#7 (and #9 to a lesser extent) is very much like what I originally envisioned when I did the logo I have now, specifically with the slur over the name. I think I still like the times-italic font, though. The ends of the slur seem a little too "turned down". Would you be able to do the same layout as #7 using times roman italic font, remove "INC." and make "technologies" a little bigger so it fits between the "g" descender and the end of "o", and maybe "flatten" the slur (or maybe just the ends) a little?
Thanks for the update - that was a quick turnaround!
Would you be able to make one more variation of #18 using a bold font for "legato" (same times-italic) and times-italic font in lower case for "technologies"? I'm not sure if I want the whole thing in the same font and lower case, but it would help to see it. Also maybe a little grey-er blue for "legato", maybe like #004D99 (rgb 0, 77, 153).
thanks so much for your input. that is what makes this process work. you seem to know a lot about type. I will be happy to make any subtle (or not so subtle) changes that you would like to see.
Numbers 30 and 31 are pretty darn good, I'm just not sure which font for "technologies" I like better (decisions, decisions...). I'm leaning toward #31 and will adjust the ranking, but that could change at any time :)
Not sure about the ethics of this, but there is another submission that is basically the same as yours, but uses a grey-blue color for the slur and "technologies". I like this color variation, but everything else in your designs is much better (font spacing, slur size/shape, etc.) and you submitted it first. If it wouldn't break any rules, can you make a similar change to #31?
The ethics are that you should not copy another designer's original design. I could take him/her to logo court and win, but since you recognize the beauty of nicely kerned type I would rather just work with you and will continue to make any and all changes that you would like to see. Thank you.
Great - I appreciate your willingness to work with me on this design.
I definitely like the color variation, but I think the lighter blue is too light, specifically with "technologies". The concept is definitely there, so I don't know if we need to completely fine-tune it more. I expect that should your design win, we can do this fine-tuning after the contest ends if this is ok with you.
It's been a while, but the group here would like to try something with your entry #52. The consensus is that we would like a little color, so we would like to see this with a dark gray (but not all the way black) "technologies", and the slur to be an orange somewhat lighter than the entry in my #2 ranked position now, and maybe include a 1-pixel darker orange outline on the slur. This may make the slur a little thicker, but that might be ok.
I was wondering where y'all were... oh no, I've slipped in ranking! :-O well, I hope you like the revisions I've made as per your instructions. I am happy to provide any changes would like to see. Thanks for your input.
Thanks for your latest entries. #180 is the revision to #52 that we were looking for.
And don't worry too much about the ranking - I wish we had two number one spots - we could go either way right now (we didn't realize how difficult it was to choose :)
I also just mentioned this to another designer and I will post a public comment, but we've decided that we would like some kind of iconic symbol to go with the textual part of the design. We didn't originally think this was a requirement, but we plan on using it as a "favorites" icon for our web site, as well as possibly an application icon. We may even extend the contest a short time if necessary. Unfortunately, we really don't have much direction to give in this area, we're just looking for a cool symbol that may imply "technologies smoothly connected". Any ideas?
LOL. It always surprises me when a client says that my designs reminds them of a sports team, as I wouldn't know one team from another, but thanks, I guess. The symbolism in 190 shows a hard edged square blending/morphing into a round cornered square. It could be an extreme closeup, as I imagined it, of two different pixels seamlessly blending together. Thanks again for your feedback.
#190 and #193 fit the design in their simplicity (this is a good thing), but we're looking for something with a little more depth or detail (but not so much that it conflicts with the simplicity of the rest of the logo).
The shape of #193 looks like we're trying to say something, but nothing is coming out.
I'll try to get you some more useful feedback when our group gets back together this morning.