is a newly opened night-club. Its special features include interesting interior design (lots of dark, exotic wood accompanied by glass, metal and LED lighting), great sound system and complex illumination effects. The club is planned to host many events and shows, its music theme will consist mainly of modern club-beats mixed with 70s and 80s retro-hits.
Client declared a need for a logo with graphic symbol and wanted it to be very simple, unique and easily rememberable. It should communicate: music, energy, people, fun. I was also provided with some visualizations of club`s interior design, which turned out to be very helpful in tuning in to its atmosphere:
Club`s interior design.
Even though that client had suggested using a standalone graphic mark in the logo, I couldn`t hold myself from exploring possibilities of a logotype-logo. Short, compact and catchy name that also seemed destined to have quite some typographic potential was too much to resist... I was pretty much convinced that the most important part of the logo should be interesting and made-from-scratch lettering.
First tries and sketches looked like this:
Having in mind client`s wish regarding logo structure (logotype plus graphic mark) I have also created some graphic symbols that could go with previously constructed lettering. These were the initial, rough concepts (planned as probes of “where to go next”) presented to the client:
First designs presented to the client.
To my great satisfaction (and relief:-) it turned out that our opinions were similar — project A became the favorite. We`ve decided to follow this route. This led us to a long series of modifications, changes and trials-and-errors based on the initial concept:
Visualization of mark in its "natural environment".
In all above graphics I`ve been trying to improve readability of the logotype and at the same time keep the initial concept — forming all the letters from a base-shape (“circle with a teardrop”?). It was very important for me not to wander off from this idea, because, in my opinion, it was the element that provided the logo with an organic, harmonious and unique feel. Moreover, basing typography on a circular shape evokes feelings of cosiness and friendliness. All those associations combined very well with the club`s planned interior.
At the next stage of work we decided to drop the stand-alone graphic symbol, as logotype itself seemed original and visually unique enough. Another two versions have been created, in which I`ve tried to eliminate the sharp ending on R`s leg (it seemed not to go very well with the idea of a soft and friendly logo):
Another batch of logotypes.
The problem of letters going astray from the basic circle-shape turned up again in the B-version. But not only that — small changes introduced to this variant of the logo resulted in some “real” issues, which I`d like to expose with this graphic:
Illustrative comparison of two versions.
I`d like to especially pinpoint:
- General shapes of blocks formed by consecutive letters and how they are perceived by human eye. To point it out in a slightly exaggerated way - A seems to be a set of circles, whereas the first three letters of B may resemble something more like a group of shapes morphing into squares. A`s silhouette, especially in the key-regions (straight lines intersecting with round ones), suggests that the basic form of the logo is a circle. Meanwhile, in B, our brain might be persuaded to perceive it more like the shapes you can see in 1B.
- Changes made to the first three letters disturb distribution of weight of the logotype, especially near the bottom. Impression of inaccurate letter-placement on the baseline is magnified — “B” and “O” seem to sit too high compared with positions of other characters.
- One can also point out how consecutive letters are placed (vertically) in both logotypes. For A, an abstract horizontal line grouping them together seems to go through centers of successive circles. For B — especially due to unfortunate visual connection between bottom edges of “R” and “A” — the whole mark seems definitely more matched to the baseline. I tried to illustrate this phenomenon with dashed lines (box 2).
The whole problem was that in this case me and the client had different opinions about which way to go. Considering all above ranting of mine, it`s not hard to guess that my favorite was version A
At this point we decided that the best solution would be to take some time off, don`t think about the project for a few days, and then come back to it with a fresh mind. It turned out to be exactly what we have needed. When we resumed working, a new version — satisfactory for both sides — came up almost instantly. The most important modifications were increasing radius of roundings in “R”s and “B”s corners and slimming the whole logotype a bit.
There wasn`t much hesitation about logo`s colors — it seemed pretty much imposed by intensive interior design. Therefore, the final version of the logotype looks like this:
Bright background version.
Dark background version.
The logo is accompanied by a Basic Logo Card, which describes its safe area and colors used. You can look up the BLC here
The whole workflow is a great example of constructive cooperation. Thanks to a fully bilateral communication I was able to provide the client with a logo that satisfied both sides and easily made up for all hurdles we`ve come across along the way.
Case Studies »