I should start by saying that I love you readers! Bright, perceptive, articulate — you just rock! What a pleasure to have an audience of colleagues!

Earlier this month, the day the 2014 Sochi Olympics logo was unveiled, a friend e-mailed me the Transformer Studio Olympic logo, saying that he liked the image and its symbolism, to which I couldn’t help but agree. It’s pretty, full of motion and dance and fire. It works in full color and one color, at all scales and in all media. It satisfies Transformer’s creative brief beautifully. I liked it, too.

At least, I liked it as a classroom assignment, where I’d give it an easy A. But the longer I looked, the less I liked. Out in the real world, to represent the real Russia in the real Olympics, the circle seemed vaguely . . . empty.

That sent me exploring, where I discovered that this was not the logo of the 2014 Sochi games at all, but merely a runner-up. The official logo is this one, from Interbrand . . .

. . . which consists of the logotype and the ice crystals, too.

Both entries were designed in Moscow.

Having seen the firebird first (and perhaps because I’d seen it first), my response to the official logo was like some of yours — meh. But that lasted about 10 seconds, and then I started to like it. And the more I looked, the more I liked. Main reasons? There are three: It’s unmistakably Russia, it’s unmistakably winter, and it’s unmistakably today. In 40 years it will look old, as it should, because in 40 years it will live only in record and memory — “Hey, remember back . . . ?”

The firebird — let’s call it that — doesn’t do that. It feels generic, which means, literally, “stock.” It’s a logo with no name. Cover up Sochi, and you’re left without a single clue where these Olympics will be played. Cleveland? Rangoon? Winter? Summer? It’s clip art.

Beautiful, yes, and to be fair, it is not the first host-nation logo to look generic. The problem, however, is that, without a sense of place, the symbolism of its imagery — which is what makes the firebird work — doesn’t work. The feathers and circle dance have no meaning, if they’re perceived at all. As Orlando Angel commented, “It could be a logo from any year, any place. It seems anonymous . . . lacking a relationship to something outside of itself.”

That’s bad news for any logo, but we’re branding Russia, comrades, not Charmin. The Empire. And it’s not, as Erin put it, the “fairy-tale, fantasy Russia,” for which the firebird may have worked. It’s Mother Russia. Peter the Great, Tolstoy, Nicholas and Alexandra, Red Square, Tchaikovsky, Solzhenitsyn. The Bear may be a menacing countenance to those who came of age in the 20th century, but you can’t design him away.

And you shouldn’t, because this is how Russia looks. Said Daria, “I am a designer from Russia, and I can say that it’s quite in our tradition to use heavy brick, cut-out forms (remember Russian avant-garde of the 20th century beginning, our famous posters of the World War time, and socialist realism as the leading trend of design and art).”

Added Paulie, “The [logo] for me says ‘Russia’ — in re-emergence. A nation that respects strength above all. Churchill presented a ceremonial sword to Stalin to honor the ‘steel-hearted citizens of Stalingrad.’ To me, the logo evokes that spirit. The typeface is reminiscent of the Russian revolutionary and wartime posters — a simple, strong, bold appeal to the Russian heart.”

As for the visual details, which to some readers made the logotype “unreadable” and “confusing,” what we have is an English-language logo that hints of Cyrillic lettering (not easy to do), which, to Western eyes, is unreadable. To my eye, the juxtaposition works as both complex and interesting. The “y” in 2014, as Erin pointed out, “looks like the letter for the ‘ch’ sound in Russian, which reflects the ‘ch’ sound in Sochi.” No one gets it at a glance, though. You have to look twice.

You can also see the hint of mountain-sea reflection that represents Sochi, which, the world will learn, is a sub-tropical resort town along the thin strip between the Caucasus mountains and the Black Sea.

The Olympic Games are an ancient event that every two years bring the world’s nations together in a place, in a time. They have a fine and enduring logo. The Sochi 2014 image does what a host-nation logo should do; it puts its stamp on the place and time. These are not the Winter Games of Lake Placid or Lillehammer or Nagano, these are the games of Sochi, and you won’t forget that. In a month, Vancouver will get its turn. Then London. After Sochi, Rio. And so on.

