After viewing the logos again I dont like #1.

I like the notch taken out of number one and the full box on number two. Try combining them.


Also, what about just using the tc logogramme thing just by itself?

I definitely want my name to be under the icon. I will upload the notched versions.
-Tom

-Tom

Here are more variations. (I forgot to change the numbers on the group above, so consider them 4, 5, 6).



-Tom

I still don't think I like the notches. I dont really like my first and last name being one so here is a version that I have split them up.



-Tom

Maybe I see the logo (nice) too big for the text.
I moved it a little (hope you don't mind), another view of what you have so far.

Tom:

I like the "CT" mark. Your insistance to accompany the mark with the Tom Cannon Design name is wise, as the "C" is difficult to discover on its own. The black framed "design", however is not doing it for me. I think this approach is generating competition between the "CT" mark and the name.

Attached are a couple of alternative suggestions using Armada (name font). There aren't any additional design elements to the type, but I think the typeface has plenty of interest in and of itself and is appropriate.

Good luck in developing your perfect solution.

Aloha!
Scott

Hi Tom,

very nice icon. I see the 'C', but does everyone see it? You could always rotate it ccw so that the T is horizontal.

I would cancel the type with the frames. The icon is already strong, don't mess it up with other shapes and blockforms. I would go for clean type that has character. Therefor I agree with Scott.
Personally I would not put the text centered under the icon. Perhaps smaller beside the logo. Choose your type carefully but don't let it overshadow the icon.
I will look around for a type that I think could fit.

Regards,
Ren

its reminds me a squarepusher logo a little, more as conception..

Sorry, I didn't see no "C". :-(
It would make it less dynamic, but I think if you really want
the "C" to show up you'll have to go totally horizontal on the "T".

hhp

Tom:

Thanks for the emails.

As long as your name is accompanying the mark, I don't think that a horizontal "CT" is necessary

I don't see the C either, but agree that it's not important. It's a nice little 'aha!' when pointed out.

As for the logo, I say loose the decoration around the type. Let the mark be the mark and let the type be the type. I think they boxes around the type just muddy it up.

Thanks you all for your comments! I love armada and I just purchased it =) The line around the icon took out the clunky look.

Before I do anymore with the stationary, I am trying to get colors I am happy with. I don't want the icon to be too bright, but I also want it to be exciting. As far as the text I Like using the Cool Grey Colors.

Do you all like the design being darker than "Tom Cannon"? I think it helps, but I also realize it may make it off balance. My thinking is that the white "t" aiming to the right may make it ok to have it heavy on the right.







-Tom

TOM --

try posting some PMS numbers so we have something to reference on these.

hildebrant.

does anyone else feel that the 't' is too simplified to go with the type treatment?

also, the rule around the circle? why is that there? (just curious)

I like the mark. I like the type. I don't like them together.

I'd suggest loosing the rule around the mark. It doesn't really add anything and just further polarizes the style differences between the mark and type. Can you use the 'T' from the typeface in the mark? I can't tell if the T has any small unique identifiers to it, but it might help tie them together. I'd also drop the two-tone grey. It's just too much IMHO.

I'm not struggling as much as some of our peers with the type/mark combination, but I was inspired by what Darrel said about using the Armada "T" in the mark. First of all, I don't see much difference between the Armada "T" and the existing "T" other than the Armada arms seem to be slightly shorter

That's nice! Much more butch and contemporary.

hhp

Tiffany is probably right about the "C" in the type

I apologize for not responding more, but my wife and I just bought a home and things have been busy.

The armada "C" & "T" work better. I didn't realize until I saw a new solution how bad the old one was. I have looked at the circle icon for 5 years now. I am happy to see it go. It didn't fit armada, but I didn't want to change the font.

I think the icon can work with the text if the text is spread out 125%. I still like the greys in the text and a light grey shadow with the icon. I like pms 308 teal with the shades of grey.



I appreciate everyones suggestions. I never thought I would get so much advice since I am new to this board. I am learning so much from everyone =)

Thanks,

-Tom

My black and white version (for faxing etc) should be all black.



-Tom

Maybe pms 307 Teal

I like the black and white version. It is like a drawing for a machine part, with some softness of a hand drawing. It says 'design', and looks great too, with the TC initials being clear. You might even try making it look more like a draftsman's drawing for a product, and see the effect.

Tom:

In the original circular mark the "C" was hidden behind the "T", but this mark allows both letters to have presence. Have you tried illustrating the mark without showing dimension in the "T"? I wonder if doing this would assure that the "T" is the first read, followed by the "C". It's lookin' good.

Aloha!
Scott

I agree that the "T" and "C" are more readable, but I feel if there is a 3D look then the "T" should have dimension even if the readability is sacrificed. I would obviosly like to have both though.



Below is one way that may keep the overall 3D look and it still be readable.




-Tom

This is my favorite 3D version.

The fat ones lying down are awesome. Maybe because they rest on a visual floor for me they have more presence. Perhaps the shadow color or shade could be a bit less dark.

Check out http://www.chasedesign.net to see a similar 3D effect

here is what I am looking at now--I have to decide on which 3D version I like--I may use them both.

I saw the site and I agree it has 3D very well done. I don't like the look of carrying all the tones of the teal on the side for my design because I need some greys in the icon to tie my text in with the logo. I also think it gives a cool effect to have only color on top and not on the sides.

Below I darkened all the text to the same blue-grey color. The 2 toned text didn't bother me, but I can see your point. With the sides grey (if I keep them grey) it seemed to go with it. Then again, I have looked at it too long! Thanks for your feedback.

Hmmm

"I need some greys in the icon to tie my text in with the logo."

Consider each grey a color...meaning you have too many colors. Adding grey to the logo is just adding another color--it's not doing a whole lot to tie it in to the two-tone type.

The monotone type is better. I'd maybe try setting the type in black as well. For the record, the second logo is working the best, IMHO.

I have adjusted the shades of grey and I think it works now. I darkened the contrast on the shading so they matched closer with the two-tone-type.

I will use the non-shadow and shadow version. I will use the 3d version mostly on my website and the non-3d version on my business cards and letterhead. I agree that it would look too structural if I used the 3d version on everything (refering to Tiffany's post).

I have started my website with this:



I am very happy with the end result and have got postive feeback from some clients. I really appreciate the time that has gone into everyone's posts. I hope you all like the logo.

-Tom

Scott, I wouldn't highlight the C in the type. Too tricky.

Tom. I have to disagree with the stroke around the circle. I think the stroke subtracts from the simplicity or rather complicates the design. I also wonder if the T could "break out of the box", so to speak?

While I prefer the 3D version for some basic reasons, one of which is I find the C more interesting in this dimension, there is one reason for which you might wish not to use it. That being, that it seems (suddenly) to be for an architect or building company of some sort. Dunno. Tell me I'm wrong and I'll just bite my tongue. I do like this new blue.