Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

simonmartin · Oct 3, 2005, 03:48 PM

hi,

I need your help with what our new logo should look like.

Ippimail.com is a webmail service like Hotmail, yahoo, GMail, whatever.

The difference with us is that we are raising money for charities and Open Source software.

We are currently working on a new logo and need some feedback on which ones people like the best.

We are trying to put across the human aspect of the project, that it's an email service, that you can raise money for your favorite charity at no cost to yourself, etc, etc, all warm fuzzy stuff.

The word 'ippi' means 'A helping hand' in Japanese.

The images are here , please let me know which ones you like and why. Perhaps refer to them by their numbers. The images are marked as '1 of 17' etc.

Many thanks for your time!

Disgruntled Head of C-3PO · Oct 3, 2005, 03:50 PM

This one is the most "creative"

simonmartin · Oct 3, 2005, 03:51 PM

Originally Posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO

This one is the most "creative"

Hi,

Wow that was quick... Thanks for the input.

and how do I do that thing where you get the image inline in the post? :-)

Simon

andreas_g4 · Oct 3, 2005, 03:52 PM

IMHO all are to messy. I'd try with a less detailed hand and a thicker font.

simonmartin · Oct 3, 2005, 03:53 PM

Originally Posted by andreas_g4

IMHO all are to messy. I'd try with a less detailed hand and a thicker font.

Hi,

Which one do you feel we should be pursuing though?

Simon

Oisín · Oct 3, 2005, 03:59 PM

I personally prefer this one:

- although I agree the font should be heavier. The thing I like about this one is, as Andreas pointed out, that the hands are less detailed here, which makes the logo simpler. Also, it seems the most equilibrial of the choices you give.

(If you quote this post, or SWG's post above, you'll see how to post images as well)

simonmartin · Oct 3, 2005, 04:00 PM

Originally Posted by Oisín

I personally prefer this one:

- although I agree the font should be heavier. The thing I like about this one is, as Andreas pointed out, that the hands are less detailed here, which makes the logo simpler. Also, it seems the most equilibrial of the choices you give.

Oisín,

Thanks for that.

We were a bit concerned how that one would look really small. Do you think you'd be able to see they were hands at all?

(Thanks for the tip about how to post images in line. Seems I *was* doing the right thing but got an error saying I was trying to post too many...)

Simon

Mastrap · Oct 3, 2005, 04:02 PM

I quite like this one.

Got to agree with Andreas though - the majority of these logos don't do much for me.
You've got to ask yourself how many people will get the hand connection. How many people speak Japanese, outside Japan? And if they do get it, then you have a classical case of see-say, meaning you're saying what you're seeing. In which case one of the elements becomes superfluous.

I would concentrate on either a type only logo for now, or if that's not an option, branch out from the hands.

simonmartin · Oct 3, 2005, 04:04 PM

Originally Posted by Mastrap

I quite like this one.

Got to agree with Andreas though - the majority of these logos don't do much for me.
You've got to ask yourself how many people will get the hand connection. How many people speak Japanese, outside Japan? And if they do get it, then you have a classical case of see-say, meaning you're saying what you're seeing. In which case one of the elements becomes superfluous.

I would concentrate on either a type only logo for now, or if that's not an option, branch out from the hands.

Mastrap,

Thanks.

Our thinking was that people won't realise the hand connection until they are told but once they have been told they will remember the logo that much better.

Make any sense?

Simon

Oisín · Oct 3, 2005, 04:08 PM

Originally Posted by simonmartin

We were a bit concerned how that one would look really small. Do you think you'd be able to see they were hands at all?

Probably not, but:

1) As Mastrap says above, that's not much of an issue. The hands create an appealing 'cradling' shape around the name, and the fact that it is actually a picture of two hands is not pivotal.

Edit: As you say, once people have been told, by you, what 'ippi' means, they will most likely be able to see it anyway. And if they don't know what 'ippi' means, it makes no difference if they see two crescent-like shapes, or two semi-cupped hands.

2) You could avoid the problem altogether by simply never using the logo really small. This would be the better one, of course; avoid using the logo too small at any rate.

Mastrap · Oct 3, 2005, 04:09 PM

I don't know. If you have to explain it, then you've lost 90% of the target audience.

You guys are close to it, you know it's meaning, you care. The average punter will go "Yeah, whatever".
Simpler is, almost always, better in my opinion. Stuff that needs an explanation before I get it - not so much.

