[alligator]

I'm going to try to create a logo in Photoshop Elements 3.0, but I don't have any background art for the logo.

Where do people get logo art? I'm looking for something like a caps lock key.

[KeriVit]

Don't create a logo in Photoshop.

Have a nice day.

[OreoCookie]

Use Illustrator or any other vector graphics program such as Corel Draw. NEVER ever use a pixel-based program for that.

[Love Calm Quiet]

What's a less expensive vector graphics program you would recommend: like PhotoShop Elements is to Photoshop?

[wdlove]

I hope that you will be successful. Sounds like an interesting project.

[Kevin]

Who is teaching these people to do logos in Photoshop?
I just don't understand it.

There are people here who even consider themselves PROFESSIONALS that do everything in Photoshop.

[froggy]

If you can't afford Illustrator, Freehand or Corel Draw, try this http://www.inkscape.org/?lang=en
For a cap lock key reference, using Google in image mode will give you plenty of those.

[MindFad]

I've been known to do a logo in Photoshop using vector paths. Scandalous!

[Kevin]

Fad fact is, most people who DO do logos in Photoshop don't know what a vector path is.

[MindFad]

This is the truth.

[Kevin]

There are few people that can get by with it as well. You and Adam Betts are great at illustration in Photoshop.

Most are not.

[I Bent My Wookiee]

If you do decide to do it in Photoshop make sure you do it at a very high resolution right from the beginning.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by I Bent My Wookiee

If you do decide to do it in Photoshop make sure you do it at a very high resolution right from the beginning.

Still wont come out the same SWG.

It will always look like a Photoshop image. And not crisp like a vector image.

I've messed with the differences so many time in the past 10 years.

Photoshop can be FAKED to look vetorish and sharp. But it's not even close when the print comes out.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Who is teaching these people to do logos in Photoshop?
I just don't understand it.

There are people here who even consider themselves PROFESSIONALS that do everything in Photoshop.

When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem starts to resemble a nail.

[Kevin]

I think the problem is, it's the only tool they know how to use. And don't want to bother learning any others.

I've even seen people do page layout in Photoshop (Ouch)

They just don't know any better. And even if you explained it to them, their unwillingness to learn something new outweighs it.

[Mediaman_12]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I think the problem is, it's the only tool they know how to use. And don't want to bother learning any others.

I've even seen people do page layout in Photoshop (Ouch)

They just don't know any better. And even if you explained it to them, their unwillingness to learn something new outweighs it.

This used to be my experience with lots of graphics programs. I have seen people do multipage page layout in Illustrator, and even seen (more than I care to remember) logos designed 100% in Quark.

[MindFad]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Still wont come out the same SWG.

It will always look like a Photoshop image. And not crisp like a vector image.

I've messed with the differences so many time in the past 10 years.

Photoshop can be FAKED to look vetorish and sharp. But it's not even close when the print comes out.

As long as that resolution is in rasterized images, how can you possibly tell the difference in an image that is exactly the same—one a printed vector and the other printed from pixels. There has to be a point where your are "outshooting" a printer's own printable resolution, I imagine, but I have a hard time believing you can tell the difference between 5"x5" logo designed and printed at 600 DPI that is rasterized, and the same thing printed at the same resolution and dimensions from an Illustrator file.

Originally Posted by Kevin

I think the problem is, it's the only tool they know how to use. And don't want to bother learning any others.

I've even seen people do page layout in Photoshop (Ouch)

They just don't know any better. And even if you explained it to them, their unwillingness to learn something new outweighs it.

Boy, I've seen this, too. Good thing Pages is around, though. You know we've all seen those 72 DPI flyers around with lens flares and bevel and embosses galore. Step away from the Photoshop, please. Not that I am one to talk, considering the ads I just did for MacDirectory are actually all Photoshop, but at least they're 300 DPI.

Edit: Sorry for the derail.

[I Bent My Wookiee]

alligator before you take to many of these opinions to heart you should ask them what they do for a living and how they know so much about graphic design (making signatures for MacNN does not make you a graphic designer). For all you know they could could input classified ads into a local paper all day and think they are graphic designer extraordinaire.

Perhaps someone here would like to show them some examples of logos they have done for CLIENTS in vector and bitmap format to illustrate the difference.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by MindFad

As long as that resolution is in rasterized images, how can you possibly tell the difference in an image that is exactly the same—one a printed vector and the other printed from pixels. There has to be a point where your are "outshooting" a printer's own printable resolution, I imagine, but I have a hard time believing you can tell the difference between 5"x5" logo designed and printed at 600 DPI that is rasterized, and the same thing printed at the same resolution and dimensions from an Illustrator file.

At 600DPI no. But scale down that graphic, and some stuff gets lost. Not so in vector.

Boy, I've seen this, too. Good thing Pages is around, though. You know we've all seen those 72 DPI flyers around with lens flares and bevel and embosses galore. Step away from the Photoshop, please.

