The Gallery

My BBC Versions.

New here. I can take criticism. Bring it haters (February 2016)

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
AE
AlexEdohHD13
AxG posted:
Inconsistent, inconsistent, inconsistent, etc.

Was that a reply to me, or was it your opinion about the mock itself.
IA
IAmBrian
AlexEdohHD13 posted:
iamqueeni posted:
Okay so I've listened and re-done the channel logos... be as harsh as you want. I want to better at my work

BBC Logos...
*

The concept is good. The mock is really poor.
However, you can improve it by:
either using words OR numbers, not both (for consistency)
actually making idents using the symbols and not putting them in the logo (like the new BBC Three logo which doesn't make sense i.e., 'BBC II!')


So basically keep them as they are now? Haha the actually TV ones
DB
dbl
Agree with AXG, now its just inconsistent and sloppy. You need to think how your logo would be used. I.e: Digital use, on-screen bugs, off-air (print), 'would it clash with certain colours', 'is it readable?'
IA
IAmBrian
dbl posted:
Agree with AXG, now its just inconsistent and sloppy. You need to think how your logo would be used. I.e: Digital use, on-screen bugs, off-air (print), 'would it clash with certain colours', 'is it readable?'


Okay so what do you think needs to be changed?
AE
AlexEdohHD13
iamqueeni posted:
AlexEdohHD13 posted:
iamqueeni posted:
Okay so I've listened and re-done the channel logos... be as harsh as you want. I want to better at my work

BBC Logos...
*

The concept is good. The mock is really poor.
However, you can improve it by:
either using words OR numbers, not both (for consistency)
actually making idents using the symbols and not putting them in the logo (like the new BBC Three logo which doesn't make sense i.e., 'BBC II!')


So basically keep them as they are now? Haha the actually TV ones

What I said was that all the logos you made should either be words OR numbers for ALL of them. Not a mish-mash. To make it consistent. (I understand using numbers across the numbered channels, i.e., 1-4), but this is just a mish mash of numbers and words for the numbered channels.
NI
Nicky
AlexEdohHD13 posted:
The concept is good. The mock is ****.


Oh the irony.
Larry the Loafer, orange and PATV Scunthorpe gave kudos
AG
AxG
AlexEdohHD13 posted:
AxG posted:
Inconsistent, inconsistent, inconsistent, etc.

Was that a reply to me, or was it your opinion about the mock itself.

That's what the quote button is for.
AE
AlexEdohHD13
AxG posted:
AlexEdohHD13 posted:
AxG posted:
Inconsistent, inconsistent, inconsistent, etc.

Was that a reply to me, or was it your opinion about the mock itself.

That's what the quote button is for.

oh.
AE
AlexEdohHD13
Nicky posted:
AlexEdohHD13 posted:
The concept is good. The mock is ****.


Oh the irony.

I changed it recently and replaced with more constructive criticism. I like to give my opinion and justify, (basically give constructive feedback and say how it can be improved)
AG
AxG
I shall just say one last thing, Lambie-Nairn didn't put personality into the logos, it put it in the branding, idents etc.
AE
AlexEdohHD13
AxG posted:
I shall just say one last thing, Lambie-Nairn didn't put personality into the logos, it put it in the branding, idents etc.

Yeah. Look I'm not expecting him to be the next Lambie-Nairn, or the next MDTA or something, I'm just realistically saying that there is room for some small improvements. (I'm just being realistic).
AE
AlexEdohHD13
I have to say iamqueeni, this mock is a real (70%) improvement.

Newer posts