Oisín · Oct 3, 2005, 04:11 PM

Originally Posted by Mastrap

I don't know. If you have to explain it, then you've lost 90% of the target audience.

You guys are close to it, you know it's meaning, you care. The average punter will go "Yeah, whatever".
Simpler is, almost always, better in my opinion. Stuff that needs an explanation before I get it - not so much.

I would agree with this, if they actually had to explain it first. But neither the logo nor the name/concept is nonsensical without an explanation, so I don't think it does need an explanation.

Mastrap · Oct 3, 2005, 04:12 PM

PS: United Way are currently running a good campaign using hands in Canada.

simonmartin · Oct 3, 2005, 04:16 PM

Originally Posted by Oisín

I would agree with this, if they actually had to explain it first. But neither the logo nor the name/concept is nonsensical without an explanation, so I don't think it does need an explanation.

Oisín,

This is what we were thinking too.

It doesn't matter that you don't get the 'helping hand' thing but when you do it reinforces the logo in your mind.

Simon

andreas_g4 · Oct 3, 2005, 06:08 PM

Originally Posted by simonmartin

Hi,

Which one do you feel we should be pursuing though?

Simon

If I had to:

This one looks quite good, for the various reasons stated above. It is also the one that looks "cleanest". Maybe it would look a bit better if the hands were more idealized and emerging out of the "o" from ".com", like waves that have their origin there. I'm just too tired to fire up illustrator… I assume the font is futura, make it medium or bold.

Disgruntled Head of C-3PO · Oct 3, 2005, 06:22 PM

Originally Posted by Mastrap

The problem with this one though is that I wouldn't have known they were hands unless I saw all the other ones. They just look like corn flakes.

simonmartin · 01:47 AM

Originally Posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO

The problem with this one though is that I wouldn't have known they were hands unless I saw all the other ones. They just look like corn flakes.

Andreas and Disgruntled Head of C-3PO,

Thanks for the feedback! Much appreciated.

How about some comments on this one
Which is my personal favorite...

(Is it an issue with Moz which prevents inline images?)

Simon

DeathMan · Oct 4, 2005, 02:05 AM

the cornflakes one shouldn't be focusing on the .com. Probably on the mail. It seems weird to frame the most (com)mon part of the name like that.

Cubeoid · Oct 4, 2005, 02:05 AM

They are all fine.

simonmartin · Oct 4, 2005, 02:51 AM

Originally Posted by DeathMan

the cornflakes one shouldn't be focusing on the .com. Probably on the mail. It seems weird to frame the most (com)mon part of the name like that.

DeathMan,

I was thinking that focusing on the 'mail' might be suitable too...

Simon

simonmartin · Oct 4, 2005, 02:52 AM

Originally Posted by Cubeoid

They are all fine.

No favorite?

Simon

Randman · Oct 4, 2005, 03:09 AM

Originally Posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO

This one is the most "creative"

Yep, nothing says hotmail-like than a couple of thumbs down in a logo.

The envelope needs a little work but this out stands out the most, imo.

simonmartin · Oct 4, 2005, 03:14 AM

Originally Posted by Randman

Yep, nothing says hotmail-like than a couple of thumbs down in a logo.

The envelope needs a little work but this out stands out the most, imo.

Randman,

Thanks for that. (I had noticed the 'thumbs down' thing as well...)

What do you think we could do to the envelope on your fav?

Simon

Cubeoid · Oct 4, 2005, 03:18 AM

Urhsz.. What do you mean by email for the 'good guys' ? who are these suposed 'good guys' and what distingusesh them from the 'bad guys' simply the fact that they use ippy mail ? it is kind of rude and presumptpus to say that who ever does not use ippy mail is a 'bad guy' just my 3 cents.

simonmartin · 03:35 AM

Originally Posted by Cubeoid

Urhsz.. What do you mean by email for the 'good guys' ? who are these suposed 'good guys' and what distingusesh them from the 'bad guys' simply the fact that they use ippy mail ? it is kind of rude and presumptpus to say that who ever does not use ippy mail is a 'bad guy' just my 3 cents.

Cubeoid,

Fair comment. We are reviewing that line as well

One version we are considering is: 'It's email.For good.'

Any suggestions/comments?

Simon

Randman · Oct 4, 2005, 04:32 AM

It just looks a little void. Either downsize the hand or add a postal stamp on the letter.