Not that I am one to talk, considering the ads I just did for MacDirectory are actually all Photoshop, but at least they're 300 DPI.

Ewww

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by MindFad

As long as that resolution is in rasterized images, how can you possibly tell the difference in an image that is exactly the same—one a printed vector and the other printed from pixels. There has to be a point where your are "outshooting" a printer's own printable resolution, I imagine, but I have a hard time believing you can tell the difference between 5"x5" logo designed and printed at 600 DPI that is rasterized, and the same thing printed at the same resolution and dimensions from an Illustrator file.

It seems that way, and probably is the case sometimes, but not always. I've tested by using a vector logo and a TIF version rasterized at 2x the printer's resolution — the TIF version had a more jagged curve. I don't think anyone but me actually noticed, but it was definitely there.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by I Bent My Wookiee

alligator before you take to many of these opinions to heart you should ask them what they do for a living and how they know so much about graphic design (making signatures for MacNN does not make you a graphic designer). For all you know they could could input classified ads into a local paper all day and think they are graphic designer extraordinaire.

Good idea.

I have worked in

• pre-press graphic houses designing logos and various other business needs
• newspapers doing actual ad design,
• and now I work for a publishing company that does artwork for books and magazines.

All of which would haven't even hired me had I fired up Photoshop to do a logo, or layout.

Perhaps someone here would like to show them some examples of logos they have done for CLIENTS in vector and bitmap format to illustrate the difference.

That would only work if it could be submitted anonymously. As personal chips on ones shoulders tend to cause one to react differently to a creation.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

It seems that way, and probably is the case sometimes, but not always. I've tested by using a vector logo and a TIF version rasterized at 2x the printer's resolution — the TIF version had a more jagged curve. I don't think anyone but me actually noticed, but it was definitely there.

Someone that wouldn't know what to look for wont notice it. But those that do, it's a major annoyance.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Mediaman_12

This used to be my experience with lots of graphics programs. I have seen people do multipage page layout in Illustrator, and even seen (more than I care to remember) logos designed 100% in Quark.

I've done my share of Quark logos

But atleast it printed decently.

[greenamp]

I'm gonna take this a step further and say you should always design your logos on marker paper 1st, then scan them in to a vector program.

But, I have been know to do very simple textural single page layouts in PS and Illustrator. PS CS/CS2 handle type a lot better than previous versions of PS.

[I Bent My Wookiee]

Yes there is a difference under some circumstances in the edge quality. Depending on what you are doing you may or may not see a difference.

Another thing to keep in mind is the cost of these apps. Many people simply pirate the apps and then come off all high and mighty telling you what you should use.

If you are an honest person and cannot afford to buy illustrator or photoshop or don't want to spend that much for one logo, Photoshop Elements will work just fine.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by I Bent My Wookiee

Another thing to keep in mind is the cost of these apps. Many people simply pirate the apps and then come off all high and mighty telling you what you should use.

And some get them free from work.

We had 2 extra CS copies. Both given to us by Adobe.

Every time Adobe comes out with something new, they send us a few copies knowing we are going to buy tons more. ( I think there are about 90 copies in our office a lone)

If you are an honest person and cannot afford to buy illustrator or photoshop or don't want to spend that much for one logo, Photoshop Elements will work just fine.

Actually I would instead get Fireworks. It does Vector and Raster decently to a point.

[MindFad]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Ewww

Yeah, pick up a copy. Page 21. Be amazed at a common magazine ad print resolution and find me a jagged edge. It's even what they requested. I think it came out nice, though. I probably would've changed a few things in the ad design-wise, but it was a last-minute, late-night project.

And if there's one certainty to glean from the MacNN fora, it's that having a hefty client list doesn't necessarily make you a good designer.

[I Bent My Wookiee]

Originally Posted by MindFad

And if there's one certainty to glean from the MacNN fora, it's that having a hefty client list doesn't necessarily make you a good designer.

The difference is you have a hefty client and most of them will fire you if you give them a magazine layout that was done in photoshop.

[MindFad]

Originally Posted by I Bent My Wookiee

The difference is you have a hefty client and most of them will fire you if you give them a magazine layout that was done in photoshop.

I don't have a particularly hefty client list, but I agree—unless that's exactly what they want, then I imagine they'll be happy.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by MindFad

And if there's one certainty to glean from the MacNN fora, it's that having a hefty client list doesn't necessarily make you a good designer.

This is true.

[alligator]

Wow, I didn't mean to start this great discussion about Photoshop. I need a logo for a startup small business (just my brother and I - a small local computer service business).

I really don't know what I'm doing, and this business isn't worth enough to pay someone for a professional logo. So I thought I'd try Photoshop (which is all I have available right now).

Thanks for the information!

[rozwado1]

Sketch it out and post here. Maybe someone here would be willing to vectorize it for you...

[rozwado1]

Originally Posted by Kevin

They just don't know any better. And even if you explained it to them, their unwillingness to learn something new outweighs it.

