Wow, quite a week. Lots of discussion, we really do read everything you comment and your opinions do have an impact on our decisions. I think our choices this week may surprise you a little bit, lets see….
We went for two designs again this week. We reviewed all the votes of staff and the panel, and picked to put through the following two designs, because we think they have the right balance between outstanding idea and near perfect execution:
1. The first is Label Spread by Ulahts
Seeing the new versions only backed up for us that this design is nearly ready. It fits the brief really well and is very flexible. Here are some other variants
While we’re not convinced about having the shirt attached, the new version also shows clearer separation between Spread & Shirt:
2. The second is “Label Cut Hole” by Prince. We think it can be an innovative and radical concept if it’s used the right way, in its current format. But as I said before and picking on one comment that it looks “generic when used online”: we think there is a lot of potential still in the design to push this concept further and to make it really outstanding. Just to give you an idea what we see is not the “half moon” or the “ring”, but really the idea of tagging and labelling in a consequent but at the same time reduced manner. You could loads with this, the extreme end being making holes in every t-shirt that we send out. Its exactly what we hoped from the OLP, that an idea would emerge that really excited and surprises us. Label Cut hole does this and much more.
There were two other entries that came close, really close. The first is “Your own label” by MaumerDesign
Another well executed design. As much as we’re all into this, somehow it just sort of scratches the surface of what is possible, its just not pushing the boundaries enough. For that reason it doesn’t make the grand final.
The second was “Redtab” by Kimlarsen. Internally and from the panel this design received easily the highest number of votes. But a lot of the comments all suggested what we were thinking, that its just not there yet, its a concept but not a finished logo. The balance between idea and execution is not where it should be for a grand finalist design, so we didn’t put it through. Here are the thoughts of our internal steering group and the panel that voted for it:
Steering Group Review:
*Good: Photo realistic style, Simple, easily plottable, best representation of our tagline so far, easy and striking.
*Improve: Flexibility, red label is overused and has other connotations, lacking in a signia or stand alone element, typo is not there yet.
Jana: Gets across label point clearly. I’m not sold on the font, and it doesn’t really separate spread and shirt, but I think you can get there with this idea.
Frank Piller: The most original of the short listed designs — finally, not just another blue/white combination. The stitching provides plenty of opportunities to turn the label into graphics and a corporate CI.
Branded: The label excites because it shows how it might look on a garment.
And some of you made interesting points about this design here
So congratulations to Prince and Ulhats! Thanks to everybody who took part last week and made our job so difficult. Let the discussion commence…..
I was curious to read the panel’s comments on the finalists like in the first week! Why did your report just those about the red redtab?
It would be interesting and also useful to read the panel’s opinions about the first two…
Number 1: ‘Label Spread’ is lovely, but it’s not a logo - it’s a great illustration, but I can’t see it being used as a logo. It’s too… lovely, in a way. It’s not striking enough, though perhaps the concept could be manipulated to be a stronger illustrative logo.
Number 2: label Cut Hole: not crazy about this at all, apologies to the creator - I can see what he was getting at, but take the icon in isolation and what have you got? A circle.
I think the strongest logo you have on this page is the black and white t-shirt with the S by MaumerDesign - it’s not very well integrated with the type, but the iconic nature of the illustrative element is the hottest lead I see here.
congratulations, finalist! don’t give up too soon, all the others - you’ve all submitted great designs!
mootsie - you’re right. but like adam mentioned above - the redtab was the one with the most comments, that’s why we thought we post these .. opinions on the other drafts were quite balanced and each panel member had it’s own favourite. But one quote I have available and can deliver you is the one from computerlove on label spread: “simple to adapt and works everywhere. Good way to interpret “Label” and “shirt”.”
frank - i also agree and i mucho like the maumer design shirt and I hope we maybe see another updated version of it, ie. with a slightly different font. But I’m also a big fan of the cut hole and again, I can only say - don’t just take the iconic standalone view, but think in terms of a logo and how you could use it differently depending on the context.
I think the one with the tag hanging from the “S” of spreadshirt could be simplified quite a bit by just making the “tag” be a shirt shape, rather than trying to make a hangtag morph into a shirt…too many ideas trying to go into one logo, IMO. A t-shirt shaped tag with hole and string hanging slightly at an angle off the “s” might be the answer.
