I was going to say 'what's with the jesus connotations' but then got to that part of your description, so, hey, I guess that works perfectly!

> the cross motif can suggest both the crucifix and shovels

And what's the dagger connection? ;-)

The only thing I would say here is that the second word seems to need to be a lot heavier; or maybe all-caps, especially condensed. Mason Stencil, anyone? (That was only semi-serious.)

BTW, I'd remove the trapping from Caecilia, and correct the microscopic slant, which can only give you rasterization headaches.

hhp

BTW, does anyone have any serious legibility issues with it?

It looks nice, but this is a lot to read, considering the quickly viewed applications that are used in this industry (vehicles, signage, etc.). Nelson Earthworks, isn't too long in itself, but your execution with two different type approaches, one of them being a stencil (which is a busy stop'n'go face), and the triple-meaning crucifix/shovels/r-t ligature make for a boat load to take in. I suggest finding a way to simplify it. I think I might even like it better if it was all the same face, but only the "r" was stencil to accomodate the r-t lig. The only issue I would have with that is that I don't really see the shovels. As Hrant commented, "dagger" comes to mind, or even when I think in construction terms, I see a file, screwdriver, brush, etc...but not shovels. Overall, the concept behind the symbol is pretty clever...you've accomplished your client's objective, but kept it subtle enough to appeal to all audiences.

Good work!

Aloha,
Scott

Kris, I like the tone and quality of what you're doing, but as a whole, I'm not sold yet.

I have to admit that the stencil treatment is making it very busy on my eyes. And the ligature between the r and t isn't helping me read the shovels any easier. I want to see them, but I just don't.

Keep it up. As always, nice work.

Uh-oh, we have the pre-commitment jitters! He now sees it as blasphemous, with the cross/shovel duality. Oh well. I had never inteded the 'shovels' intitallly, someone at the office mentioned it and it stuck, as things are wont to do.

Here it is, non-stencil. Bland I reckon, but what do you think?

This is the new and revised version. Oranda Bold to the rescue! (again). It reads more easily, and is a bit more human. I find that the 'spade' reference has all but disappeared.

For me the ambiguity with the spade/dagger/cross just gives too many different messages, and weakens the mark.

I like your stencilized Oranda, which conveys both rough strength and sophistication - already a lot. The simple word mark may be better.

Also, you could have a cross on the stationary and cards with the personal names - perhaps with the distinctive spade/cross logo. The religous/commercial business juxtaposition seems to me in poor taste, whereas a personal/religious one seems appropriate.

Kris, why is the second r in Earthworks lacking stencilization (if I may use that word)? It catches my eye because of that.

Here is the finalised logotype, and application in the business cards.

I like the brick red. It somehow makes the cross/dagger/spade thing not somber but playful, and has a totally different mood than earlier. Also the bleached out artsy contrasting background. Very nice!

Cheers mate! They aren't quite the true colours, foe those who are familiar with the Riso inks they are Marine Red and tints of Hunter green. I wasn't trying for sombre, but I always start in blackand white, then move to colour.

Hello Kris,

Perhaps I'm too late, but here goes:
This has been an interesting read. The religion thing must have been quite an interesting experience. I like the tiling effect on the business card. Could be a "collect 'em all" challenge?. Heh.

It appears that the card could do with a little more leading between the name/title and the contact details. The space between the email and fax number is greater than that which is between the name/mobile number.

There seems to be some sort of slight optical alingment issue thing going on with the M F E.

- Chris