Arrowwood

I've been working on a logo for a friend's company called Arrowwood Healthcare Consulting.
Rather than using an existing font, I've drawn the letters myself.
If you have any comments, I'd like to hear, thanks!

«1

Comments

  • Craig EliasonCraig Eliason Posts: 898
    Tapering of strokes in diagonals could be more subtle. (Choosing a condensed boldish sans for a company with a double W in the name is setting yourself up for a challenge!)
    EA and LT fitting is too loose. Lots of kerning refinement needed throughout—look at three consecutive letters at a time and make sure the middle one feels centered. 
    Was electing to have no hierarchy among the words (everything the same size) a conscious choice?
  • Ori Ben-DorOri Ben-Dor Posts: 280
    Tapering of strokes in diagonals could be more subtle. (Choosing a condensed boldish sans for a company with a double W in the name is setting yourself up for a challenge!)
    That's supposed to add some character. You think it doesn't work?
    EA and LT fitting is too loose. Lots of kerning refinement needed throughout—look at three consecutive letters at a time and make sure the middle one feels centered. 
    Yeah, I'll do that, thanks for this tip!
    Was electing to have no hierarchy among the words (everything the same size) a conscious choice?
    There will be hierarchy, I just wanted you to focus on the letters (and spacing) for now.

    Thanks for this feedback!
  • Tapering of strokes in diagonals could be more subtle. …
    … or perhaps not. This feature caters for a good deal of character to your design. I would not favour to see this being abandoned.
    For a Logotype, achieving an even ‘colour’ of gray throughout all three lines, is important. It’s a challenge to get there, but its possible. Start with the notorious LT conumdrum and then go ahead to tweak all the other parts which need adjustment. Also think about the space between the lines.
  • Craig EliasonCraig Eliason Posts: 898
    Well I did say make it more subtle, not abandon it. But with further reflection it may only be the thinness of the second stroke of the W that won’t stop standing out to my eye. 
    I’d also make the middle arm of E as thick as H’s crossbar, and probably change A’s to match too. 
  • Cory MaylettCory Maylett Posts: 156
    You seem to have approached this as a type design problem rather than a logo design problem in which typography plays a leading role.

    The purpose of a logo is usually to make a positive initial and memorable impression on the target audience, which is typically potential customers. So with the target audience in mind, is this a distinctive and memorable logo or would it mostly just appear to them to be three lines of generic type spelling out a name?
  • Ori Ben-DorOri Ben-Dor Posts: 280
    edited July 19
    Well I did say make it more subtle, not abandon it. But with further reflection it may only be the thinness of the second stroke of the W that won’t stop standing out to my eye. 
    Interesting, I thought it was the right half that bothered you.
    I’d also make the middle arm of E as thick as H’s crossbar, and probably change A’s to match too. 
    A and H are the same, so maybe you're calling for an optical correction. But to which direction? A's crossbar looks thicker to me, I think. To you too?
    You seem to have approached this as a type design problem rather than a logo design problem in which typography plays a leading role.

    The purpose of a logo is usually to make a positive initial and memorable impression on the target audience, which is typically potential customers. So with the target audience in mind, is this a distinctive and memorable logo or would it mostly just appear to them to be three lines of generic type spelling out a name?
    Don't worry, this is just a specimen of the type, not the logo :)
    Tapering of strokes in diagonals could be more subtle. …
    … or perhaps not. This feature caters for a good deal of character to your design. I would not favour to see this being abandoned.
    For a Logotype, achieving an even ‘colour’ of gray throughout all three lines, is important. It’s a challenge to get there, but its possible. Start with the notorious LT conumdrum and then go ahead to tweak all the other parts which need adjustment. Also think about the space between the lines.
    Thanks. Don't worry about the space between lines, this is just a specimen, not the final composition. 
  • Ori Ben-DorOri Ben-Dor Posts: 280
    What do you think now?


  • Craig EliasonCraig Eliason Posts: 898
    Thickness of \ diagonals of A and N makes those letters a bit overbold. Still too much white around the Ts—in addition to closing the space you could consider thickening and/or extending the horizontals of L/T. 
  • Are you planning to equalize the line length for the three lines?
  • Thomas PhinneyThomas Phinney Posts: 1,585
    edited July 20
    The second stroke of the W bothers me—it getting thicker as it rises. This seems wrong in an inner stroke that connects at both top and bottom. I would equalize the thickness of that stroke.

