Sarah Kettell - Full Logo
Sarah Kettell - Logo Symbol
Sarah Kettell - No Subtext
Sarah Kettell - Monochromatic
K Sarah Kettell
5 Reviews0 Votes0 Favorites428 Views
Concept Images
Concept Reviews
-
Personally, I think the mark serves its purpose -- it's clean, fun, and isn't just a ho-hum font attached to a name. Being "professional" doesn't always mean you have to be vanilla with your choices. The blue would work well on a dark or light background, and I like the font choice for the name.....
....but I would change it for the tagline. Currently, the tagline is competing with your name for a few reasons: it's the same font, the same-ish color, but mostly because it's the same weight. You might pick a simpler sans-serif font to compliment the script of your name, and follow Michael's advice and switch to a light grey (not quite white) or darker slate (not quite black) depending on the background.
Almost there, IMO. :)
-
-
Christian Elden commented:You're welcome. Love the direction you've gone in place of the first go-round, too, for what it's worth.
-
-
Josann Warmann commented:i like your confidence to come outwith such a design,very simple but communicative
-
-
Hi Sarah
This is NOT where I imagined you would go following your first draft. I think it's an unfortunate backward step. It's not professional, not unique and not well-drawn. It's messy.
Harsh, I know. But I expected you to get creative, rather than fall back onto something safe and predictable. Really exercise the grey matter. This gives me less of an idea of your personality than the flower concept.
I have a serious question. Do you plan to trade under your own name and position yourself as a freelancer working sub-contract for other design firms; or are you intending to market directly to end users/ other businesses? The reason I ask is because to me, it affects the whole way you present yourself.
The personal, hand drawn approach works well if you're in the freelance arena. A less personal name is better suited to the business environment eg. Kettell Design.
If you go for the personal, make the script a stylised version of your actual signature. If the business approach, revert to the font you started with.
For a wider market, I would seriously reconsider the "kettle" positioning and welcome the mis-pronunciation. Or, change your name (in the logotype) to a phonetic spelling. Seriously. If it's pronounced "cattle", that opens a whole bunch of new doors!
Again, hope this helps.
-
Sarah Kettell commented:
Hi Steve,
Thanks for the feedback. Always appreciated. :)
I'm sorry to hear that you think this is actually a step back...and also, at the same time, having a sudden urge to bang my head on something. lol I went through half a dozen other designs before I got to this one and thought it looked the best and suited my personality best. Basically, it is my attempt at getting creative.
To answer your question, I'm aiming for being a freelancer that works under my own name, rather than a business name, at least for now. Going full business is something I'd been considering for a future switch, but not right now. I've already had some work for other businesses using this method, so I didn't think that it would really limit the customer base?
I had considered the signature idea, but I've seen it used on several other portfolios and wanted to try something different. It just seemed somehow predictable, although maybe only from a designer's perspective and not from a client's.
I was wondering if you could explain exactly how it's not professional? You're not the first to say this, but I really am not seeing it.
Thanks again. :)
-
Sarah Kettell commented:
I added a quick sample of one of the other versions I'd been working on (it's not completely polished yet), to see what you thought of that. It goes in a different direction than this one does. Trying to get a feel of what I'm doing wrong.
-
Steve Osborne commented:Sarah
I guess by unprofessional i mean it looks somewhat "thrown together" to me. The font is not quite hand drawn, not quite typeset. It simply doesn't strike me as being mature. It looks like something from a student portfolio, done for effect not from a true sense of design.
I'm being brutal here and others will certainly not feel as strongly about it as I do. I'm trying to be objective and look at it from the point of view of a design firm creative director wanting to hire freelance staff. I'm going to be much happier hiring someone with a logo demonstrating a grasp of both identity design principles and technical proficiency. And to my critical eye, this demonstrates neither.
Typographically, I think you can only go in one of two ways. Either draw the logotype from scratch (design the font yourself, whether it be script or roman) or; find an existing display font that clearly projects your positioning.
As others have pointed out, the descriptor is fighting the logo on all fronts. Too ornate, too heavy, too distracting.
All of which is a long-winded way of saying I'm looking for something "clever" from you. Not decorative, not fancy, not gratuitous, not a second guess at what you think will appeal, rather something that looks "designed" and deliberate.
I'll readily concede I'm going overboard here, so I may have overstepped the mark in my criticism. Forgive me please.
-
-
I loved your previous design....it was way better then this one....why you made a revision :(....
Anyways...in this one if i have to choose i would go with the first one...I like sarah kettell font....But i dont like web and graphic design font it doesnt look professional.... I like the colors...but you should use a bright blue for the tagline...AND the rabbit head or K you made doesnt look good...sorry...i think you shouldnt use it...Only sarah kettel and the tagline would do just fine...
