it needs a lot of kerning work

It strikes me as awkward that the H is a silent letter, but it's visually emphasized.

I would suggest looking more closely at the type and trying other ideas/typefaces. Perhaps look at some vintage American industrial or Constructivist logo designs for inspiration and guidance.

When looking at your spacing–don't you find it queer that the two Ts in the middle draw so much attention? It looks like they are meant to add meaning with the strong counter shapes they produce, when it's actually just a case of you not putting thought into the spacing between each letter.

First off, thanks for the thoughtful feedback. I do want to clarify something that probably didn't come across in the original post - the logo shown is an existing logo which I am trying to overhaul into something with a more professional aesthetic. Not that this point matters a whole lot, but in these situations it is sometimes good to keep some resemblance to the original to provide a mental link for those who knew it. So, perhaps this is something to keep in mind.

The kerning point is a good one, and I agree wholeheartedly. The logo I showed was first done about four years ago, and I will fully admit that I used to be pretty naive with respect to that sort of thing. I'm glad it came up though, because the issue has been on my list of 'fixes' and I appreciate the fact that others feel the same.

As for the emphasis on the H, it was cribbed from this logo here: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5a/Browning.svg

I kind of like the quirky turn-of-the-century industrial aspect that it represents, and would like to keep it in the overall design if possible. That said, if I or someone else comes up with a better way, that's great too.

The Constructivism comment is great - I didn't know the style by that term, but that is exactly the sort of thing I had in mind for this. Thank you so much for educating me on that bit of information :)

With all this in mind, can salisae or anyone else suggest some specific typefaces or concepts that would be worth applying? Please forgive my lack of depth in this specific subject area; I am trying hard to learn.

Thanks again for all your help.

I also want to add that one typeface that I tried and kind of like is Neutraface. That said, one sees this *everywhere* these days, so I'd like to avoid something that might be cliche. The lowered crossbar on the H is something that provides some emphasis and might be a way that I can reduce the difference in height between the T/H and the other characters. Do you all feel the same way about Neutraface getting played out? If so, I may find my way with a different typeface and lower the crossbar myself as I manually edit the logotype if I can find a way to do this without it looking 'off'.

Sorry to keep replying to my own thread, but I guess the ability to edit one's post goes away after a bit.

Here is the most recent effort on this logo overhaul. A few of my own notes:

1. I think that extending the T arm and hooking it into the H whilst dropping the H crossbar reduces a lot of the emphasis that the H used to have, while retaining the look.

2. The extended arm on the T is also suggestive of a construction square.

3. The lowercasing of the I was done because I felt it was getting 'lost' amidst all that T action going on right next to it. It also invokes an umlaut. While we all know there's no such thing as an umlaut I in the German language, I wanted to reference the Germanic origin of the name (which is a family name).

4. The overall color of the logo was changed to red which I feel is a much stronger color than blue and plays into the Constructivist/construction angle of it all.

Again, thanks for any criticism that you might have.

I like that a lot, although I think the bottom right of the N is a bit unnecessary.

The font in the Browning logo has big slab serifs that form a strong horizontal element to unite the letters into a single shape (important here because "Trittenbach" is such a long name). You've achieved the same effect by spanning the letters with the cross stroke of the T.
It appears that the T and H are not only bigger than the other letters, but proportionately thicker. How would it look if you reduced the stroke weights to match the letters in the middle?

That looks a whole lot better! PublishingMojo's comment about the weight is definitely something to look into (offset path). Also, look into balancing the middle horizontal aspect (H crossbar with the A crossbar, etc.)

I personally don't mind the N extra feature but that's just me. It adds more character and makes it memorable.

Why the dot on the "i"? Why not make it capital like the rest of the letters?

penn

i like the new one a million times better.

not a fan of the lower-case i though. i've always hated mixed lower-case/upper-case words

Well, thought I'd come back again and show the final draft. The figure has some tweaking to do yet, but I like the logotype portion enough to consider that part finalized.

Thanks for everyone's help! Your input was invaluable.

Why is one of the C's terminals leveled off and the other not?

the width of T's look too thin too - in my opinion.
there's also seem to be some stroke weight issues in general.
the style/image the type creates is definitely stronger in the latest version. Don't use the hammerguy ... looks like he's about to destroy the logo - construction is not destruction.

----------
Paul Ducco
Graphic Design Melbourne
Short Film Festival