Need an opinion on a logo

Okay, so for the longest time now, I’ve been needing to desperately redesign my online portfolio, which is so old and decrepit and reeking of Geocities design aesthetics that I’m embarrassed to send people there. In fact, you haven’t been able to get by the splash page in ages, because I’ve long since removed the link to the main page.

Anyways, I’ve been stifled in my attempts to come up with a design for a new portfolio, when it hit me recently that I am still using the logo I designed years and years ago which sorta kinda totally rips off the Metallica logo.

Here’s what my business cards look like, to show you what I’m talking about.

Anyways, after much ado about nothing, I finally finished a new logo which looks satisfactory to me. I could be comfortable with this for a few years. But I need to know what other people besides me, myself, and I think about it.

So please, take a gander at this new logo, and let me know what you think. Cool? Retarded? Stylish? Dull? Lay out a 500 word critique if necessary. The more feedback, the better.

Thanks guys.

If this is business-related, why do you want to go by Mach5?

I like the first logo better, fwiw.

The first one looks like an advert for an out of date rock band (hrrm… starts with ‘M’ ends in ‘napster’) and appears the colours (‘colors’) don’t seem to blend… I don’t know you but justdging by the second one it seems like your heart wasn’t even in the first (let’s play a game caled “making sense”).

I like the second one better for some reason… looks cleaner… more… uh. professional… even though it’s just “grey” in tone it actually stands out more to me… hell… you could even colorise to the colour of the month if you want (dunno if anyone else does this… but I’ve gone from blue, to black to red (current site- plug) to orange to purple in the last year or so)…

(just looked again)

yer number two is a thumbs up from me… it’s simple, clean and the font style and “rendering” stands out more…

(that and the “comic” look is in I hear)

The new logo look ssort of all bent wrong. I don’t know how to describe it any better.

Well, my business is graphics design. Name recognition is one of the more important things, and **** ***** is a very unmemorable name. Not only that, but as soon as I get around to it, I’ll be legally changing my name to Mach Five. Stop laughin!

Yeah, like I said, the original logo was designed for a forum logo some time back, before I realize I wasn’t going into computer science and that graphics were my true calling. So I didn’t have “longevity” or “trademark infringment” on my mind at the time. I really should’ve scrapped that logo the moment I put up a portfolio site, but then, the thought never’d crossed my mind.

Thanks for the kind words!

Well, what you’re seeing is some really odd perspective. The “5” is projecting in a totally opposite direction than the Mach, and your mind is saying, “Wait, that isn’t right.”

You’ll also notice a sort of Escherian influence on the depth - You’d expect to be able to follow the extrusions properly, but you can’t. It’s hard for me to explain, but easy to point out. You’ll have to trust me on that. ;)

I think the odd perspective is what sort of contributes to the edgy, off-kilter aesthetic. “Edgy, off-kilter,” describes me personally quite well, which is why I was aiming for it. :)

What’s your portfolio for?

The new one is too… spacey.

[i]Buck Rogers in the 25th Century![/i] spacey.

You’d be surprised, but the most enduring images are classy ones. I remember visiting my family in Poland and talking to my uncle about his company - well, he pretty much runs the Polish division of this pan-European company that makes windows. Anyway, for some reason he showed me his business card during a conversation and I was just struck by the cheap, imitation Bauhausness of it. I didn’t know what Bauhaus was at the time or anything, and I was hardly an expert on business cards, but I could tell it sucked.

We talked about it and I looked through my bag and found some E3 cards. Immediately the one that struck me the most, before I even saw who it was from, was the Microsoft one. So anyway, I gave it to him so he could present it to the “right people” and maybe gain some political points. A few months later we were talking on the phone and I asked him about it. Apparently the design department was like “oh no, that’s silly, so amateurish and American”.

Six months after that I get an email from him with an image attachment showing a scan of the new business cards that the design department felt were necessary for some bullshit reason or other. I’m not going to name the company, but there are just too many differences to ignore.

So what’s my point?

Oh right, subtlety rocks. Your gray theme works. A white background is as classy as you can get, and black is obviously the classiest text font but you can do amazing things with subtle touches of color. I love the NVIDIA business cards, for example.

