Home

this is really great...

Interesting special effects. Is this part of the Firebrand design company already established in the UK? www.firebrand.co.uk

well, I hope that agency deserves to take the name firebrand, because Roy its a master in logos, he is the only firebrand for me!!! n_n

i think we should fight fire(brand) with fire(brand)... there can be only one!

Which software you used for this logo?

@firebrand: Nope, they've got nothing to do with firebrand.co.uk. It's a completely new agency, don't think they've got a site up yet.***@Respiro: photoshop/illustrator*

Is it a vector logo?...

@Respiro: No, the wordmark is a vector but the symbol is a bitmap

I was really hoping that the mark was vector :(

@piermadonia: I am amazed that they can trade using this name, surely there is a conflict.

@firebrand: I can only presume they had it checked and approved before they briefed it out. I wasn't involved in the naming

Sorry this is just %22effects%22 IMO does not make the cut as far as LOGO goes. ANY logo should work in vector otherwise it's called something else.

Hmm...interesting point Mike. Although this draws the eye, I personally would not use a 'fire' element in the mark at all. Its just too cliched.

ouch :/

Vector. Raster. Whatever. I just don't think it's executed well. The flames just don't feel natural in their movement. Too forced to get the F.

How come it's out of the gallery then?

Meh, are we back at the vector/raster thing again? A logo is a mark used to identify something. The way in which the mark is created is irrelevant to its status as a Logo. Hell the first 'logos' were drawn on cave walls with charcoal.. not a vector in sight %3B)

Vector logos are more versatile IMO: 1. They can be blown-up to any size. 2. Colours can be altered more easily. 3. Small file size compared to raster. Etc,...*I have no problem with raster logos - only if it's really required or if there's no other option.

At first when I saw this, I thought Roy ( the real firebrand :-P ) was having another go at his personal logo. My immediate reaction was not good. This concept seems weak, and I agree with gthobbs, the fire shape seems forced. Don't get me wrong, this is fun to look at, but there's nothing 'WOWing' about it. In regards to the vector/raster thing, daleharris makes some great points. However, there are certainly far more benefits with a vector logo.

@Climax: No, like I said I have no problem with raster logos - they're just not as practical when required to be applied to different media. Sorry for stating the obvious earlier also. There are no rules to creating logos but vector would be more acceptable. This is just my opinion.**

I know you weren't. Maybe you could create a way of posting with a tone of voice included :D

@ Dale, yeah,.. well cavemen did not have cell phones either, (joke) except for the Gecko guys.

@smartinup: I tried to register this name myself but it's already trademarked in the design business... in the UK at least. Maybe not for advertising.

@firebrand... maybe you should change your name... i can help if you like?... have you thought of rubberbrand?

Haha... No, I'm not very flexible.

jejeje, for me, firebrand will be Roy's synonymous! :)