Poll: Should we keep the current Dallas Makerspace logo, use an updated version of it, or change it completely?

DMS General
#14

I have a question, Do people really post stuff to the internet and expect every single soul who see what they have posted to like it?

If you put your design out there expect it to be praised and bashed, its part of the deal. I like both designs current and new.

However, its like any other thing here going through the proper channels and maybe discretely and slowly pushing what you want done instead of tossing it out to the wolves and expecting 100% approval.

Too many personalities around here to get 100% buy-in so to the designer kudos for the work, but folks are gonna argue this thing down to the nub, and by that time, people are not even gonna care anymore, and or somone else will come up with another design for folks to argue over.

I’m actually curious how long it took to get the 1st one approved…

LOL, limiting my responses to 2 per thread, before TROLL dude wakes up again.

2 Likes
#15

The waters are getting a bit turbulent for me. I feel talk has gotten a bit more aggressive around the edges lately, I don’t like it. I think we need a face to face happy hour to talk over things person to person.

Nicole’s feelings concerning altering the logo of DMS (I’m an art teacher so just go with me here):

  1. I feel like the attachment to the old has more to do with the attachment to recollecting about the good times and feelings about the “past” makerspace. The logo speaks to late night talks, successful execution of dreams and bonding friendships over some pretty difficult growth years. I’m going to state that I feel this is more an emotional pushback and not an aesthetic pushback. Feel free to disagree but that’s the vibe I’m feeling.

  2. The kerning (space between the letters) on the past logo could be improved. Specifically between the p-a-c-e it’s not visually balanced. This is something that many may not see but it’s a part of the visual language of a logo. Thank god both are san-serif as I would have gone ballistic. The font of the second is easier to read from a distance and balances out with the width of the logo lines. The other is unbalance. Which you like is a matter of opinion - but for me, I prefer bolder letters.

  3. Current trends in aesthetics/logos (from what I can tell) are going two ways - one way is clean and the other is fractured. With logos, in my opinion, clean is the way to go - both are clean but the new one is a visual quiz of sorts. It takes you a second to figure it out - what is it? OH it’s a wrench and an M. That second is a second people are paying attention- that second of someone thinking about your “brand” is invaluable.

  4. Full disclosure Michael and I have been very close for years - before we both got involved in the manic energy of makerspace. Hands down, he is one of the most talented designer I’ve ever had the pleasure of working with. He has handled rebranding and branding several times with major companies. Both logos were designed by artists and what an honor to have that happen here.

  5. Rebranding is commonplace - its part of the evolutionary cycle of businesses. (see below on legos visual journey)

  6. I want everyone to imagine putting something on talk that they have made (be it a chair, something made of metal or a pinball restoration) and a reaction similar to this. It’s not supportive or productive. It’s counterproductive and makes it seem that efforts to modernize and improve makerspace will be met with a negative reaction. I just think everyone needs to take a second and consider how that effects the idea of personal efforts, volunteer time and energy here at DMS.

Important side note: (In my opinion) This public forum has started to eat it’s tail on several things and if not checked it will start to drastically effect the culture of makerspace that we all love. I believe it already has started to alter the vibe and I don’t like that one bit. Is it possible to give this little corner of the internet prozac or at least some whiskey and a rocking chair?

8234800485_aae57d5c3b_b.jpg1024×846 319 KB

4 Likes
#16

That’s my read too.

Storytime:
In a previous career I worked for a small manufacturer named ComCo systems, a division of Communications Conveyor Company. This latter tagline attached to almost every bit of company material was a reference to a bit of the past: before cheap phone systems, department stores of the early 20th century used pneumatic tube systems to send paper messages between departments and a backroom (the company’s main products were pneumatic tube systems for bank drive-throughs). The ComCo logo was stylized with the small O’s captured by the big C’s to suggest a carrier going through a tube. Rarely acknowledged by management was the growing irrelevance of pneumatic tube systems in the market: bank drive-throughs were on the decline, multiplex theaters were neither popping up like weeds nor were they handling much cash, and other markets like hospitals and industrial facilities were either using robots or going to more sophisticated competitors. But still the logo and tagline endured, despite the confusing throwback. The owners were stuck in an era that predated the 1968 founding of their company and failed to heed the implications behind the oft-asked question “so what’s a communications conveyor anyway?”. It is of small surprise that the company has struggled in more recent years.