[OT]
When I first moved down here, I went to a local sign printer to get some banners made for a business. I showed up with my AIs and EPSs to get a quote, but the signman couldn't open them bc he only knew how to use this 'Signmaker' software; he didn't have any pro apps on any of his machines. I almost knocked his teeth out.
[/OT]

[greenamp]

Originally Posted by rozwado1

[OT]
When I first moved down here, I went to a local sign printer to get some banners made for a business. I showed up with my AIs and EPSs to get a quote, but the signman couldn't open them bc he only knew how to use this 'Signmaker' software; he didn't have any pro apps on any of his machines. I almost knocked his teeth out.
[/OT]

Oh man Bubba-sign-shops are a hoot.

[ironknee]

blah...i've seen so called pros designing the entire websites in ps, design logos in ms word! and use ms publisher! wtf is ms publisher!

[Kevin]

Ms sent us a few copies of MS publisher with a sticker that says "We accept MS publisher files!"



We never used it.

[Apfhex]

Originally Posted by ironknee

design logos in ms word!

In all seriousness, I think for the OP's situation Photoshop would be OK as long as it's high-res and not made to be too "Photoshop" looking, i.e. no huge bevels, lens flares, etc. Heck you can even use the pen tool in Photoshop! Maybe not in Elements though (I haven't used it in a long time)?

[Paco500]

Somewhat unrelated, I have a graphic done in Photoshop that I need to make vector. About 100 years ago there was an application called Corel Trace (bundled w/ the windows 3.1 version of corel draw) that would do this king of thing. Is there such an app in the mac world?

[Chuckit]

Both Illustrator and Freehand have tracing capabilities.

[davesimondotcom]

Originally Posted by Paco500

Somewhat unrelated, I have a graphic done in Photoshop that I need to make vector. About 100 years ago there was an application called Corel Trace (bundled w/ the windows 3.1 version of corel draw) that would do this king of thing. Is there such an app in the mac world?

Got Flash? It's got a trace function.

So does the newest Illustrator.

[Paco500]

I've got none of these, but now that I have a lead, I'll find someone that does.

Thanks.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by davesimondotcom

Got Flash? It's got a trace function.

So does the newest Illustrator.

Older versions of Illustrator had tracing too. It wasn't as sophisticated as CS2's, though.

[alligator]

Here's what I was thinking for a logo - but something more polished (and smaller).



It doesn't need to be fancy, just something that can be reproduced on paper invoices and on a future web site. So yes, it does need to be able to be scaled up and down in size.

[KeriVit]

Alligator, if you're just gonna get some biz cards made- use your Photoshop and make sure it is 300 dpi at 100% from the start- save it as a psd, tif and eps. Have the printer set the type and be done with it. If the company takes off and u need letterhead, envelopes and signage- hire a pro- probably even at your printing company. ok?

[greenamp]

Originally Posted by alligator

Here's what I was thinking for a logo - but something more polished (and smaller).



It doesn't need to be fancy, just something that can be reproduced on paper invoices and on a future web site. So yes, it does need to be able to be scaled up and down in size.

In all honesty, you really don't need the keyboard key, just pick a nice typeface and spell out "CAPS LOCK COMPUTERS." Kern (visually adjust each letter in each word) it a bit on the tight side and it will look professional.
ex:

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by ironknee

design logos in ms word!

Darn, just wanted to suggest that. Best apps evar.

-t

[froggy]

Originally Posted by Paco500

Somewhat unrelated, I have a graphic done in Photoshop that I need to make vector. About 100 years ago there was an application called Corel Trace (bundled w/ the windows 3.1 version of corel draw) that would do this king of thing. Is there such an app in the mac world?

there was Adobe Streamline, if you can find a copy... It's much better than the Illustrator auto trace tool. The best is to trace it manually though, streamline generated paths always need some cleaning and adjustments. You don't save that much time, and for a result that will never be as sharp as hand traced vectors.

[drmcnutt]

Heck there are a bunch of cheap logo shops out there. If you don't have the tools or inclination (or are ahem, a designer) then invest in one of these places. You do get what you pay for, but since this is something that you don't feel is worth a decent investment now, it should be fine for your needs, certainly better than what you've hobbled together so far.

[Kr0nos]

Originally Posted by alligator

And see, that's the real problem here. You could do this in MS W3rd and it wouldn't be any worse than in Illustrator. Why? Because the IDEA sucks.

Oh, and the real advantage of vector graphics over pixel based stuff is "scaleability". You could easily do a very crisp and nice logo in PS at one single resolution, but if you need to use it for various different "size" publications (web, posters, business cards etc.), you really need a vector graphic.

Originally Posted by greenamp

I'm gonna take this a step further and say you should always design your logos on marker paper 1st, then scan them in to a vector program.

I do that a lot too. Mixing vector, pixel and hand drawn stuff. You can get some very cool looking graphics…