Keep in mind, too, that the block lettering will rarely be seen in isolation; don’t forget those ice crystals — “fresh and tangy,” said Brett — which will be splashed, sprayed, scattered everywhere on venues big and small. You can already download some for yourself.

In the end, the Olympic Games are about the athletes, the competition, the pageantry, the tradition, and never about the logotype. And while, as some of you said, politics and money may have had a hand in making this selection, there is, for me at least, no doubt that they chose the better image.

_______________

For more:
39 Olympic logos from 1924 to 2012. webdesignerdepot.com
Complete, immersive history of the modern Olympics. olympic.org

Hi John,

The hardest part about design is the client.
Have you ever said that?

I can’t believe their taste.
I was asked to design a logo for a riding therapy for children.
I decided to do something clean, tasteful and uncluttered.

Do people understand that the logo does not have to tell the entire story?
Look at the very bottom of this e-mail. I mean, she has the world, a horse, all those kids and a wheelchair!

I just don’t get it. Obviously, I didn’t finish the job, but how do you convince people they don’t have to have every thought element in the logo?

Here is her initial sketch . . .

Here is my design . . .

. . . and my accompanying notes to her . . .

This is a very clean design that is very flexible because there are few lines involved. Think of all the applications you will be placing your logo on. Do you want to embroider it on a T-shirt or a hat (which would be good for riding in the sun)? Do you want to place it on a banner, signs, printed pieces, buttons, water bottles, pens etc.?

Here is an alternative that I offered . . .

. . . and my notes . . .

Alternate concept with the globe behind it. This one is a lot more intricate, with the lines of the globe. Be aware of how it will transfer to any applications you may want to place it on. If you’re using it only on paper or printed pieces, it will not be a concern. I just want to mention the other options in case you want to apply the logo to them.

And here’s what she ended up with!!

——————–

Lori, I’d say she didn’t actually want a logo. She wanted a little story.

John

——————–

How do you help the client see it?

It seems that so many of them want it all too literal.

Trying to convince them that all of those elements don’t have to be in their logo is like beating your head against the wall.

I wouldn’t feel good creating the logo she ended up with. I don’t even think I could do it, because it just isn’t right.

Lori

——————–

First, you have to be sure that your solution is better. In this case, your logo is “cleaner,” but hers is more inviting. Her horse has eyes and an expression that I can connect with, the wheelchair arouses compassion, and the children running toward the horse, along with the headlines, tells me unmistakably what this place is about. If I were flipping through the Yellow Pages and saw these two logos side by side, I’d phone hers.

Her image feels warm, nurturing, enfolding, exactly the things that I’d want in therapy. Yours feels cool, even cold, and somewhat distant. The point of your image appears to be the horse out there in the wind. The point of hers appears to be children being healed — and thrilled.

So this is a case where story trumps graphics.

A brilliant logo will capture the story in a “simple, clean” mark, but that is extremely difficult to do.

John

——————–

It was the 1962 typeface change that visually separated Pepsi-Cola from Coca-Cola, which until then had shared a swashy, Spencerian script, at least in the uppercase letters. Pepsi’s clean, modern look was in sync with 1960s design, in which sans-serif type was acquiring huge popularity, and for a time it left Coca-Cola’s 19th-century logo looking rather old.

Above, left to right, 1930s, 1951, 1962, 1987. Note the Coca-Cola-style script, and that the Pepsi wave has remained almost unchanged for 75 years.

Pepsi’s makeover and high-octane advertising paid dividends in sales. Outsold by Coke five to one in the the early 1960s, by the mid-1980s the gap was two to one, close enough that nervous Coca-Cola introduced “New Coke,” reformulated, it was said, to taste more like Pepsi! (a misadventure that lasted only three months)

While Pepsi’s look has been modified many times, its wavy red, white and blue circle has remained basically the same and is Pepsi’s real icon. The 2008 iteration retains the circle and colors but distorts the wave; and it replaces the bold, full-blast typeface with a light, low-key version — airy, minimal, quiet.