While I too have some emotional attachment to the old logo (and I wasn’t even around for the old space), I can see the appeal of the new one.

1 Like
#17

Great example of branding evolution…

#18

Nicole @uglyknees

I don’t think ‘in person’ get togethers will make any difference. Personally, I haven’t found this thread to be much more antagonistic then is natural when people disagree about something. And when you compound that with the fact that our members have less then perfect social skills it is easy for people to get their feelings hurt. But this is an area where people really do need to develop a thicker skin. The nature of a democratric organizatrion like ours is that debates will get heated when people are arguing their passion. Pleasant? No, but unfortunately a sign of a healthy organization such as ours.

I also have a couple of comments about your bullet points.

  1. I disagree, and think you (and anyone else) should reconsider this belief. Personally, I just prefer the aesthetics of the old design. The ‘puzzle’ aspect of the new one is counter to the purpose of a logo in my mind. Instant recognizability. But more to the point, attributing a ‘reason’ to the oppositions preference for one aesthetic choice over another is problematic since such choices are largely preference. They are not arrived at by reason (on either side).

  2. I know Michael has said the text of his new design is part of the logo, but I disagree. The symbol parts of logos are frequently used by themselves (see Pierces christmas tree ornaments) and the actual font used to render them in an organization like ours is likely to be different for everyone who uses it. I suspect that this was also the case with the ‘text’ part of the prior logo.

  3. We are a business, but unlike most our mission is not to obtain new customers (members) like a normal business. Our purpose is to serve the needs of our current members. At least I would suspect that is why most of our 1,000+ members kick in their $50 each month. Given that ‘brand’ isn’t a particularly important consideration. Compound that with the fact that any one of our members is capable of producing a news article, magazine article, press release, etc… and use whatever ‘pretty stuff’ they want to illustrate ir, the idea that we can dictate from the top down what our ‘brand’ is seems doomed to failure.

  4. I believe I received a much stronnger reactionb from Michael a few months back when I suggested we have a contest to create posters to remind people to clean up after themselves. I din’t take that personally, and I would suggest that he not do so here. I don’t believe these comments on these threads are personal. They are just people who disagree.

2 Likes
#19

Just my $0.02 being tossed into the fray. I like the new logo and fell it does represent DMS in an appropriate way. I think most of the push back is the way people read their on beliefs into the discussion.

I will say that it has a wiff of ‘my way or the highway’ to the manner the new logo was proposed to go forward.

Thanks for all the contributions the current and new logo. We as a group should decide which to use.

:smile:

1 Like
#20

My thoughts are how many people come here for the knowledge base the tooling and the comradery?

If it was to change would we really see a drop in membership, i mean would people really cancel? Would people just not join or come to this wonderful place over a logo?

If it was to stay the same, what would the impact be…

I’m thinking nill on both, however as stated in a prior post, maybe its just the shear idea of rebranding the entire organization thats causing the arguments. It costs money and folks volunteer time to make that happen and considering all of the other Makerspace goings on thats brewing, changing the branding probably just isnt on the priority list.

Let’s just change the logo to that Mr. Hankey looking thing @AlexRhodes carries around on his chain, is it D**K-Butt or something and call a truce…

If you look really hard at it, you can see the D the M and Crescent wrench on it…

1 Like
#21

That right there.

As a frequent reader of the forum that is supposedly the clearinghouse for information for the Makerspace, I find myself coming here often and sometimes being surprised by decisions that were made and implemented without a heads up. It was discussed in some meeting, a line item was posted in some place, etc. And somehow I never see it.

In large orgs, sometimes that’s how things have to be to get it done. But to me it just seems to happen a lot.

I can’t be the most active member due to certain commitments, but I feel like it is difficult to stay well-informed of goings on unless I’m camping out.

2 Likes
#22

I decided to come up with some alternatives to address my major criticism that the M in the logo isn’t really visible (I had to be told it was there)

I think with the change in colors, maybe the weight of the hex needs to be increased slightly

logorecolor.png4267×2133 136 KB

logo.png4267×2133 138 KB

1 Like
#23

Logo’ should work in color, as well as in black and white.

2 Likes
#24

Just the inner part looks interesting, not to mention much easier to spray paint on stuff


https://talk.dallasmakerspace.org/uploads/default/original/2X/c/c12110b4974916e0c989b53504febd6526207ef1.png

2 Likes
#25

Either way they will be easier to stencil since they are single part images. It will make 3d printing and lasering them easy too

4 Likes
#26

Current logo is fine.

