Redis Logo Contest Started (Design one now)(redis.io)
redis.io
Redis Logo Contest Started (Design one now)
http://redis.io/logocontest/
8 comments
I agree in general terms, but here the idea is that for the "Redis way" it is paradoxically better to have a logo obtained in this way that may not be so super cool from the point of view of a professional designed, than something that will be very professional and well conceived based on the target and so forth.
Also note that the first entries we got were the one done by programmers in five minutes :) The best entires will get more time I bet, but will be more interesting.
UPDATE: anyway I put a few design guidelines in the logo contest site, so that the professional designer can have some inspiration and background.
Also note that the first entries we got were the one done by programmers in five minutes :) The best entires will get more time I bet, but will be more interesting.
UPDATE: anyway I put a few design guidelines in the logo contest site, so that the professional designer can have some inspiration and background.
The red cone one looks like an undercover ruby ;-)
I often see design contests for open source projects.
Why does no one seem to mind when there is usually an uproar against commercial contests/spec-work/crowdsourcing sites?
Why does no one seem to mind when there is usually an uproar against commercial contests/spec-work/crowdsourcing sites?
Probably the same reason why no one objects to developers contributing code to OSS.
Speaking as a designer I don't mind, but it's a terrible way to actually get an identity of any quality or cohesiveness for anything.
How much do most small-businesses need in terms of logo quality and cohesiveness? While there is plenty of crap there, http://99designs.com/logo-design/store seems to have a mess of logos that are worlds better than what many small businesses end up with when they work with a freelance designer. And most importantly, this (and contests) entirely remove the scariest part about logo design-- that you'll pay thousands to a designer to get something you don't really love.
I spent years as a designer (I still do a fair bit of design, though only for my own startup efforts usually) and if I had a friend starting a small business, I'd actually suggest they go the 99Designs route with a bigger-than-average bounty (though I'd probably tell them to browse the ready-made store in case they found something they loved).
I agree that you won't get a gold-plated identity package with most contests... But do most small businesses need that?
I spent years as a designer (I still do a fair bit of design, though only for my own startup efforts usually) and if I had a friend starting a small business, I'd actually suggest they go the 99Designs route with a bigger-than-average bounty (though I'd probably tell them to browse the ready-made store in case they found something they loved).
I agree that you won't get a gold-plated identity package with most contests... But do most small businesses need that?
well to start with I agree on some occasions that working with freelancers could be fun.
But to make things worse for Small Businesses is to believe gold-plated identity package will cost more than they need to pay. A strong branding will give an extra edge to SMBs fight against giant brands.
Hope this article will be of some help to all the readers here: http://design.inkzoo.com/bid/48880/Small-Business-Marketing-...
Hope this article will be of some help to all the readers here: http://design.inkzoo.com/bid/48880/Small-Business-Marketing-...
People aren't making money from your work.
It's just the same as contributing code to an OSS project.
I just posted a logo and I am a design talent vacuum!
What font is #14?
Looks similar to 'Transit Back Positiv Normal': http://www.fontfont.com/shop/view_product.ep?id=15745
Go radish!
So far I am liking the one marked 'original logo'...
Agreed. The original Redis logo is badass!
Design contests are evil.
Why so:
1) It takes the design itself to be a matter of taste. Obviously taste is important, but to design based on taste means designing without knowing anything about your company.
2) People entering the contest have nothing at stake. As they do not receive anything to just participate, they will invest very little. You would not do something you care a lot about if there is a very big chance of it turning to nothing.
3) It takes the "billion monkeys randomly typing" approach: assumes that variety must lead to quality. In doing that, it precludes depth. You have 100 ideas that took at best 1/10 the time a consistent idea would require to develop, and hope that luck will do the rest.
4) It fails to value the person creating the design: It implicitly says that they were not good enough to be sought after. And more importantly: It gives them no power whatsoever to control how their art will be used. If the company decides to paint it green, the guy just has to suffer it.
