EKnowledge Logotype

squeeze's picture

eKnowledge is a client of mine that is undergoing a major identity crisis, both visually and functionally. I am consulting them in all areas of marketing and communication, beginning with their visual identity. Their products and services (which are too broad) currently include everything from video production to website development to office infrastructure set up and maintenance to information management, and the list goes on. Like I said

dan's picture

My opion Scott loose the techno look. The name is intimitating enough. I like the middle one because it feels accessable and you need as much warm and fuzzy as you can generate.
It sounds like they need to focus their business. At one point in my career I worked for a marketing agency that did direct mail for the banking industry. A very focused niche, so business wasn't hard to find. Do they do dishes too

squeeze's picture

Tell me about it. The CEO is having difficulty letting go of products and services that he knows the company is capable of providing. Myself, and many others from what I've heard, have encouraged him to focus on one or two of their primary services (preferrably ones that offer the highest ROI) and dedicate all resources to them. Due to his stubborness to let go, I am taking a compromised approach by catagorizing his various products and services into comprehensive divisions. In the future eKnowledge will be marketed as: (1) eKnowledge - systems + information management, (2) eKnowledge - training + education, (3) eKnowledge - rich media marketing + PR, or some similar catagorical divisions. At least that way, their will be added clarity to the customers. I'm working on the proposal now, so hopefully, he'll buy into it.

Oh yah, back to the critique. I am favoring the altered Georgia logotype also. I didn't want to say anything until I had heard from someone. Considering the broad customer base, I think it is the most universal of the options. The reason I included the Futana type was because I think it lends well to using a byline (reason for including all that gibberish above), which will be a necessity if I am successful in my pitch.

Thank you for the critique.

Tom Cannon's picture

Scott,

I too like the georgia italic. It will look even better once color is added and you fuse the "e" and "k" more.

timfm's picture

Hi Scott,

From what you've offered, I tend to agree about the modified Georgia. Based on what you've told us about the multi-faceted nature of the services, maybe this would be more appropriate...

just kidding.

-t

cgonzalez's picture

hi scott

i add my vote to georgia. i do think that you should elaborate a better ligature between "e" and "K", and i also think that the "o" is asking for another ligature with the "w", a script one.

i think the horizontal on top of your "e" should be thicker, in the actual weight you will have problems in small prints.

keep us updated

CG

dan's picture

Scott brilliant idea making divisions of his business and marketing them separately. Do you have a variation of the logo with a division attached to it? It seems you could develope one based on the Georgia logo that every post seems to like.

timd's picture

The Georgia is a good choice I think you should consider a ge ligature and work on the eK, there is an area of darkness at the join which disturbs the effect. The teardrop terminal of the g is not as elegant as that of the w. The horizontal bar and the divisions could be colour coordinated?
T

Chris Rugen's picture

I definitely agree that the Georgia version is the best choice. It's strong, but not cold. It's also got a nice unique flavor.

There's something about it that makes my eyes/brain try to see Greek or Cyrillic characters in the word (I speak/ write neither, by the way). I don't know if this matters, or is something others see, but I can't seem to shake it from my head. I think it has to do with the terminals, the curve-terminal combinations that the italic makes and the custom ligatures. Again, this is really here nor there.

I also agree with Cristian and Tim about the eK ligature needing tweaking to make it lighter, and Tim about the g's descender and trying a ge ligature. It didn't bother me, but once I caught the connections running through the whole word, the end e seemed left out.

hrant's picture

Of those three I like the Georgia the most, but I think it's still off-track. I think you need something squat, geometric and somewhat bland. But how can you make it variable too?... I got it! Wachowiak's Generation (which I've recommended before). Available through http://www.fontshop.de , but not cheap.

BTW, is there a way you can make the logo modular? Like consisting of two parts - one that's fixed and another that changes depending on the "department".

hhp

squeeze's picture

Thank you all for the great feedback. I apologize for not responding with anything of interest yet, but I wanted to acknowledge the helpful critique I've received and provide a brief update.

Last Tuesday (1/27) I submitted a proposal to my client using the Georgia concept. The existing logo (as shown in my original post) was proposed as a universal eKnowledge logo to be communicated to investors. Three market specific logos were also submitted, which included the eKnowledge logo, as shown, accompanied by the above mentioned descriptors (from my second post). I believe this is the kind of approach Hrant was alluding to: eKnowledge (static/fixed) and descriptor (dynamic/changing). In addition to having dynamic descriptors, these market specific logos are each assigned a unique color as well. I expect to discuss the project with my client tomorrow (Mon 2/2), at which time I should have an idea of where I'll be taking this.