Sincerely,
Tim Nielsen

2 Likes
#27

I have no opinion towards either logo, which was not a choice in the poll. So I didn’t vote.

I like the people at the Maker Space. Some I have found to be extremely crusty, but I have been assured they will warm towards you if you are there to build things.

That pretty much describes me. I go there to build things I could not do otherwise.

2 Likes
#28

I see the M, the wrench (it’s an open end in my head rather than Crescent), the screw, the drill, and of course the hex bolt head, but I’m not seeing the D…
So as to not be off topic, I’ve already stated my opinion in ‘the other thread’.

#29

DMS.jpg1197×1285 50.4 KB

or

DMS B.jpg1181×1245 53.6 KB

1 Like
#30

Wow, this is a big, stressful topic in my life right now. I designed the current Dallas Makerspace logo and have seen it used to represent us over the last six (? I’ve kinda lost count) years. (Rablack - “approved”, oh you kidder. There were fewer than 30 members at the time.) To me - as I think to many others - it means “home.”

Yes, this is sentimental. I mean, have the key to the space implanted in my hand - I’m pretty attached to this place. I think that’s okay, though. Attachment is what makes a community.

The idea to do brand development on the space really perplexed me - that’s not what I expect PR to do. But now I know that’s Michael’s experience, it makes sense that he’d focus his energies on something he’s good at. I hope its understood that - to my mind, at least - the approach to presenting it to the community is the objectionable thing. Something like this should feel like a gift to the members, and if I can venture a guess, I’d say that’s what Michael feels he’s doing by designing something new. It just takes more than a good design to make people happy about changing something that’s close to their identity. We have to choose it.

One of the things that has been brought up in conversations off thread: 99% of the instances of the logo you see are made by members independently - in stickers, out of the 3D printer, lasered and routed and plasma cut. We don’t have a chain of command for approving stuff like that (because that would be silly.) If you try to enforce brand unity here, well, that way madness lies. :stuck_out_tongue:

I am SO happy to see us discussing this in a general forum, even though some heat has been turned up. We need to talk about this kind of thing.

-H

7 Likes
#31

I agree with what Haley said – it is a good thing that this is being discussed.

In the grand scheme of things, whether we adopt a new logo or not is irrelevant (although I must admit I am partial to the original logo as one of the original members). The manner in which the change is being pushed through, however, is VERY relevant as it hints at some unsavory cultural changes which we would like to avoid.

I fear there is a failure to understand the basic values of the organization with regard to this “re-branding.” The Dallas Makerspace is not a shop where you come to rent time on various tools. It is a COMMUNITY of makers, artists, technologists, and creators which has acquired space and various tools based on member interest. This community is very diverse in its opinions, interests, and abilities. It rarely reaches 100% consensus on ANYTHING. It is, nonetheless, a community which is greater than the sum of its parts and has always come to some workable solution after much debate.

Trying to push a major change without community feedback or consent fails the “be excellent to one another” tenet of our entirely volunteer-run organization. Hurling public accusations at a member for initiating discussion and creating an informal poll fails it even further. I have witnessed us grow from 30 initial members to the 1000+ we have today and it has happened through shared enthusiasm and word of mouth – not corporate branding initiatives.

This being said, Michael appears to be a talented designer. I hope he can receive what we are saying here in the spirit of constructive criticism.

We are a volunteer run and financed organization – whatever mandate anyone in a leadership position has comes from below – not above!!

5 Likes
#32

I did a google reverse image search on the “new logo” and the most similar logo is Magento’s:

It’s probably not too similar though, so that’s good.

It’s also worth noting that what we’re referring to as the “current logo” is a variation that I hacked together to match the font and color changes to dallasmakerspace.org in May 2013. I think improvements to line widths and kerning are still welcome.

I think the “new logo” looks great, but I’m not sure a total change is worth wiping out whatever brand recognition we’ve built based on the current logo.

Edit: Oops, looks like some others already looked into whether the logo was similar to others here: New DMS logo files available

6 Likes
#33

I am open to a new variation on the logo but maybe an adjustment of the current one that still has similar color palette and shapes.
The blue in the proposed one seems like it could almost be a different makerspace.

1 Like