Sunday, May 03, 2009

Another Poll

Hey all - my husband is working with a designer on a new logo for his homebuilding company, and wants some opinions on his current options. I know this has nothing to do with art, but I know you all have good taste, so would you mind taking a look and voting on which one you prefer? Pretty please???

FYI, he builds modular homes in the mountains of Colorado. The logo goes on his marketing materials, advertising, and website, and also on his truck and equipment etc. One of these is his existing logo, and one is the proposed new one (I won't say which is which), and he's not sure he wants to make the change to the new one. If you have any opinions on what could be changed to make either one of them look better, feel free to leave them in the comments.

Sorry these are cropped so tight - use your imagination =)

Here's Logo #1:

Here's Logo #2:

Thanks a bunch. I promise I'll post something about art this week - I have a new painting to show!


  1. as a logo designer, my opinion leans toward #1, i like the clean contemporary look of it, although, i think the 'house' and homes font need revisited. would need to see it, but possibly combine elements of the 2nd logos house/mountain icon a little more cleaned up, lighter looking not so heavy.

    the 2nd logo, while it's a more refined design, i feel it's somewhat dated.

    that's just my opinion. :) hope that helps.

  2. I'm voting for neither also. The second does seem dated but the first doesn't hold together for me very well either. Three words and all of them look like different fonts/styles - why? To me it implies modular is a fat bulky thing since it's the fat bulky word in the logo. Also not real font of the house in #1.

    So I didn't vote - cause my vote is neither.

  3. Make that "not real fond of the house"

  4. i agree with the other posts that neither seem to work great yet. #1 doesn't hold together very well with homes set in the bulky "house". maybe moving things around would help. #2 seems more inviting, and maybe it just should be simplified a little and change the fonts to update it.

    just my thoughts!

  5. #1: So does he build houses with uneven roofs that have holes in them? Also have to agree that all the different fonts are off-putting.

    #2: I like the picture on the right. The rest does look stuck in 1998. Maybe if they updated the font a bit and did away with that mountain outline above it.

  6. They both feel a bit clunky in different ways (and nothing that a bit of fiddling with typefaces and layout wouldn't fix) but the first logo is a bit to cold and "engineer"y for my tastes. Yes that is appropriate for the creators and builders, but as a CUSTOMER who will be making the biggest purchase of my life for a place to live I'd like my company to be a little more comfy and a little less austere (but probably not as cluttered as #2).
    Also, for both logos, "Colorado" is taking all the attention away from the more diminutive "modular homes". Now, you are IN Colorado right? So it isn't being evocative of some other place, it's just saying "hey we're local". You are trying to sell homes, and their unique feature is the modular construction, not where you (and most of your clients?) happen to be.

  7. I'm not particularly thrilled with either, but I wonder what it would look like with the colors of #2, the house graphic of #2 and the fonts of #1: "Colorado" and make both "modular" and "homes" be either the bold or regular font, not both, and spaced out evenly beneath "Colorado".

    My $.02, pre-coffee, so I must disclaim this suggestion!

  8. This comment has been removed by the author.

  9. The idea of "Modular homes" combines two emotions. Home = comfort, family, tradition, longevity. Modular = modern, technology, economy. I'd combine these emotions by using the graphic from #2 with a very simple, economic and modern text treatment.

  10. Just a thought, why even have a fancy graphic to the right of your logo. You don't need it. If I were looking for a home and I saw Colorado modular homes I would know exactly what you company is about I wouldn't need the graphic. Give this a try, take the second logo remove the graphic to the right and the line below and leave the mountains at the top. I also like the font choice the designer used for the word Colorado, it say Colorado to me, I realize that you are not selling Colorado BUT anyone looking for a modular house is not going to be mislead and besides it adds the needed flair to make your logo unique.

  11. I agree with above comments - you mentioned that #2 was the new logo - It is more inviting but the type is dated in style - tweaking the font and foregoing the "embossed 3d" look would help as well. Maybe you should have a contest for all of us designers out here! Good luck!

  12. My background is graphic design (with an emphasis on corporate identity). All the people in your comment section are in agreement (so far) that both these solutions are weak.
    Logo two is salvageable. The thing to do would be to remove the goofy shape effect in the word "Colorado", lose the "mountain" squiggle shapes over and under the word "Colorado"..and make sure the font(s) are adequately kerned and preferably classic (Goudy, Gill sans, that sort of thing). As it stands now it has a decided late 70's look. I don't mind the house pictograph is kind of nice, but if you go that way...the type can't have any bells and whistles. Logo design is very much like painting..there are things that are necessary for success. Timeless typeface, no oddball warps, correct letterspacing. Less is always more.
    You mentioned some hesitancy to have the designer go back to the drawing board... did you choose him because he was a bargain? You honestly might be better off going elsewhere. Someone who is not a designer is either directing him or he simply doesn't get the project. Your logo is really important. You should consider a new designer. No contests. You shouldn't cut corners about something this important.

  13. Thanks so much everyone for the input - it was exactly what we needed and Nate was able to better clarify to the designer what he wanted changed (vs. "I don't like it")!