This is not unwelcome. In a world pounded by relentless visual noise (thank you, Internet), Pepsi is joining a move to simplicity and silence characterized by spare, pure design (thank you, Apple). It prevails over the noise not by outshouting it but by erasing it; as in an art gallery, the product alone on a clear field is the only thing you see.

As it was in the 60s, Pepsi’s new design is in sync with the times. This time, however, it has some company. Coca-Cola has gotten synched up, too, ditching its shadows, metallics and fake water drops for a crisp, white-on-red presentation that is simpler, clearer, stronger.

Above, the busy old cans and the quiet new ones.

Side by side, Coke’s new aluminum bottle and Pepsi’s new can make it obvious that we’re in a new era of ultra-clean brand design. These products stand out on cluttered shelves by virtue of their white space — or, in this case, red and blue space.

The question, though, was what do you think of it? Does Pepsi’s new logo work? I asked last week, and you had many bright, perceptive things to say.

For my part, I’m a big fan of the new simplicity. Simple design means that lines, shapes and colors are applied only after asking, “Does this element strengthen or weaken the visual message?” Nothing is plopped down arbitrarily; simple design is characterized by intentional, to-the-point clarity, and it’s always beautiful.

That said, had I been on Pepsi’s board, I would have given the new design a thumbs down. It’s technically adequate (if unimaginative), but the sum of its parts, as many of you pointed out, is static, empty, vaguely bland. It conveys no energy, no motion, no effervescence, and, well, it’s not young. Its styling cues — the round letters, the wavy e, the swashy circle — will please Pepsi insiders, and consumers will recognize it, but that’s the end of the good news. It really could, as others said, pass for an oil can or a tissue box or an airline logo.

Above, Pepsi, Korean Air Lines

So what’s happening? The problem starts with the wavy circle. By disconnecting it from the type and floating it in space, it becomes a singular design element that must stand on its own, which it really cannot do. It’s not a bottle cap, as it once was. It’s not an object. It has no meaning in real life.

Pepsi’s circle and name used to interact — one overlaid the other or was contained within it . . .

. . . so the two functioned as one. The wave added motion and vigor to the name. Alone, however, the Gestalt law of equilibrium takes over and brings all that to a stop . . .

Equilibrium Above, an object in nature tends toward a stable, resting state, as seen in a water droplet. Splashed water beads up — draws inward — and comes to rest in a circle, the shape of greatest equilibrium.

In logo design, a circle is used to convey stability and stasis. It’s the reassuring shape that says, “we’re here, we’re settled, we’re steady, you can trust us.”

Above, left to right, BMW, Target, ABC, AT&T, General Electric, Starbucks

Pepsi, of course, is “here, settled, steady and trustworthy,” but that message is for its shareholders. Its public image is Fun! Carefree! And young!

You’d think the wave would help. It’s active, for sure. I don’t see the “smile” unless I try hard, but it does remind me of sailboarding. Problem is, it’s stuck inside that circle, where it’s too small to overcome the effect of equilibrium and the stasis of the large, empty field around it.

(Above, left to right) Full of motion, no motion, slow motion

The thin typeface doesn’t help, either. Thin type is mostly air. Because of that, it can convey quietness, sophistication, authority, the kind that comes with understatement. But these qualities also require a conventional, grown-up typeface, not Pepsi’s quirky round one.

It’s an awkward setting. Three round forms are followed by an abrupt si. There’s a tiny wave in the e. All is lowercase. The single stroke weight is mechanical, meaning it required machines to draw it, so it lacks the warmth of a human hand. It’s not people.

But why is it here? Understatement is not Pepsi. Pepsi is about bubble and fizz — cheery, exuberant, bursting. This typeface is slow; it’s upright and mostly circles, and you know what they do. Better would be bold type that’s italicized or swoopy or in other ways put in motion. The tiny e wave is moving, but it’s too small to have any effect.

The can slows things further. It’s mostly white space, which is used in graphic design to convey silence. White space in an art gallery is a good thing; it allows the eye to settle undisturbed on the artwork. But here it’s out of place, because there’s nothing to “settle” on except that ball, which is static. Worse, the layout of typeface and ball form not a straight line, which would be fast, but an inert “L,” all of which gives the design its sense of inactivity.