“Number 1: ‘Label Spread’ is lovely, but it’s not a logo - it’s a great illustration, but I can’t see it being used as a logo. It’s too… lovely, in a way. It’s not striking enough, though perhaps the concept could be manipulated to be a stronger illustrative logo. ”
Isn’t this what’s about a logo: a great illustrated icon that reveals the company name in a beautifull / lovely way? Frank mentioned “maybe too lovely”, but i think that, while many submissions are using hearts and stiches - i never seen in 11years of graphic design so many stiches and hearts like i did here in this competition - the company is either about embrodery or a meet-to-person website.
While many submissions kept the shirt as a 90% of the symbol the message gets lost a bit. Where is the spread message, where is the company to company message? How can a stiched label spread? It is stitched. How can a shirt encompass the marketing power of the company along with the “your own label” slogan.
Maybe a few words along with my entry would help:
The message i was trying to convey was to combine two ellements : one coming from company name and one from the tag line. So i combined the shirt with a label in a very illustrative way - @frank - this is about a logo, right? - and then thought to let the symbol float, this way i avoided the “fixed” in place logo and touched a bit the spread effect, that i guess the company was trying to convey also. Using two colors in the text and two colors in the symbol also contribuited to the entire composition, adding unity of the whole idea a .
I believe it’s hard to describe a t shirt label that, by his nature somehow …spreads arround. I think i managed it, think of a small feather taken by the wind…i mean, well, spreading in the entire world, think of a label shirt spread. ;)
A logo should be about : idea, message, graphic execution in this order, every one having the same 33.333333(3)% importance from a whole.
Thanks for the oportunity, thanks for the comments, it’s a big challenge for me and - i always hate to say that when i am trying to conceive a logo - it’s fun this time .
Cheers,
Emi
While i can see the “Label Spread” concept working as a logo if maybe further tweaked a little here and there i honestly don’t think the “Label Cut Hole” will work.Sure, you can call it “fexible” and do all kinds of exiting things with it like making holes in t-shirts etc but here’s the point:
Does it work as a logo ?
In other words, would Spreadshirt “own” the hole - as in would people associate Spreadshirt with a hole ? Here’s the thing with “fexible” designs: They’re flexible because of their generic nature which is fine because it opens a ton of possibilities what can be done with it but at the same time it’s their weakest point -> they’re so generic they’re not unique and distinctive enough.
To check if a logo really works, you have to imagine not the perfect but the most hostile situations where your logo might show up one day; say as a standalone on b&w fax sheet for example.Now how unique and memorable would just a hole with no company name next to it be on that fax paper ? Would people still know it’s from Spreadshirt ? Nike can get away with their swoosh for two reasons:
First, at the time it was released, it was a distinctive swoosh (and it still is).Second, the pumped millions of dollars in ad campaigns to make the swoosh known so after a while they “owned” that swoosh.But this hole (no matter how nicely executed it is) lacks the Nike Swoosh distinctiveness and the million of marketing dollars.
In the end, it’s not the question of “..what we see is..” but what your potential customers see in it.If they’re the ones that as well see “the idea of tagging and labelling in a consequent but at the same time reduced manner” in the logo, then fine.If they just see a hole and don’t connect it with your brand, you’re lost.
The marketing dollars decide how generic your logo can be really.
You are50% right. Still a logo should convey something and reveal through his graphic his many secrets one by one. ;)
Congrats ppl-who-made-it!
ulahts - thanks for the additional explanation. It’s really an exceptional logo and we all were excited about the “bridge” you’ve made.
logodesigner - i agree mostly (I have no problem with a pure eyecatcher ie on a fax, though - I guess thats what ulahts meant) ..
altough I would repeat that there is more than just the hole on this logo (see it as a tag), it’s like you said “can spreadshirt own the hole?” -> this is exactly why we picked it, and it will be interesting to have such a draft in the finals.
Sincerely, I’m a little disappointed by this choice… But congrats to Ulahts and Prince ! ;-)
thank you all folks! :)
ami - i do understand what you mean, still you actually prove my point:
“see it as a tag”
That’s the thing - if you have to tell your potential customers/stakeholders/whoever how they should see the logo, the logo doesn’t work.It’s not like you can write an explanation next to the logo everytime you’re using it, get my point ?
That’s actually what the main purpose of a good logo is - to bring across what the company does, their values or at least be so unique and memorable everyone connects it with your brand.
So far everyone i showed the logo without further explanation, said either “hole”, “moon” or “circle” - i haven’t heard “tag” yet.
Don’t get me wrong, i’m not trying to bash the concept here, it’s rather trying to make Spreadshirt think what a good logo’s *function* really is and to remind that sometimes a concept might be totally clear to everyone involved in the project (*because* they are involved) but not neccessarily to someone not involved (like potential customers).
Congrats dudes !! :)
Congratulations to Prince and everybody else.