OUGD503 - Studio Brief 1/Individual Practice
Development: Logo - Feedback
To evaluate the concepts created for the logo designs, it was essential to obtain feedback from students and tutors as they have critical design insight and can be attributed to the target audience being part of the general public. This feedback started by showing participants the previous blog post that highlights a succinct explanation behind each of the digital renders to articulate the concept behind each design (Found Here), They were then invited to share opinions regarding their favourite concepts and which designs they felt would make the most appropriate logo for the new identity if Grand Cafe.
There was positive reaction from students towards designs 1 and 6 as they felt the thick weights stood out and would create bold, iconic logotype. Comments included 'I think these two look contemporary and would be really versatile over all the different things you put the logo on' however some of the students felt these designs felt 'too digital' for the brand, who promote the environment suggesting these concepts felt a little too 'corporate' to represent the brands true identity.
There was mixed feedback for the 2nd design as some students liked the playful arrangement of the letterforms saying 'it makes it more fun and gives the brand bit of personality' although other students felt it wasn't as successful as some of the other designs saying 'it looks bit childish like fridge magnet letters, this might confuse who your audience actually is'
Concept 3 was praised for its minimal aesthetic however issues arose regarding its legibility. Due to its minimalist design it was identified that 'the type doesn't pop or stand out which is what you really need from a logo' a student said 'a logo needs to be rememberable, and while this looks really nice it won't stand out'
The abbreviation used within concept 4 was highly praised for being 'inventive' and could be used in isolation or anchored with the supporting text however students felt the serif typeface was inappropriate for the tone of the brand. This was highlighted in comments such as 'I like the whole abbreviation thing, but the serif makes it look far too fancy for the brand' and 'I think the serifs confuse the brands message, this might put off some customers as well thinking it might be too posh for them or might be out of their price range based purely on the aesthetic.
Finally the 5th design was said to be the most appropriate by several students, they gave comments including 'this looks like it should be in a trendy urban cafe' and 'I love how you've got rid of the digital feel that was too obvious in other designs with the subtle little deformities in the letters' the most notable being 'I think this represents the band the most appropriately out of all these designs'
There was positive reaction from students towards designs 1 and 6 as they felt the thick weights stood out and would create bold, iconic logotype. Comments included 'I think these two look contemporary and would be really versatile over all the different things you put the logo on' however some of the students felt these designs felt 'too digital' for the brand, who promote the environment suggesting these concepts felt a little too 'corporate' to represent the brands true identity.
There was mixed feedback for the 2nd design as some students liked the playful arrangement of the letterforms saying 'it makes it more fun and gives the brand bit of personality' although other students felt it wasn't as successful as some of the other designs saying 'it looks bit childish like fridge magnet letters, this might confuse who your audience actually is'
Concept 3 was praised for its minimal aesthetic however issues arose regarding its legibility. Due to its minimalist design it was identified that 'the type doesn't pop or stand out which is what you really need from a logo' a student said 'a logo needs to be rememberable, and while this looks really nice it won't stand out'
The abbreviation used within concept 4 was highly praised for being 'inventive' and could be used in isolation or anchored with the supporting text however students felt the serif typeface was inappropriate for the tone of the brand. This was highlighted in comments such as 'I like the whole abbreviation thing, but the serif makes it look far too fancy for the brand' and 'I think the serifs confuse the brands message, this might put off some customers as well thinking it might be too posh for them or might be out of their price range based purely on the aesthetic.
Finally the 5th design was said to be the most appropriate by several students, they gave comments including 'this looks like it should be in a trendy urban cafe' and 'I love how you've got rid of the digital feel that was too obvious in other designs with the subtle little deformities in the letters' the most notable being 'I think this represents the band the most appropriately out of all these designs'
Tutor Feedback:
Asking tutors for feedback regarding the logo designs would further establish which concept is the most appropriate to realise the brand. I explained the concepts of the different designs to a number of tutors and also showed them the brand DNA which highlighted the brand personality and tone of voice. Tutors suggested that the 5th concept was the most appropriate as it feels friendly and accessible, is representative of the brands ethical values and will due to its modified letterforms can become iconic of the brand.
 |
| Extract from brand DNA |
Further tutor feedback suggested trailing a range of typefaces particularly the one used in concept 6 as this thicker weight would make the logo stand out further and create a sense of authority. This is something that can be further developed to ensure the final logo concept will create a greater sense of brand awareness that will appeal to the audience more so than the brands current identity.
No comments:
Post a Comment