Couldn't agree more with all the "logo" comments. I think they're the bane of everyone's existance. I wanted to do the Commodore logo in a type treatment similar to the headline, but "branding equity" for the club (owned by the House of Blues) dictates that the logo exist at this size on all posters (see some of my other posters to get the idea!!).
Great suggestion by Hand Carved Graphics - I agree it would've added to the design. This poster was "knocked-out" after 5 or 6 lunchtime beers so the inspiration was there but maybe the attention to detail was somewhat lacking!!!!
i went to the designer's site. if you look at most of the other posters on the site, you'll see that they all have the same layout-scheme. the club info and corporate shit at the bottom. it's like a template.
if this was my poster, i probably would have tried to make the bottom part of the poster look like the bottom part of a matchbook where all of the matches are sticking out of. then i would have just thrown the clunky logos down there and it might have set it apart a little better. other than that, great poster, great bands.
i've used that "put the logos at the bottom in a strip and trim it off your copies" technique for years. some problems that develope:
1) sponsors begin to see it as a "ghetto" and resent not having the sponsor logos become an integral part of the design. they often will go to the point of instructing you HOW to use the logo, so they get their 'money's worth'. often they want it above the headline no smaller than 75% of the headline. that virtually makes it another headline - and if it's (as in one case we had) the verizon logo - very ugly with a huge swash above it - it takes up a third of the image area and dominates the design. clients are usually so desperate for the sponsorship that they won't say no. if you protest they dump you and do it themselves, or hire someone else.
2) most copies will end up existing WITH the strip at the bottom, and that is usually an eyesore that ruins the design. nobody will likely ever see it without the strip. and you ALWAYS forget to trim them off anyway.
3) collectors will see the 'trimmed' version as 'damaged' and will actually prefer the 'untrimmed' version as the true design/collectible.
4) still, nobody ever pays YOU (the artist) to put a corporate logo in your artwork. seems to me, as the artist, YOu should be paid for this service, not the client. in the longterm, they'll get much more promotion out of being associated with the art than with the evern. the event and the promoter/client will likely go out of existance in a few years (as will the bands, most likely) and yet the logo still is there being associated with what may actually become a cultural icon. can you imagine a pepsi logo stll hanging on a rick griffin poster? do you realize how much that would STILL be worth in terms of advertising cred to a corporation?
the thing that really irks me about sponsorship logos is WHERE THE FUCK DOES THE MONEY GO?
i've been on all sides of the logo
playoing in the band i got ne extra cash from pepsi
making the poster i got nothing from budwiser
tending the bar i certainly didn't get a pair of vans
and promoting the show (after being charge rent on the venue) i certainly didn't get any bacardi that the club owner insisted went on the flyers
so who the fuck get the goods if not the bands, staff, promoters, poster artists? just the club owner?
We have encountered it... and worked around it by telling the promoter that they would have to pay X amount for each logo. They dropped them.
Don't misread me here, we HATE putting logos on posters, but if someone is paying for it, welll........
Dan, I really like the AA solution to the logos. Great idea!
why do clubs and bands even NEED logos?
i mean it's kinda weird
lucy for me the places in mtl that have em USED to insist but we just wrote thier names to match the poster and they were happy with that.
if i HAVE to put logos i drop em down abit so they don't clutter the design and then on my personal copies and those i give away and sell i slice em off.
it just pisses me off cause this coulda have looked gret if it just said at the commodore in the same type of lettering.
One way we've seen of getting around sponsor logos is creating an area on the bottom of the poster that can be easily chopped off without interfering too much with the design. that way you can easily make some clean ones. Probably could've done that pretty easy with this one.
I totally agree with Art. We hate sponsor logos on posters. There's nothing more heartbreaking than creating a poster you love and having to stick a Pepsi logo on the bottom of it. It feels good to have a nice clean poster. We go so far as to not include our own credit info on the front of poster so we feel comfortable requesting that no other corporate sponsor logos (or any logos for that matter) go on the poster either.
i not talking about the club. i'm talking about all the other logos. perhaps you've not encountered this problem, but someday you will.
as for club logos, i use them if they make some sort of design sense with the rest of the poster. otherwise i write out the club name in a way to fit the design. a club that insists on a logo seems to think that people won't know where (in this case) 'commodore' is in relation to all the other 'commodre' clubs, ya know? how many 'commodore's are there in that city. seems to mee putting the word 'commodore' at the bottom in a cut-out type like the stuff above would have looked a thousand times better, and everybody would NOT get confused as to the location.
phill - oh, i know. but like everybody here on this site, we all want to think this stuff is more than that - that it aspires to real "art". take the idea to an extreme... what if picasso had to put 37 bad logos on one of his paintings because the guy who commissioned it was being backed by all these corporations? how would he feel? would he even do it? what would we think of his "art" then?
this is an extreme example, but deep down in our hearts, we all feel this way when we do our posters.
"logos are an endless problem, especially sponsor logos. those logos stay on "my"
posters for years after everything else is forgotten. it's not fair."
art, the one thing is they look at it as their show advertisement, not your artwork... you know.. to them it's their promo poster.... kinda like how you talk about this is an ad poster,an artifact...
please dont take offense, just an observation.
i'd also like to point out that i never get paid to put logos on any posters - the clients (hopefully) get paid. that 37 logo poster was a benefit project. it all just ends up being free advertising for the corporations, a way to associate themselves with a community or an 'art piece' without having to really do anything. it's sort of offensive.
logos are an endless problem, especially sponsor logos. those logos stay on "my" posters for years after everything else is forgotten. it's not fair. every time i show a poster to somebody, even decades later, there's this ugly little radio station logo or doc martin logo fucking up the whole design. the record i had for logos on ONE poster was 37 LOGOS! now, if you don't think that ruined any efforts i tried to make it a good poster...
and those 37 logos will follow me on my "artwork" long after i'm in the grave.
if you get paid for it... slap those logos on.. if you get something out of it... logos are good.
i mean if i was given a gig, and the only way i could do it is if i had to put logos on it... id do it.
but im a whore.