Whatbird.com

We need help picking our new logo. Please vote for your favorite in the poll below. DONT CLICK ON A GRAPHIC - GO TO THE BOTTOM WHERE THE VOTE BUTTONS ARE.  YOU MUST BE LOGGED IN TO  VOTE.

---

iBird Explorer: Finally a field guide as light as a feather. See it at http://www.ibird.com

I voted... but I don't see what's wrong with the current logo

 CD

If you mean the hummingbird at the top corner of the page - we love that too. Its just that is not really a "mark" and its not practical as a logo. However we plan to keep that and merge the new mark into it. We haven't figure that out yet but you can rest assured that Green-violet Hummingbird aint going anywhere.  Thanks for voting. I hope more people jump in. Looks like #5 is winning right now.

---

iBird Explorer: Finally a field guide as light as a feather. See it at http://www.ibird.com

I prefer logo #2 the most because it is more "web 2.0" than the others. Not that you are leaning towards a total site redesign, but that logo and the colors would meld well to make the site "web 2.0". I think a new look is a great idea (although the old one looks pretty cool too).

---

The Birdfreak Team
Eddie Callaway
http://www.birdfreak.com
Rockford, IL

Eddie can you tell me what makes #2 more "web 2,0" like than the others.  Thanks for voting!

---

iBird Explorer: Finally a field guide as light as a feather. See it at http://www.ibird.com

#2 to me just looks more web 2.0 because it reminds me of the popular hip logos of clean website designs like Flickr, Technorati, YouTube, etc. It's the type of logo that looks like it could be transferrable; other websites, blogs, etc. could post graphical links to this site from their's. Most of the logos look pretty good, I just think that is the best.

---

The Birdfreak Team
Eddie Callaway
http://www.birdfreak.com
Rockford, IL

I guess I'm the odd one out here.

I'm a graphic designer who has designed numerous consumer brand and corporate logos for both print and web and I find all of these options mediocre and in need of refinement. I find the choices of type, color, and scale unappealing in each concept. I think the most popular one is such because its simplicity violates fewer asethetic considerations; however, the typeface used in that version is weak for a brand/logo and the color choices are not ideal for both print and web.

The presented choices are either too busy or visually weak and appear to be first pass renditions. I realize everyone has their opinion and my intent is not to offend the designer, but to suggest that perhaps the presented options can be refined by exploring differnet color and type treatments for each and revisiting the position, space, and relative scale of the elements in each.
 

I would not disagree with any of your comments. They are not finished or refined. I was mainly looking for direction. But it may be that any one of these if done correctly could serve as a logo. The colors are up for grabs too.

I think the most popular one (#5) is because its simple but also because its similar to other birding sites. And it has a clever way of presenting the question mark. These were all done on speculaion from artists abroad who hope to get the job of designing the logo but I am feeling like I need someone with a more profressional track record who does this kind of thing for a living.

Thanks for your insights.

Mitch

---

iBird Explorer: Finally a field guide as light as a feather. See it at http://www.ibird.com

I think I like #4, but I actually do like the current logo best!
 

Hi:

 

I like #5.  It is simple and classic.  It also incorporates all birds, instead of just a certain few.  Thanks for letting us share our opinions and vote!

aitchaitch:

I guess I'm the odd one out here.

I'm a graphic designer who has designed numerous consumer brand and corporate logos for both print and web and I find all of these options mediocre and in need of refinement. I find the choices of type, color, and scale unappealing in each concept. I think the most popular one is such because its simplicity violates fewer asethetic considerations; however, the typeface used in that version is weak for a brand/logo and the color choices are not ideal for both print and web.

The presented choices are either too busy or visually weak and appear to be first pass renditions. I realize everyone has their opinion and my intent is not to offend the designer, but to suggest that perhaps the presented options can be refined by exploring differnet color and type treatments for each and revisiting the position, space, and relative scale of the elements in each.
 

 

I agree.

Not a designer though :)

Personally I think that there is some things that should be a definite inclusion

1-WhatBird = Capitalize both words to make them more distinct

2- ?com = I think that the question mark as the dot is a great idea!

3 - I do like the "bird" in #5 but not the overall feel I think that the lettering is to soft and not striking enough

4 - colors = really I think that the same color base as the current humingbird will make for a good transition as well as the fact that they are "nature" colors, blues and greens!

 

Thanks a bunch for asking for opinions!

Smile4Katie:

I agree.

Not a designer though :)

Personally I think that there is some things that should be a definite inclusion

1-WhatBird = Capitalize both words to make them more distinct

2- ?com = I think that the question mark as the dot is a great idea!

3 - I do like the "bird" in #5 but not the overall feel I think that the lettering is to soft and not striking enough

4 - colors = really I think that the same color base as the current humingbird will make for a good transition as well as the fact that they are "nature" colors, blues and greens!

Thanks a bunch for asking for opinions!

These are really good tips. Regarding your #2 you dont think that WhatBird?com looks funny? The problem with #5 from a logo point of view is that the fine lines will drop out when used in different mediums, think hats, tee shirts, etc. Plus I am just not enamored with the script type of writing. Yes colors need to be compatible with the hummingbird, I agree totally. Anything else will clash.

---

iBird Explorer: Finally a field guide as light as a feather. See it at http://www.ibird.com

I do not like #5 because it is too plain and doesn't tell you what the site is about... but if you are talking about using the exact same logo for the website AND materials like hats, shirts, etc. I think two logos would be needed... a nice design like #2 for the website and just the bird for hats and shirts. I don't know if I would use the hummingbird because it is commonly used on other sites and mediums but it does look cool (on the current logo)... ever thought of using a bird like a Cuckoo, Rose-breasted Grosbeak, or maybe a cool looking warbler? Black-throated Blue would look great and the colors would look sharp for the words.

 Just some extra thoughts.
 

---

The Birdfreak Team
Eddie Callaway
http://www.birdfreak.com
Rockford, IL

Mitchell Waite:

We need help picking our new logo. Please vote for your favorite in the poll below. DONT CLICK ON A GRAPHIC - GO TO THE BOTTOM WHERE THE VOTE BUTTONS ARE.  YOU MUST BE LOGGED IN TO  VOTE.

I think that the lettering in #6 really sets off the title

I like the ? as .com I just think it needs to be brought up a bit, sorta like #7 but the bird needs to be different

I actually like #2 but I think it leans towards the duck to much, but what if you set it up the same way with the bird beak to the left and incorperated the com into the body somehow???????? You could almost write it in I don't know just a thought :)

 
By the way I am totally new here but think this is the best site for birding I have EVER been too I found out what my bird was on the first try, it was so easy!!!

I Think if you get the right one they can be used on clothing/hats just with out a bottom slogan
 

Thanks for the ideas! I like the one about the .com and the duck a lot.

---

iBird Explorer: Finally a field guide as light as a feather. See it at http://www.ibird.com