Honestly, I don’t think the logo cuts it. I don’t like it – but I also don’t like the AT&T one, lol
I also don’t like all the logos that have “point”, “nerd/nerd”, “bee” in them – I think they are silly.
Chatpoint, mappoint, geekpoint, – chatbee, geekbee, etc etc – I wonder who buys that sort of stuff … but that’s another discussion
@Bunch: No, your item lacks basic design principles. Reviewers are not here to teach you.
People here in the forum are willing to help. But you keep brushing our comments off. You are input-resistant.
Until you learn that typography is essential, that basic design principles are essential and that you need to present a finished product ( not one your customers can finish for you ) you will keep collection hard rejects.
The round collar one is probably simply because there are dozens of these which look almost the same.
I do like the other one. Try adding a tag line and balancing the font size with the size of the icon. I think that would be nice.
Yup! And know what you’re good at!
I have a couple of party flyers in my portfolio and sales are pathetic – and I recognise that that’s just not my thing
Still had fun doing them though, but if you want to make some sales, you better stick to what you’re good at.
this can definitely go somewhere.
I agree with the negative space idea, but may be right.
I also agree that the shape of the ear of the elephant is somewhat strange.
Work on those two, and you’re onto something.
Definitely one of the better items I’ve seen rejected lately. I’m sure you can make something with this.
I think there is not enough there. If you compare to other similar items on sale here you will see that you get many different angles and many different compositions. Here it only seems to be the one seen from two angles.
technically, I agree, it seems hard to make out some of the details, seems a little dark.
Personally I would not be too keen on the cables, the lamps, or the other stuff you have standing around on the desk. I don’t find this an attractive scene.
I think this needs to offer more.
Let’s face it, you need to read between the lines:
1) Hard Rejection:
your item is so poor there is no need to comment on it it does not meet basic design standards, or basic principles of what is a good logo or a good design.
2) Soft Rejection:
It’s just about okay, but it’s not great or something is missing. Here you may get some tips on how to improve because here Envato consider that this item may meet said standards and basic principles
All in all Envato is not here to train authors to become better designers. You are supposed to be an accomplished designer before selling here. A hard rejection means that your product is not seen as accomplished.
I do agree that there are consistency issues. However two wrongs don’t make a right. Meaning another poor item that slipped through is not an argument for the next poor item to also be accepted. You are right. They should both be removed. In that we agree.
Please don’t take offence to what I say. I don’t mean to point the finger or call anyone a bad designer. I know that there are far better designers than me out there. But most of the work I see hard rejected here does not meet basic design standards. And in most of the cases I agree with hard rejections.
Take a look over at the item discussion board and see what people are trying to submit. There is a lot of really horrendous stuff there. Now imagine being a reviewer and getting sent this stuff every day. There really is no need for them to comment on each of those items.
But yes, more consistency in pricing and in items that accepted.
Completely agree, and if they are very talented they will design great items and make many sales.
And I wouldn’t need to explain that typography is an essential part of a logo to a very talented trainee! He would choose great typography by himself.
If the trainee produces and outstanding product then there is no reason why it should not be sold here. But if the trainee’s product lacks quality and the trainee lacks understanding of basic design principles then it shouldn’t.
We’re not talking rocket science here. Not everyone is “sevestyles”. But everyone can learn about and apply good design principles. I find myself arguing them here when really they should be beyond any need for explanation.
That’s my point
nope, you just need to hit the enter key a couple of times
I have to disagree here.
I do agree that there are consistency concerns. And I do agree that there are areas of improvement.
However in the specific case almost all arguments Bunch presents are not relevant or simply not correct.
1) “It is very good, professional graphic for me”
It is not. It does not meet minimum design requirements for a logo as I pointed out in my post. A graphic that does not work in greyscale, black and white, very small or very large and has unbalanced typography is neither very good nor very professional. It needs work.
If you say that this is a good professional logo then you should take a look at what is commonly accepted as basic logo design guidelines.
2) “And even if our project is good based on all requirements they still reject it. “
In all my years here in this forum I still have to see a submission which meets all requirements and is a great item that was hard rejected. Show me one.
3) “They spend a lot of time doing project itself, image preview screens”
Just because you spend a lot of time doesn’t mean that the work is good enough
4) “But they don’t like a newbies here.”
Nobody has problems with newbies. In fact many newbies here have skyrocketed to be top-selling authors in very little time. BUT this is not a training ground. This is a marketplace where professional designers sell professional products. Not where people learn and study. You learn and study first. Once you are good enough you can sell your professional product here.
Would you want to buy a car which was built by a trainee? No, you buy a car built by professionals to professional standards.
Here in this forum there are many people available helping struggling authors to reach these standards. And many of us, including me, have learned a lot here from other authors and become much better at what they do. But this marketplace is not to “give everybody a chance”. This marketplace is for professionals selling professional products.