"agriculture + technology" logo critique/help :)

rlueder's picture

Hello, this is a school assignment, we´re supposed to "redesign" a corporate identity keeping some of the elements from the original idea. My first problem is that my teacher really doesn´t like AvantGarde, he didn´t want me to use it (because it´s "old and overused") but since I insisted in keeping it he said I should alter it somehow, that´s what I did on the third logo. The first one is the original design.

What are your ideas about altering typefaces? I have this idea that the original design of a typeface probably took a lot of effort from its original designer and altering it is somehow bad, specially in this case, altering it just to "look different from avantgarde". I built "a" and "g" from "o" and "t" and altered "e" and "c". I´m worried that "a" has a chance of being read like an "o", specially in small sizes and I think the "g" looks too much like number "9", maybe that´s one of the reasons Lubalin didn´t design it this way...

What are your opinions about this? Should I keep the original design of AvantGarde or the altered version? Would you suggest any other highly geometric typeface? I did some testing with Futura but I really don´t like its "c", looks somewaht incomplete to me.

The leaves are supposed to express the idea of their tagline "high technology applied to agriculture", the first two leaves are more organic, the last two completely geometric, the middle one is a mix of both... Any other suggestions? Kerning? Colors? Any ideas would be really appreciated. Thanks. :)

agrotec_critique.png59.88 KB
Chris G's picture

If your teacher's dislike of Avant Garde is purely due to its age and popularity I would say that is a pretty bad reason to start altering it. The trick is to make well known types fresh again through good design.

I think that the success of your treatment should be based on contrasting the geometric, technical quality of the letterforms with a more organic leaf shape. The first leaf looks a bit too 'drawn', and the diamond shaped leaves seem a bit unorganic.

Maybe a leaf should grow from the stem of the 't' to form the cross bar?

If you do decide to change the letterforms then you need to look at where the stems and bowls of the 'a' and 'g' meet. If you look closely there is a lot more white space in the original because the stroke that forms the bowl is not actually a consistent width. This may help avoid the 'a' looks like 'o' problem that you mentioned.

WhitePepper's picture

Yeah! I agree with Chris G! Tell your teacher to shove it! Ask for a proper reason why you shouldn't use it. I remember a teacher telling me not to use Clarendon because it looks too old-fashoned, and it's now one of my favourite typefaces and used on my logo! Rebellion!

I prefer the tighter letter spacing on the 2nd two ideas and think there's more in them than the first.

The positioning of the seedling in the first breaks up the word in the wrong place, whereas in the other 2 it breaks the 'agro' from the 'tec' which I imagine is the idea.

Ray Frenden's picture

I like the angular leaves of the second two. There are a lot of leafy logos out there, but the color of your geometric shapes emparts the idea that they're techno-leafs well enough to be different, I'd say.

Miss Tiffany's picture

well, i wouldn't tell you teacher to "shove it", but i would question him/her. "just because they don't like it" isn't reason enough for a teacher to tell you not to use a typeface. if he/she can't articulate a reason beyond taste i might be so-inclined to agree with the afore-mentioned insult. =^P

Syndicate content Syndicate content