I still like your previous version...:)
-
Hello Sarah - to answer your questions: 1. What do you think of it? Does it look professional? IMHO....This does not look professional. The choice of font has no personality in it and I'm just not getting what you're attempting for it to portray of you as an artist. 2. Is it unique enough? not really....all I'm seeing is your name and tag line (which every freelance design site uses) 3. Do you prefer it with or without the sub-text? I definitely like having sub-text. I think tag lines work on websites. 4. What do you think of the symbol using the initials? The symbol using the initials isn't needed if a logo can stand on it's own.
I looked at your previous concepts and don't understand why you completely diverted from the track you were on. The earlier versions looked much more professional (especially #3), and the flower at least added a personal branding which is not at all present in the latest version. I'm not saying you have to have the flower, but something that is symbolic to you that will be remembered by all that view it. That's branding :-) I don't know the url off the top of my head, but smashing mag did a great article on branding not too long ago with fantastic examples.
The blue against the black is OK, but once again, nothing new. Over all, I think this concept is lacking personalization and creativity. I would suggest changing the font choice, and add some depth to it with possibly a shadow effect or more of a color variance between the name and the tag line. There's so many filter affects available you just need to play around. I apologize for not having more positive feedback. Have fun....
-
Sarah Kettell commented:
Hi Rebecca. Thanks for your feedback and suggestions. :)
I decided to try starting from scratch because it was highly suggested by a lot of the people I'd shown the previous logo to. It wasn't very unique. The font for this version is a combination of multiple fonts and actually has customization done to it, which is what I love about it -- it's more a reflection of my personality than the last versions, which were just a pre-made font.
As for adding filters and effects, that was the one thing that pretty much every review on my last versions agreed on -- logos shouldn't use filters because they don't work well in print, limit use, and don't look as good in different sizes. :) So I tried to design something that looked good on it's own, without needing any "flashiness".
Anyway, thanks again. :) I'll keep your points in mind.
-
Rebecca Perry commented:Hi Sarah - I admit I don't know a whole lot when it comes to the print world, therefore I probably have no business critiquing graphics that are print specific. After re-reading your concept description, I see where I missed your point on not wanting effects used in this version. I'm sorry if I spoke out of line, & I hope you didn't take offense :-)
-
Sarah Kettell commented:
No worries. I didn't take any offense. :) I'm still learning about all of this myself, especially print design. So much to learn in this business, that's for sure.
-
-
Hi Sarah
Despite your aim to portray yourself professionally, this logo unfortunately fails on all counts.
The font, whilst interesting, is a bit over complicated for me, I'd prefer a simpler, more elegant typography, and preferably one that doesn't lean to one side.
The typography of the tagline is also quite poor, it's far too stylized. Taglines should almost always use a very simple font that doesn't detract from the main logo - which this one does.
The colour choices are also not the greatest. Two shades of the same colour is tricky to pull off, I'd suggest neutralizing your tagline, make it a light grey.
The main logo should be a more vibrant colour too, at the moment it's a little bland.
Good luck!
-
Sarah Kettell commented:
Thanks for your feedback. :)
I wasn't sold on the tagline myself, actually preferring the version without it because it looked less complicated. I'll definitely try your ideas about changing the colour and finding a simpler font.
I'll try playing with the vibrancy of the blue for the main logo, although this particular one looks really good in the site design that I've been working on.
Otherwise, I must admit I'm at a loss as to why this one looks less professional. :\ At least, when the tagline is changed, anyway.
-
Sarah Kettell commented:
I added a quick sample of one of the other versions I'd been working on (it's not completely polished yet), to see what you thought of that. It goes in a different direction than this one does. Trying to get a feel of what I'm doing wrong.
-
Michael Gunner commented:Sarah, they look much better already, particularly the bottom one. It'd be interesting to see what they look like with the dark blue substituted for a grey, though I appreciate what you're saying about the context of the logo. Though, I'd argue it needs to look good in any environment.
Definitely an improvement though - have you considered a REALLY simply basic font? Sometimes the basic fonts portray the highest degree of professionalism.
-
Sarah Kettell commented:
Hi again,
Glad you're liking the other concept. :) I should have really posted both at the beginning, I guess!
I've just added another revised version that shows the changes suggested on both of them, with a simplified grey tagline. I hadn't realized how vastly different the feel of them both were until I put them on the same image for this sample -- night and day! Let me know what you think. :)
I'll be honest, I haven't really played with the basic fonts because I guess I went kind of font crazy when I saw some of the awesome ones out there. You know, "Ooooh, shiny!" lol I should give it a shot for the bottom concept, though.
Thanks again! I appreciate it.
-
Thanks for the review. :)
"it's clean, fun, and isn't just a ho-hum font attached to a name. Being "professional" doesn't always mean you have to be vanilla with your choices." That's exactly what I was going for! Glad someone else saw it too. :)
Definitely going to try changing the tagline. I wasn't really sure of it anyway. Thanks again!