None of this means that the design will fail. It may do just fine — it’s only one part of a program, after all, that Pepsi can power with rhythm and drive. Advertising can be bold and fast — tilted, flashing, spinning, with multiple logos or HUGE logos — but alone, this tepid design will not help them.

Back to Coke
Before I leave the topic, it may be instructive to look again at Coca-Cola’s logotype, which is everything Pepsi’s is not . . .

Coca-Cola’s famous, hand-drawn script is full of human warmth. Circular letters are vigorous and rhythmic, and those swashy Cs have exuberant, carefree flair. Thick-to-thin strokes are visually engaging and fast, because the eye follows converging lines. The name has the strength of aural alliteration, too; Coca-Cola’s repetitive, hard “c” sound is visually expressed in the flowing loops. Best of all, the name is the logo . . .

. . . so no matter how much white (red) space it’s in, no interpretation is necessary. High-contrast red and white could not be stronger, an effect amplified, above, by the high contrast of elaborate script and simple circle, one smooth and plain, the other high texture and high touch. And the logo runs in a single, straight line, which is direct and very fast.

So what do you think? Does Pepsi’s new logo have what it takes? Or should it go back to the drawing board?

Let me know.

———————————————

For more on logo design, we recommend the following print issues:

Reader Glenn Kramer writes: “When I last went grocery shopping, I had the fortune of spotting boxes of the new Diet Pepsi logo side by side with the old design. I happen to love the new look. The sans-serif geometric font with the smiley e, paired with the new Pepsi circle, looks forward-thinking to me. I like the change, even if it’s hard to tell that the Pepsi circle is supposed to be reminiscent of a smile or smirk.

“However, when I posted the photo to Typophile’s Web site, it seems like everyone so far pretty much hates the new look. I wanted to know your take on it. I’m attaching the photo that I took at the grocery store. It’s interesting to see the old and new next to each other for easy comparison.”

———————

Thanks for the photo and your question. This is a big makeover. Pepsi says it will spend $1.2 billion (that’s a b) over the next three years to re-brand its carbonated soft drinks plus its Gatorade and Tropicana lines. Considering the fantastic number of cans, bottles, Web and print ads, point-of-purchase displays, vending machines, billboards, sportswear, stadiums, on and on—worldwide—that must be changed over, well, the scale is mind-boggling.

So does the design boggle you? I’ll give you my observations next week, but this week I’d like to hear from our readers.

A couple of points before you write.

One, don’t go with your knee-jerk reaction, good or bad. Let it simmer awhile. What you know and like (or not) about Pepsi is attached not to the new logo but the old one.

Two, try to be objective. Focus on this design, not what else it may look like. Almost every image looks a little like something else. Ask, “Do I like this look? Would I reach for it? Would I be happy with it?”

Three, try to articulate the reasons for your impressions. (You’re Before & After readers; you can do this.) Keep in mind that we’re interested in design here, not business, marketing, strategic planning, what-were-they-thinking?, none of that. Just, “Do I like this and why?” To get you started, you might look at our Gestalt theory: Equilibrium (article 0676) preview, (which is free), and Simplify, the back page editorial of print issue 32 (which is not).

Also, the can in Glenn’s shot is one in a series of five, all of which can be seen on Pepsi’s site; note how the logo changes from can to can.

Your turn.

(To leave a comment, click on “### Comments” below the print-issue images, then scroll to the bottom.)

For more on logo design, we recommend the following print issues:

I have read the book from Before & After, Graphics for Business. It’s always a good idea for me to work with design. But now, I get stuck on my head to design about “Bali Surfers” logo. Can you help me for give me ideas and sample, so that can inspiring me for make a logo? Thank you. —Fona

Hi Fona,
Tell me more about Bali Surfers. Who are they? Where are they? What do they do? Who is their audience? And so on. —John

Hi Mr. John,
Bali surfers is community of Balinese that liked surf. Balinese surfer always liked peace of mind and enjoyed surf as a beauty.