    The right-side stroke of the W is thicker at the top than the bottom, which is fine. But why not the left, then? Just move the inside bottom vertex of the first V part of the W slightly to the left, until the second stroke has a consistent thickness.
  • Ori Ben-DorOri Ben-Dor Posts: 280
    Thickness of \ diagonals of A and N makes those letters a bit overbold. Still too much white around the Ts—in addition to closing the space you could consider thickening and/or extending the horizontals of L/T. 
    I agree about the N, but it's tricky, since even color isn't the only consideration. I've looked at Alternate Gothic, for example, and it seems to suffer from a similar problem, but I think I get why Benton made this compromise... Anyhow, I've made minor changes. To the T too.
    Are you planning to equalize the line length for the three lines?
    No need, this is just a specimen, not the final composition. The final composition consists of just two lines: big ARROWWOOD and small HEALTHCARE CONSULTING.
    The second stroke of the W bothers me—it getting thicker as it rises. This seems wrong in an inner stroke that connects at both top and bottom. I would equalize the thickness of that stroke.
    I'm not sure it bothers me too. The bottom part of W is more crowded (the same four strokes need to share less room), so it makes sense to me that strokes would be allowed to get thicker as they rise.
    The right-side stroke of the W is thicker at the top than the bottom, which is fine. But why not the left, then? Just move the inside bottom vertex of the first V part of the W slightly to the left, until the second stroke has a consistent thickness.
    One of the characteristics of my design is that thick strokes appear to be of even width while thin strokes are tapering (look at the A and N). I don't want the W to deviate from this too much.

    Thanks to you all!


  • Ori Ben-DorOri Ben-Dor Posts: 280
    R is too dark, isn't it?
  • Evie S.Evie S. Posts: 56
    You may be getting that feeling but to me it stems from the leg of the /R appearing optically heavier than the bowl. I can't tell but the weights seem equal when the bowl should be very slightly thicker to the right.
  • Ori Ben-DorOri Ben-Dor Posts: 280
    Evie S. said:
    You may be getting that feeling but to me it stems from the leg of the /R appearing optically heavier than the bowl. I can't tell but the weights seem equal when the bowl should be very slightly thicker to the right.
    Yeah, I think you're right, thanks!
  • Are you planning to equalize the line length for the three lines?
    No need, this is just a specimen, not the final composition. The final composition consists of just two lines: big ARROWWOOD and small HEALTHCARE CONSULTING.
    Then maybe the small print will require optical adjustment? I suggest looking at the lettering in its intended context.
  • I think we're all very good at nitpicking here, but this looks really cool. It looks fresh yet familiar. 
  • Ori Ben-DorOri Ben-Dor Posts: 280
    Then maybe the small print will require optical adjustment? I suggest looking at the lettering in its intended context.
    We're thinking of two versions. One for big sizes:



    And one for small sizes:



    Do you think optical adjustments are in order?
    I think we're all very good at nitpicking here, but this looks really cool. It looks fresh yet familiar. 
    Thank you so much for this comment, it's really nice to hear! (Thanks to @Ray Larabie
     too!)
  • Frode HellandFrode Helland Posts: 114
    I think the type looks great. I’d maybe consider some flaring in the horizontals to echo your A. The A is great! G may also learn something from that one. There is already the implied triangle in its beard.

    The success of such a lockup, IMO, depends on the interplay between elements — even more so when you only have very few of them. Right now, there isn’t much of the arrow in “arrowwood” and neither is there much of the wood in the arrow.


  • Looking good so far. The second line is optically lighter than the main line, but maybe that's intentional.
    Right now, there isn’t much of the arrow in “arrowwood”
    I guess you could place/orient the logo such that it forms the arrowhead to the wordmark's arrow?
  • Adam LaddAdam Ladd Posts: 120
    edited July 25
    I think the type is quite nice and has a subtle charm to it. Though, to be honest, when I see it now with the icon, my first impression is that they feel somewhat unrelated. The curve shapes in the icon and round letterforms play off each other some, but the icon overall appears softer and lighter to me (maybe it's the colors too?).