You have all identified some flaws in the current typeforms, namely, the "e-K" ligature and the "g-e" relationship that is void of a ligature. Originally, I simply thinned out the stem of the "K" to offset its heavy base which is a derivitive of the "e-K" lig. Obviously, from the remarks that have been made I didn't quite pull it off. The horizontal line over the "e", which I added after creating the logotype contributes to the heaviness also. I'm still uncertain about whether or not to connect the "g-e" via ligature. Since my initial sketches, I haven't come up with a way to make it look natural, or rather, indiginous to the original typeface.

I don't know how many of you were on board my personal logo critique for http://www.creativesqueeze.com, but I shared my personal philosophy or practice of trying my best to maintain the integrity of typeforms when using what I consider to be classics. You might say that I will pursuade an existing typeface to conform to my logotype, but I will not ask it to give up its true identity. Georgia must remain Georgia, even if it is eKnowledge Georgia. There are fonts that I don't have as much respect for and I will treat them more liberally, but Georgia is not one of them. If my client allows me to continue in this direction, I will try my best to work some of your insightful recommendations into the logotype.

Aloha!
Scott

timd's picture

Scott,
I was thinking something like this for the g-e lig, which I know is not the same kind of ligature as the others, but is not too outlandish and I butchered the e-K lig, just to see how it looked.
Tim

hrant's picture

I think the "eK" is crying out for the upstroke of the "e" to become the upper arm of the "K".
I might even raise the "e" a bit to make it stand out.

For the "ge" I might try using a binocular "g"* and curling the tip of the bottom all the way around to become the middle stroke of the "e", but that might require the "e" to be lower than the rest - plus I think one fancy ligature is plenty.

* Try skewing Georgia's Roman "g" to get a basis.

hhp

zato's picture

The logotype doesn't read as E-knowledge enough. The "e" should have some feature that separates it from knowledge. This, and the space between the w and l makes the "now" stand out.

squeeze's picture

Thank you for all of the great input. This logo design finally became a priority today, so I'm posting the current design (3 top logos) and the original version (at bottom in black) for comparison. I have applied some of the suggested alterations, while some of the others haven't seemed to work for me (i.e. connecting the last "e"). I smoothed out a few curves, lightened the weight of the "e-K" lig and tightened the last "e" to help remedy the disconnect.

eKnowledge logo

As you can see, my client gave me the green light to segment his business. The colors are dark blue, dark green, and dark purple.

Tom Cannon's picture

Scott,

Looks good. What font are you using for the subtext? The e-k bothers me still. Maybe try and separate the e&k? I would also like to see burgundy as one of the logos.

dan's picture

Scott, spell out Public Relations the average person probably won't know PR. Plus its not consistant with your other divisions. A suggestion is to dump the word Rich, so it reads Media Marketing + Public Relations. Other than that I think you have a winner.

squeeze's picture

Tom:

I used "Mayo" for the business descriptor type. The "e-K" and "g-e" have been my nemisis on this logotype. I have sketched out every connection/disconnection I could think of and come full circle. My current resolve (unless someone here inspires something I haven't tried yet) is to leave them as is, but with the applied tweaks: (1) slightly nudged the ending "e" to the left, (2) slightly nudged the beginning "e" to the left, decreased the base of the "K", and slightly nudged the phonetic symbol over the "e" to the left, all to lighten the "e-K" connection a bit. As for color selections: (1) blue is appropriate for the targeted conservative corporate clients, (2) green is appropriate for conveying education, and (3) the third segment is where I thought I would implement a red, which would be appropriate for eye-catching marketing, but it seemed too hard for PR, so I toned it down to a red/blue (a.k.a. purple). Also, I think purple is a rich (Rich Media Marketing) color.

Daniel:

"Rich" Media Marketing is mouthful in itself, but my client ate it up, as a perfect description for the specific marketing services/products offered

Tom Cannon's picture

Scott,

It looked like two shades of blue on my screen. Purple works. I think it is a great logo if you change it or not. I like the "e" and "K" disconnected.

squeeze's picture

Thank you, Tom. I will definitely continue to consider alternatives such as that (e-k).

Mahalo,
Scott

aluminum's picture

Here's a thought...
superscript

squeeze's picture

Darrel:

Believe it or not, I sketched out that concept previously, but the client really likes the phonetic symbol over the "e" which I don't think works well with the raised "e".

hrant's picture

That's what I was saying.
But make the stroke flow more explicitly, probably by moving the lower leg of the "K" more forward/up.

hhp

Syndicate content Syndicate content