5) It fails to be "open source" because contests feed competition, not collaboration.
6) And further it fails to empower the community because collective involvement is at best a poll for the winner (AKA mob-think). No one in the community can suggest changes in an already proposed design, for example. There are no community practices of design-using involved, and so on.
And just as a final comment: 7) If you don't care about a logo enough to go to the Uni and find a teacher who will use your logo as an exercise for a class, why not simply have your programmers get together and do some fancy 133t svg thing? At least then it would have some connection to the people it is supposed to represent...
Notice that i all for "designers are not as important as they make themselves to be". But a contest is just not a good way to design, no matter what.
Why so:
1) It takes the design itself to be a matter of taste. Obviously taste is important, but to design based on taste means designing without knowing anything about your company.
2) People entering the contest have nothing at stake. As they do not receive anything to just participate, they will invest very little. You would not do something you care a lot about if there is a very big chance of it turning to nothing.
3) It takes the "billion monkeys randomly typing" approach: assumes that variety must lead to quality. In doing that, it precludes depth. You have 100 ideas that took at best 1/10 the time a consistent idea would require to develop, and hope that luck will do the rest.
4) It fails to value the person creating the design: It implicitly says that they were not good enough to be sought after. And more importantly: It gives them no power whatsoever to control how their art will be used. If the company decides to paint it green, the guy just has to suffer it.
5) It fails to be "open source" because contests feed competition, not collaboration.
6) And further it fails to empower the community because collective involvement is at best a poll for the winner (AKA mob-think). No one in the community can suggest changes in an already proposed design, for example. There are no community practices of design-using involved, and so on.
And just as a final comment: 7) If you don't care about a logo enough to go to the Uni and find a teacher who will use your logo as an exercise for a class, why not simply have your programmers get together and do some fancy 133t svg thing? At least then it would have some connection to the people it is supposed to represent...
Notice that i all for "designers are not as important as they make themselves to be". But a contest is just not a good way to design, no matter what.
Totally disagree on all points. Some of the most iconic logos on the planet were designed in an afternoon (Nike). There are a lot of design efforts that require depth and iteration-- logos aren't one of 'em (note: I was a designer for a good chunk of my life and still sling pixels pretty frequently).
Entrepreneurship is all about risking work for the POSSIBILITY of reward. You can build/launch a product that fails. You can spend 40 hours trying to land a customer and have it fall apart at the last minute. This is no different-- it's an army of design entrepreneurs who think the reward is worth the risk. And yeah, if you offer a crappy reward, you'll get minimal effort. Offer $100k and you'll get tremendous effort.
"But a contest is just not a good way to design, no matter what." The growth of 99Designs seems to indicate otherwise. I know lots of startup folks who have gone that route and have been VERY satisfied. In my opinion (again, with a design background), a contest with a big reward is the PERFECT way to get lots of perspectives and leverage the global economy to your advantage.
Entrepreneurship is all about risking work for the POSSIBILITY of reward. You can build/launch a product that fails. You can spend 40 hours trying to land a customer and have it fall apart at the last minute. This is no different-- it's an army of design entrepreneurs who think the reward is worth the risk. And yeah, if you offer a crappy reward, you'll get minimal effort. Offer $100k and you'll get tremendous effort.
"But a contest is just not a good way to design, no matter what." The growth of 99Designs seems to indicate otherwise. I know lots of startup folks who have gone that route and have been VERY satisfied. In my opinion (again, with a design background), a contest with a big reward is the PERFECT way to get lots of perspectives and leverage the global economy to your advantage.
My suggestions is that you must know some graphic designers in person, or your local University must have a Visual Communications department. Go ask them if their students would make logo as a part of the course brief. They get a credit on working on an actual client logo, that can be quite a thing when you are still at Uni. Other options is to as you local friendly designer to make it.
Just my opinion on the matter. And I contributed design to a local FOSS community, but they asked nicely and you get feedback and can talk about identity and brand and usage. Here is like a pop quiz and brands don't get designed that way.