They live at any region in Bali and every weekend they have the schedule to surf and help people to learn surf in any beach in Bali.

After they surf, they will do something positive for people, like cleaning the garbage on the beach area.

Sometime the surfers from other places in Indonesia or other country want to joined, and we are welcome for them, but we must keep peace on Bali and this earth. Because when we always feeling peace of mind, anything we do will have a positive response from universe.

Mr. John that was about what I know about Bali surfers. Thanks for your help. I’m so happy. —Fona

Hi Fona,
Why do you want a logo? What will it be used for? Do you have images that you’ve thought about? —John

Hi Mr. John,
The logo use for my friend, I help them for give some advice to setup a logo. And they are not commercial community.

And I don’t have the images, I just think how to make it simple and looks interesting. Just the text “Bali Surfers” or with icon image combined with the text.

Can you help me please? Thanks.—Fona

Hi Fona,
Try this . . .

[rssless]

Hi Mr. John,

Thanks Mr. John for your design. It was very nice. Look simple and strong like a wave. I love it very much. You give the nice thing for it and good inspirations and idea to me to make designs.

I will try to make another and I will sent it to you and discuss with you Mr. John. Thanks for your help.

Regards, Fona

Everyone—
Some jobs, like Fona’s, are easier than others. But the logo didn’t pop out of a hat fully formed. Here’s how the pieces came together:

(Above) Although Adobe’s typeface Mojo has its roots in the psychedelic 60s, its soft forms and undulating lines have a rhythmic gentleness well-suited to the “peaceful” surfing that Fona described.

(Above) Surf waves have two components—the swell and the surface burble. The negative shapes in Mojo have plenty of burble. For now, the two words are set as one; we’ll separate them with color.

(Above) Lime and orange are citrusy, tropic-y, high-energy surf party colors. They’re a fun pick that would look great on shirts and surfboards, but they don’t pass the peaceful, laid-back requirement.

(Above) Two similar values of tropical blue say sun and surf, which lapping and sparkling in real life has a huge range of value. The very soft “edge” between words makes the setting mellow.

A gentle curve adds the wave swell that completes the logo.

For more on logo design, we recommend the following print issues . . .

[/rssless]

Angela Lantain

[Posted at 1:15 pm on August 21, 2008 by Angela]

Hi Angela,

There’s very little in design that can “destroy” an established business. Poor design can, however, keep a new business from getting traction. A design can be misleading. It can be inappropriate. It can be sentimental or corny or otherwise cloying. It can be amateurish. And so on. The design you want is the design that expresses unambiguously who you are, beautifully, simply, clearly.

Your project sounds interesting. Show us more.

John McWade

[Posted at 1:30 pm on August, 2008 by John]

[rssless]

I’ve attached a copy of the file containing my business cards and labels. The labels, I have to admit, look kind of weird at first sight, but there’s a reason for that. My retailer requested that I make two separate labels—a price tag that could easily be removed and reused, and a label showing my logo and the name of the product line.

I also thought you might be interested in seeing photos of my completed projects. You can find them in my public Web albums on Picasa.

Angela

[Posted at 5:40 pm on August 21, 2008 by Angela]

Hello John,

An idea occurred to me this weekend. Would you be interested in a project to
build the identity of a crafting business right from the ground floor? I’m sure that I’m not the only artist/crafter who is confused about how to convey a creative yet professional identity. I’d love to see what a designer could come up with. Except for my logo, I don’t really have a design in mind, so it’s a “catch as catch can” sort of project.

[Posted at 1:02 pm on August 25, 2008 by Angela]

Hi Angela,

Thanks, but no, I have a magazine to publish. That said, I spent some time on your Web gallery, and I must say that your stuff is beautiful! I mean really.

So my question—somewhat rhetorical—is, why do you think you need a logotype?

Why would you need this . . .

. . . when you have this? . . .

I can’t think of one reason.

Your art pieces are beautiful. They’re imaginative, professional, and—especially valuable—yours alone. No logo can give you all that. A logo will only put distance between you and your customer that’s not there now.

