I placed it in context on a letterhead and it looks so boring. It looks like a logo for a natural or eco-friendly company not an up and coming music production. This is down to the low and unchangeable opacity it just makes the logo look too tame. Even though they prefer this logo I think I am going to use the stronger ink one instead. It can be justified because currently their branding does not reflect their company.
I have messed around with colours on the ink logo and they appear a lot brighter. The logo suddenly has a vibrant appearance. However the colours I have looked at all look like they should be for a different type of company.
Blue - It looks like some kind of aqua company focusing on clear and clean water.
Red - Looks way to similar to virgin media.
Green - Looks like some sort of logo for reusable materials or recycling.
I will play around with colour more and try to find one which really works for them as a business. I will also play around with the width of the lines as at the moment they are all the same width. One of the aspects Sam and Harry liked about the previous watercolour one was that they were different widths.
I have looked into trending colours and applied them to the logo to see if any of them work and look good.
The Seaport blue works really nicely, the logo looks fresh and interesting as well as dynamic.
The crushed grape doesn't seem to look as vibrant once applied to the logo. The colour looks dull and doesn't really fit the music scene.
Azure blue is refreshing, it looks new, clean and full of energy.
The Hydro green looks mature and sophisticated.
I love the Scarlet Sage however it may be too similar to virgin media yet again!
The Marigold is a warm, summery colour however it doesn't fit in well with their branding.
I will get back to Sam and Harry and explain to them why the watercolour logo perhaps isn't the best one to use and why it isn't appropriate. I will show them the new ink logo with modified widths as well as in the range of colours above.
No comments:
Post a Comment