising, etc. is not quite as critical on the actual design. So, attached is a thought to maybe help get the juices flowing…
i think the last one really looks nice, now sticking to the neon theme, if it remains in that size, the frog could use some kindo procedural, cause frogs have got these … ähm …slurp layer (?)