On top of that, what’s your goal? It’s to get your name—that is, your work and reputation—out there and make sales.

So if I were you, I’d put my art pieces right on my business cards.

Here are four business cards . . .

The cards are easy to make. Each has a photo of a product, plus your name in a clear typeface (Myriad), plus in smaller type the name of the product line. On the back would be your contact information. They would be easy to print on your desktop in small, gift-shop quantities. More conveniently, have moo.com print some card packs for you, and leave a pack on display for shoppers to take.

When I showed these mockups around the office, the response was, “Ooooohh, those [pieces] are beautiful. Whose are they?” (or some variation of this) And people instinctively reached towards them. I mean they physically reached out.

No logo will do that. When your stuff is so appealing that strangers want to touch a mere image, well, I’d say you’re pretty close to business-card perfection!

Try it.

John

P.S.: You need better photos. It says a lot about your pieces that their beauty shows through anyway.

[Posted at 5:48 pm on August 26, 2008 by John]

Hello John,

I think that would be a great idea! I can’t believe that I never thought of that myself, though I did give some thought to putting my artwork on my cheques.

I’m so grateful for your opinion about my work and the image I’m trying to project; without a formal education in graphic design or fine arts, I have to rely on my pieces to speak for themselves. I agree that I’m going to need better photos—especially if they’re going to be published. A digital camera is a definitely a must-have for artists and crafters, and it’s currently on my wish list.

Angela Lantain

[Posted at 5:35 pm on August 27, 2008 by Angela]

Hi Angela,

For Web work and desktop output, a $200 point-and-shoot camera is just fine. Two or three megapixels are plenty. For book-quality photos, you should have an SLR camera. I can recommend the Nikon D40, which on Amazon is about $500 with its standard lens. It’s excellent.

Buy a small tripod. You can probably find one for $25 at Target.

Turn off the flash.

Shoot against a solid, not patterned, background. White or neutral is best. I suggest shooting an entire collection on the same background. This can vary. Your artistic eye will know best.

Whenever possible, shoot in soft, ambient outdoor light, the kind you’d get through a north-facing window. Avoid direct sun, which makes harsh shadows. Avoid artificial light if you can.

If you must shoot in artificial light, set your camera to “fluorescent” or “incandescent” or whatever you’re using. This will help keep the colors true.

Pose your piece against its background. Set your camera on its tripod. Make sure it’s focusing on your piece. Steady finger, then shoot. If you’re indoors at night, the no-flash exposure will be too long to hold your finger steady, so set the camera’s automatic timer, and let it take its own picture. An SLR camera will come with a remote shutter release.

You’ll do great.

John

[Posted at 6:18 pm on August 27, 2008 by John]

Hi Angela,

You still need the price tags and labels that your retailer wanted, so here’s a suggestion that’s easy to do. Each art piece gets two tags—one price and one label. Size is 3/4″ x 1-1/4″, give or take. The tag with the price gets removed. The other says “Angela Lantain original” and remains with the piece when it’s sold.

Along the edge of each tag is a tiny palette of colors that are eyedroppered from the art piece. The colors are unique to the individual piece. If two dozen pieces are on display, the customer will see two dozen different color palettes, but otherwise the tags look alike. It makes a distinctive Lantain “brand,” and you can print them yourself—at least until you’re rich and famous!

See what you think.

John

[Posted at 4:46 pm on September 12, 2008 by John]

Hi John,

The pictures look just great! I especially like the colour palette idea; customers would be better able to choose suitable colours for frames and mats to display the pieces. Thanks for all your help!

Angela

[Posted at 5:41 pm on September 12, 2008 by Angela]

John, I have been a subscriber since the early 90’s and have all issues. As a matter of fact, I think the article you wrote on designing a report in your first two years of your publication was responsible for at least a 1 pt increase in my GPA since I used your format for all my papers.

Anyway, I have a logo I’m working on and was wondering if you could put your spin on it. How much would you charge for your services?

