Ehm, okay, you missed my point.

The difficulty of designing a company/product/etc. logo is to either visualize what a company stands for or visualize what a company does.

If there is no existing product or company you have to design for there is no need (read: difficulty) to take their wishes and demands into consideration. When you can pick whatever you like, it's really easy to come up with a great, striking 'logo'. Heck, you can even think of the logo concept first and then think of a striking name. It's cheating, in short.

I'm sorry but your post seriously cracked me up, so much so that  I had to come back and post again.

hahahaahahahahaahahahahahahahaha

Can you imagine a world where no one practiced at their craft and got no enjoyment out of it either?  I thought people were cranky as it is, but in your world -- my God.

"It's really easy to come up with a great, striking, logo"

Guess again, sir.  Guess again.  I have seen a lot of student logo work and other design work that is for practice and 99% of it doesn't compare to what is showcased on this site.

Actually, I think twice raises a valid point here.

In my opinion, there is a big difference between creating a logo for practice and creating a logo for an existing company/product. Fist of all, the process is entirely different. When creating a real mark, you have to (or at least should) go through some kind of a brand audit to understand what the company stands for, what their tone of voice is, how they want to be perceived in their market. For big companies, this includes surveys for the company itself (on all levels) and surveys for their target audience. This then results in a bland blueprint, that outlines all these aspects in a clear way. Then this has to be absorbed by the designer and ultimately translated in a visual style that matches this in the best possible way.

Secondly, when designing for real companies, you can create beautiful work that doesn't work for that specific company. This is something that is of no concern for practice logos.

So for fictional logos, it's about the design and the thinking behind it, without having to worry how it fits the company/product or how the target audience will perceive it. And you don't have to present/defend it in several presentations and possibly go through several rounds of adaptations without loosing you passion to still come up with the best possible solution that you and the client feel good with. A big difference, in my opinion.

I am not saying that the "fake" logos posted here (I posted some myself too) are less valid or beautiful, and they definitely should be showcased here as a great source of inspiration for other designers - as theartist mentioned. I also don't think we should split up the gallery into "real" and "fictional" work. But I feel it would be good to mention what the work is: a proposal for a real job, a chosen logo for a real company or an exercise of ones skills. And if it's for a real company, please add some background information (at least what line of business the company is in).

Just my 2 cents..

why split it up when that is what the description area is for? and then there is the pain in the &^%$ of moving made up logos to the real logo area once they are sold. and what about unused concepts? they aren't made up, but they aren't real either. I presume class assigned logos would go in the made up section, but they are assigned as though the client is real (and sometimes the client is).  this is simply a logo inspiration site people. you are over complicating it. not to mention you are asking someone to police the site because you know not everyone is going to tell the truth about their logo's origins.

and I think it depends on the designer as to whether the process is different for a made up logo or a client requested logo.

I'll side with Twice, Epsilon, and Mister Jones. 2 Sections. Post whatever you like.

^^ Anyone not see that coming?

I figured out. But don't be too harsh on this topic. Everyone has the right to have an opinion. I just don't know if those who are complaining ever noticed that the real ratio between supposedly client work logos and fictional ones in view all gallery is perhaps a bit in favor of "real" ones? The fact that majority of them are not found too much inspirational for someone to comment on or float defines logopond's tagline pretty well imho...

Bojan, you are of course right that design works are typically not sorted into two piles. It doesn't mean though that doing so is useless. There is a very big difference between two cases in question:

(1) A designer stumbles upon a great concept, implements it and then assigns a name and a brand positioning to it.
(2) A designer is given a name and the positioning of a brand and is asked to capture it in a logo.

Perhaps it's my amateurish view of it, but the second task is far more complex as it forces the designer to work in the confines of the external restrictions. And this is exactly what makes it that much more interesting to see what comes out of the design process.

This has little to do with what is more inspiring, because both types of work are in their own way. But knowing what came first - the brand or the logo - adds another dimension to the works presented. A very valuable dimension.

Nice to see everyones views on this.
I'm not frustrated about this (trust me, got other things on my mind than an online forum:), anyway here's a small summary of my thoughts

- it is important to me to get as much background information as possible when I look at a logo. The look/design is one, the ability of the designer to answer a brief is something else. I like to see those 2 things come together.

- Please don't stop posting free work, brilliant ideas, or discarted client work. It is a great source of inspiration.

- No need to separate the gallery, as that would get too confusing.

- The logo design industry has changed. Clients now go to sites like logopond to choose their freelancer of choice, or go to incspring to choose their logo of choice, or post their brief on those ****sites and pick the design they like and pay 100$ for it. This has also changed the process for designers. I still look at it from an agency's point of view, but if I was a freelancer, I would also try to sell discarted or new ideas online.

and just for reference, of the 79 logos in my showcase
- 63 are made for real assignments, 36 of these are final approved logos.
- 11 are logos made as practice/for fun.
- 5 are personal marks, made for myself.

peace,
mr Jones