Posted: May 20, 2010 11:46 am
by shh
LIFE wrote:Alright, point taken. If we go by legibility "ratskep" is surely more legible then?

It'd be my choice, definitely, I think it's got more punch, and it's not difficult to figure out, but not as straight-forward as rationalskepticism, so there's a bit of a puzzle there, it fits very well imo. :cheers:

I'm With Stupid wrote:
The legibility thing is true, but it's the sort of thing that's more important in road signs than company logos. There are as many all caps as regular logos. Pepsi have just changed to all lower case, but they've been all caps for years. I've got a bar of Dairy Milk chocolate next to me, and that's all caps too, even if the Cadbury bit isn't. I've also got my Barclays bank card reader, which has an all-caps logo, and I'm typing this on my Dell laptop, which is all caps. I can see electrical products by Bush, Humax, Toshiba, Philips and Pure, all in all-caps. And just for balance, I've got a letter from Specsavers, which is written normally. And they should know about reading. :grin:
Sure, there is definitely an element of preference here, but if you look at logo's that are considered classic you'll generally find the best tend to stick to the rules, and last far longer than those that don't, Coke, Apple, Adobe, ABC, all stick to proper (for writing) capitalization).
There are some differences too, the dell is a mixture of a logotype and a logo, the "E" is a symbol as well as a letter-form, but you're right, these rules aren't absolute, but the best way to look at it is that normal capitalization is justified because it's how capitals are placed in normal writing, and lower case is justified because it's more legible, if you're going for all-caps, you should have some justification that over-whelms these two.
Pepsi's logotypes are a bit of a design joke tbh. ... dition.php
As you can see, barring the New Coke atrocity, there's been very little change in the coke letter-forms in more than a century. Pepsi has always sometimes obviously, been trying to keep up, and the fact that they've changed so much and so often, tells us something about the quality of their logo.

Perhaps most interesting, since you said this, I thought I'd check out some movie posters, because they have that thing of never usually being an automatically recognisable logo, and having to catch people's attention in public and presumably be fairly legible, as well as being longer than your usual logo. And they're practically all all-caps. Look at all of the most successful films in history. All of the Star Wars, Avatar, Titanic, Indiana Jones, Back to the Future, Lord of the Rings, The Dark Knight, Pirates of the Caribbean, Jurassic Park, Spiderman, Shrek, hell, even Gone with the Wind. Harry Potter is the only one I can find that isn't. I dunno if that's just a movie thing, but it doesn't seem to have done them any harm.
True, but they're not relying on the logo in the same way, nor for the same amount of time. Also they have to a large degree a captive audience, movie goers are going to seek out movies, and who's gonna forget the opening scene of star wars?

Tbh, I think people should just do what they think looks best for their particular design. Anyway, I've officially given up after realising I lack both the drawing ability and the photoshop skills to do it.
Yeah, the stuff I'm saying is no more than pointers. You should definitely knock something together with a biro if you've got an idea, if the idea is good, we'll sort out polishing it up, that won't be a problem. Don't use photoshop though, it's bitmaps, so it's not capable of producing the kind of crispness you want in a logo, at least not without putting in extra effort that using vector does automatically. Inkscape is free, not sure if I mentioned that or not.
@ Callilessia, that's very nice, but are the pictures copyrighted? I like the font a lot, is it an uncial?