Thanks,
Bill Petrey

[Posted at 10:10 am on July 2, 2008 by Bill]

Thanks for the funny note. Happy to help get you through school! ;-)

About your logo, the short answer is that everything here is about the magazine. If we are able (and you are willing) to use your logo in an article, it costs you nothing. If we can’t use it, we can’t do it.

Why don’t we start by taking a look at it, and we’ll let you know.

[Posted at 11:25 pm on July 3, 2008 by John]

Would be honored to have you rip into my work and make all the readers feel sorry for me. Keep in mind that my only background in graphic art is being a loyal Before & After reader. The colors may be off a bit, but I was trying to simulate the colors in an ear of corn. Colorblindness is awkward when picking color schemes, but thank heavens for RGB %, hex codes and a wife. Okay, enough excuses.

The logo is for a blog/real-estate agent referral site that I call AgentHarvest.com. The site will be an expression of my real-estate opinions (believe me, I have many) and will market my service of finding the perfect real-estate agent to sell your house. I use MLS data to research an agent’s track record to find the best agents in your neighborhood.

The logo is trying to connect a farming harvest theme with real-estate agents. Except for the domain name, everything is fair game for you to play with or remove. The phrase at the bottom is sort of sloppy, but I haven’t come up with anything better yet. It’s all still pretty new. I’ll also be using the theme on the Web site, too.

Thanks, and I look forward to seeing the results of your work.

[Posted at 12:05 pm on July 3, 2008 by Bill]

[viewing the logo] First question: Does Agent Harvest have anything to do with agriculture?

[Posted at 12:21 pm on July 3, 2008 by John]

No, Agent Harvest is purely about residential real estate (harvesting of ideas and opinions, and picking only the best agents from the entire crop of agents).

[Posted at 1:20 pm on July 3, 2008 by Bill]

Graphically speaking, this is well-drawn and cheery. Thing is, it looks really farm-like. Iowa. Corn. All that. That impression is very strong. Since your business has nothing to do with any of that, your logo is sending viewers down the wrong path. So before you can tell them who you actually are — already a tough-enough task — you FIRST have to reel them back from the misdirection. You won’t be able to do that, and even if you could, you’ve made extra work for yourself.

So you made a nice graphic, but it’s the wrong graphic.

My advice would be to rethink your approach. Rather than key on the word “harvest,” think instead from the point of view of the customer. I (the customer) have never heard of an agent “harvester.” All I want is to buy or sell my house. It’s a tough market. You come along and say hey, I can do X for you. So unspoken questions come to mind: 1) Who are you? 2) Do I understand what you do? 3) Do I need what you do? 4) Can I trust you? 5) What’s it cost? 6) How complicated is it? And so on.

You term yourself an agent harvester. What would the customer term you?

Can you take those issues and roll them into a word or an image?

[Posted at 2:16 pm on July 3, 2008 by John]

I knew something about it was off. Now, I’m thinking more about how to do a knowledge exploding head idea, similar to Godin’s Ideavirus. We’ll scrap the farm and go with the head.

How can the answers to your questions be graphically expressed? One approach would be to have ideas flying out of the head that would touch on each answer.

1) Who are you?
A real-estate investor who got a Realtor’s license to buy and sell my own properties, and found a fountain of useful info that non-agents don’t know about. I want to share the knowledge based on selecting Realtors and making sure they perform as expected. Also, beneficial advice for For-Sale-By-Owner sellers.

2) Do I understand what you do?
No, besides offering advice and tips, the find-an-agent service is based off the basic agent-to-agent referral, except that I’m finding qualified agents, not just someone I know to get the referral. As a matter of fact, up to three agents will get the referral and compete for your listing — like LendingTree.com does with loans.

3) Do I need what you do?
Yes, the right agent makes all the difference. I find that right set of agents for you to select your favorite from.

4) Can I trust you?
Maybe. I can build credibility through publishing articles on the AgentHarvest.com site and by testimonials, but ultimately all of my agent recommendations are based solely off provable, raw MLS data that can be given to the client. I’ll be on their side while they select their favorite agent.

