R I Brands

Comments

• April 10, 2011 9:37 AM
   chrissox
    Project Holder
  Sorry - Solid color way as in #20 NOT #15 & #19....
  
  0   0
  
• April 10, 2011 9:36 AM
   chrissox
    Project Holder
  1) Company name is RI Brands, inc. NOT Ri BrandS, inc. 2) I prefer the font feel of #19/20. 3) I prefer solid color as in #15 & #19 rather than color fade of #20. 4) I prefer the solid company name as in #20 over empty comapny name as in #15 & #19. 5) Concerned about being able to seperate the logo and comapny name in #19/20. 6) Being that the "R" in the logo matches the R in company name, I am sure #15's logo will change accordingly. That is good as I find the font and logo R a bit dated. Loking for more current/professional i.e. #19/20. 7) Would like to see the updates based on these comments in both the Dark Blue/Light Blue & the Red/Orange concept.
  
  0   0
  
• April 10, 2011 5:35 AM
   gharra
   
  ok
  
  0   0
  
• April 09, 2011 2:37 PM
   chrissox
    Project Holder
  Also, think the whispy things will be an issue printing our monogramming in a small area don't you? Maybe just remove them? And the S at the end of BrandS is weird. Not opposed to a darker blue, maybe not quite Navy, but a deeper, more intense shade.
  
  0   0
  
• April 09, 2011 2:32 PM
   chrissox
    Project Holder
  Gharra, One big issue for me is the Ri. RI is the abbreviation for Rhode Island so hence, capitalized. Can you add my slogan somewhere? "putting the SPECIAL, back into specialty retail".
  
  0   0
  
• April 09, 2011 10:11 AM
   chrissox
    Project Holder
  Valid point! I am not here because I know what i am doing! You people do, so I understand. With that being said, I am not "feeling it" with these designs. Maybe because they are a bit busier than I was imagining. Maybe I spent too much time on sites like LOGOWORKS that let you pick a stock design. I was really thinking of something unique. But I need to re-think. I am used to branding a product, not a service. But with that being said, maybe if these recent designs weren't so flowery it would be different. I think Blacksun Design #1 was on the right track, but I wanted to stay away from the "RI" branding part. It is easier to know what I don't want, than what I do!
  
  0   0
  
• April 09, 2011 1:12 AM
   blacksun
   
  @chrissox treblazy made a design with an interchangeable icon like you wanted but you mentioned that it felt "stock in nature". The reason behind that is that an interchangeable logo / icon will always feel generic because it's not personalized / custom fit to your business. A logo / icon will never be unique if it was meant to "blend in" with any random name / brand. I suggest re-branding later if you decide to change your company name or if someone buys it.
  
  0   0
  
• April 07, 2011 6:02 PM
   chrissox
    Project Holder
  Thank you Treblazy. I know this is work. I think the concept has nmoved forward from the first design from Blacksun, do you see these?, but I don't find the LOGO memorable. It almost seems familiar, something more stock in nature. Not being negative, just my opinion. The fade is tough as well. I guess you got the simple, yet bold concept, but not sure it would carry forward in anyones memory as unique.
  
  0   0
  
• April 07, 2011 7:00 AM
   chrissox
    Project Holder
  PS. If I would ever move my company to say, NJ, the RI becomes obsolete...
  
  0   0
  
• April 07, 2011 6:59 AM
   chrissox
    Project Holder
  Not bad! Thank you. I like the concept, the only issue I have is if I ever change the name of the company, or am bought by another, the RI LOGO would be hanging out there. I believe in my job description I mentioned I was looking for something like the AT&T, or a Nike Swooth concept that the logo is the branding vehicle. The verbage is less important to me than the mark. Did I explain that well?
  
  0   0