    The type has a slight aged (for lack of a better word) tone, while the icon seems to be more modern. Also the diagonals in the type draw quite a bit of attention (particularly the WW and their contrast) that I wonder if the diagonals in the icon could be a little more dramatic in contrast and weight (e.g. more exaggerated thin to thick tapering)?
  • Jasper de WaardJasper de Waard Posts: 399
    edited July 27
    I really loved the one spread out over three lines. The new one with the icon feels like a step down to be honest. I agree with Adam: the icon doesn't do the type justice.
  • Ori Ben-DorOri Ben-Dor Posts: 280
    Thank you for all this feedback!
    I think the type looks great. I’d maybe consider some flaring in the horizontals to echo your A.
    There actually is a tiny bit of flaring, or more precisely tapering. I didn't like the result when I tried more. Maybe it would make a nice type, but not in this setting, or at least that's how I felt. I was too playful and not calm enough.
    The success of such a lockup, IMO, depends on the interplay between elements — even more so when you only have very few of them. Right now, there isn’t much of the arrow in “arrowwood” and neither is there much of the wood in the arrow.
    Arrowwood is the friend's name. It's also the name of a plant. I've deliberately decided not to put much arrow and/or wood and/or the plant in the logo. The friend is just starting his firm, and I wanted the logo to say something like "although I'm just a one-man firm, I'm competing with the big ones." So I wanted the logo to look like it could belong to a large, well-established healthcare consulting firm. As it turns out, most of them have plain, neutral, abstract logos.
    I guess you could place/orient the logo such that it forms the arrowhead to the wordmark's arrow?
    I'm not sure I understand what you mean, could you try to explain, please?
    Adam Ladd said:
    I think the type is quite nice and has a subtle charm to it. Though, to be honest, when I see it now with the icon, my first impression is that they feel somewhat unrelated. The curve shapes in the icon and round letterforms play off each other some, but the icon overall appears softer and lighter to me (maybe it's the colors too?).

    The type has a slight aged (for lack of a better word) tone, while the icon seems to be more modern. Also the diagonals in the type draw quite a bit of attention (particularly the WW and their contrast) that I wonder if the diagonals in the icon could be a little more dramatic in contrast and weight (e.g. more exaggerated thin to thick tapering)?
    The type echoes, I don't know, some 100-, 150-y-o wood type, maybe? But at the same time it also has some modern characteristics. I felt that thanks to those characteristics the icon and the type didn't look like they didn't belong together. And I still feel this way, though I do appreciate your input. I guess I need to give it more thought.
    Maybe more exaggerated thin to thick tapering is a good idea, I'll play with it.
    I really loved the one spread out over three lines. The new one with the icon feels like a step down to be honest. I agree with Adam: the icon doesn't do the type justice.
    Keeping in mind that the icon needs to be fairly plain, neutral and abstract (see my answer to Frode above), can you think of an idea for the icon that would do the type justice? Maybe these requirements simply call for another type and I should drop the current one.
  • Craig EliasonCraig Eliason Posts: 898
    So at heart this isn't a visual problem but more a branding problem. If the logo is indeed sending the message you intend, the type may be wrong for that brand. It feels a bit sad to say it, because the logo is unexciting and the type exciting. 
  • Ori Ben-DorOri Ben-Dor Posts: 280
    I'm now thinking of giving the R a straight leg and making the right stroke of U thinner and tapering. That'll make the type look more modern. Or maybe I'll just go with Helvetica...  :)
  • I think a plain, neutral, and abstract icon could easily work with the type you have. What makes it not work currently, I think, is two things:
    The softness of the outer shape. A square or diamond would work fine.
    The softness of the color scheme. It looks like it wants grey letters next to it, not black ones.

    Basically, I think you should change the icon, not the text. But that's just me.
  • Ori Ben-DorOri Ben-Dor Posts: 280
    I've actually explored some of those directions, but I will play with your ideas (again). Thanks!
  • Ori Ben-DorOri Ben-Dor Posts: 280
    No progress in the icon department, but I've extended the type to cover all the capitals:



    Spacing needs work and there's no kerning at all, except for the three or four pairs featured in the logo.
  • Nice! I like the first Q best.
  • Ori Ben-DorOri Ben-Dor Posts: 280
    Some alternatives:



    From top to bottom:

    (default)
    J
    Q
    R
    U
    J+Q+U
  • Vasil StanevVasil Stanev Posts: 411
    edited August 10
    Mmmm I can't get over the asymmetrical 'A' and the strange 'C' - oval on the outside and geometrical on the inside at the same time. I would look at Bebas and conciously try to do it differently so they don't look alike. I am a fan of the more subtle 'Q'.

    BTW, my TDR has an alefbet now (and it's my favorite script of the set so far :) ), you are welcome to critique it - I am sure there are more mistakes there than I am currently seeing! :)
Sign In or Register to comment.