5) What’s it cost?
It costs the client nothing. I get paid as a real-estate agent referral. In other words, I get my cut from the cut that goes to the listing agent when and if the house sells. It doesn’t increase your price of the real-estate commission, but it decreases the amount the listing agent would receive. After all, I did his/her marketing and client search for him/her. That part is an industry standard practice, except that it benefits only agents. My way benefits the client (by selecting best agents) and the agent.

6) How complicated is it?
If anything, I make the process of finding an agent easier.

Thanks for your insight. It’s like reading my very own personalized issue of Before & After.

[Posted at 2:44 pm on July 3, 2008 by Bill]

Now we’ll see if I interpreted your advice correctly. No more farm graphics, Hee Haw type fonts or corn-colored pod people. I also rejected the open head approach mentioned in my last e-mail, thinking it is more appropriate for the blog part of the site but not the actual logo or Agent Harvest identity by itself. With the logo, I tried to represent the theme of “Finding the best agents for free.” After all, that’s what the core business is structured around.

The graphic hopefully represents a rating scale focusing on the fact that we find the best agents.

[Posted at 1:36 pm on July 5, 2008 by Bill]

I wish I had more than a few minutes, but let’s see what we can do.

At Before & After we have a mantra: Beauty. Simplicity. Clarity.

Your new images miss all three.

I don’t say this to be harsh, just to move us along.

Before you start drawing, think more about the communication part.

You are a unique business. You are “Agent Harvest.”

What’s that? asks the mystified customer.

It’s “A free real-estate agent finder service.”

Hmmmm, that’s interesting. Maybe I could use that. Let me give this guy a call.

See what’s happened? Your name and tagline got you a phone call.

That’s good.

In fact, that’s great.

So the question is, do you need a logo at all?

I think you don’t.

Buying and selling a house isn’t like buying a Coke. How often do you do it? Once? Twice?

So your customer deals with you one time.

You don’t need a logo for that. Just your name and that good tagline.

Think about it, and get back to me.

[Posted at 12:29 pm on July 7, 2008 by John]

Hi Bill. A few free minutes. You explained that your service is to pick the right person(s) out of a field of many. One of your logos had people in it. Expanding on that . . .

If you showed this image plus your tagline, “A free real-estate agent finder service” to someone in your office, would they get it?

Try it.

Strictly conceptual. We’re not talking about a logo. Just an image.

[Posted at 12:17 pm on July 8, 2008 by John]

I was hoping you’d like the people concept. Your peeps line was a great idea. Here’s what I did with it. What about using a different slogan, one that makes it more personal? However, I can’t figure out how to put the “free” concept in there without making the slogan into a manifesto. Is the fact that it’s free to the seller important enough for the logo to convey it?

Does the idea of the “v” as a pointer come across? What type of fonts would be appropriate?

[Posted at 1:21 pm on July 9, 2008 by Bill]

Hi Bill. “Free” is vital. I (the customer) probably wouldn’t phone you if I didn’t know it was free. Your original tagline says it all.

Let’s get back to concepting, not logo-making. Logo-making is the last step in the process. In fact, you probably don’t need a logo.

The question was, if you showed someone the peeps line with the tag, “A free real-estate agent finder service,” would he get it?

If the answer is yes, you’re home free. It’s clean, it’s clear, it’s simple, and — especially important — it’s complete. ANYTHING you add will muddy the message.

If the answer is no and you have to explain your service further, pay attention to what’s said. What did you have to explain? What didn’t the viewer understand? Then get back to me.

You can use the peeps line (or a better version of it) as a blog header, but you don’t need a logo.

Example on a biz card:

No logotype. Works with or without the graphic.

[Posted at 5:09 pm on July 9, 2008 by John]

Just saw your business card idea. It’s perfect!!! Wouldn’t change a thing. Yes, they WOULD get it. And now, I finally get what you’re saying. What font did you use? That looks great!

No logo for me. The name and tagline work and simplicity rules the day! Thanks for the work you did and the many years of advice through Before & After.

[Posted at 7:26 pm on July 10, 2008 by Bill]

The typeface is Helvetica Neue 47 Light Condensed.

[Posted at 11:19 pm on July 10, 2008 by John]