Considering the word Mach 5 is trademarked out the ass and sounds like a shaver, you might consider a new “memorable” name.

Well, remember, this isn’t a corporate image I’m presenting. Consider this: Of all the interviews I’ve been in for freelance work, the ones I didn’t get were the ones I wore a shirt and tie to. The others I went in wearing normal clothes, and I got the job.

Essentially, I have to play to expectations in this field. People looking to commission this sort of work don’t want to see a corporate image. They want to see creativity, something offbeat, something original. Even if they’re looking to get a corporate logo done, they don’t want someone who looks corporate to do the designing.

Which really sucks, because I LOVE wearing shirts and ties. sigh

The bottom one makes me think of a five bladed shaving razor.

Trademarked? By whom?

I’ve been using it for my handle since '94, and it’s become more fond to me than my real name. I’d be rather remorseful if I had to change it.

I know. I rue the day that Gilette introduced that razor. I mean, I love the razor itself, but loathe them for choosing that name.

“Mach 5? Like the razor?”

If I had a nickel for every time someone asked me that…

What kind of image are you trying to convey with your logo? Neither of them strike me as being professional - fine for personal use, but…the first one is, well, Metallica, and the chrome and green-on-black grid is really dated. The second one is just vague, bent text. I’d keep working on it. IMHO, YMMV, ABBA etc.

Sign Me,
Bitchy Graphic Designer Since 1991

C’mon, you gotta admit Peter Murphy used to be hot stuff.

[size=2]p.s. Arr![/size]

Perhaps it will look better in context. When I get my letterhead, business card, and envelopes designed, it may seem more logical in that context instead of all by its lonesome.

I have to agree: both are incredibly unprofessional. I think most people would have a problem ordering any sort of professional service from a person whose only information on his business card is an anonymous internet handle, let alone one that is portrayed in either a death metal font or (apparently) Powerpoint word art. That black grid background is awful too.

I’m not trying to knock you here, Mach, but you’d really be better off chucking the entire thing and going back to the basics. The name of your company (Mach5?) could use changing to something more informative (what sort of services are you providing? How do you differentiate yourself from the competition?)… if not verbally, than empathically and by association. Then you should think of the answers to those questions and come up with a simple design that helps illustrate them. Also: colors are your friend. You shouldn’t use more than two or three of them, but splashes of color can go a long way in making your logo seem distinctive and bright… as it is, both these designs look like you designed them at a machine at the mall. I think you’d be better off not having business cards at all than handing these ones out.

I’m with Sparky on this one. The new logo isn’t very distinctive, and aside from the bevelling it looks like something you could make in Microsoft WordArt in a few minutes, which isn’t a good way to show off your design abilities. IMHO2.


This is not the name of my company. I don’t have a company. If I did, it certainly wouldn’t have my name in it.

This is MY name. It’s a logo of my name.

And several you failed to read my first post, in which I stated that the Metallica logo and Geocities-worthy grid design was for my OLD shit. Designed years ago. I’m well aware of how awful it looks. I’ve been meaning to redesign it all for two years.

READ the post, next time. Kthxbye.

OTOH if they have these impressions based on the logo and without reading your post (just as a customer would) then maybe the input is insightful.

Mach, you’ve asked for constructive input and many people, including Sparky (who is some sort of twisted graphics genius), have pointed out similar reasons why it is wrong with both designs and how you could go about fixing it. If you learned a lesson from your old “Geocities-style” design, why is your new one almost as bad and just as uninformative? Do you really think you are likely to get any business handing out a card with your AIM handle on it? What do you even do - what is your expertise? None of this is understandable from your logo or the old card’s information. Yet your only criticism of the old card was “design”.

In fact, for someone who is complaining about people “not reading his post”, you seem to be totally discounting the reams of relevant advice that people are giving you for free. . I just supervised the transition of logos for my company, so I have some experience with this. Sparky could (and probably does) contract out her expertise on this kind of stuff. Stop acting like a petulant internet brat and wise the hell up. The bottom line is that you shouldn’t ask for constructive criticism if you just want us to snowball you.

When you go to the interviews, do you say things like:

“Mach 5 would like a cup of coffee”

“Mach 5 thinks that pay is too low”

Because if you did, then I like the whole thing, if not, well I would be redundant to say it again.