Logo Contest Finalists
March 20, 2010 · Print This Article
Congratulations to the winners of the logo contest. Originally, we were going to pick our 3 favorite designs and test them on our website. This turned out to be a problem since we like so many of the designs. So, we picked 4 designs. It was certainly a lot of fun, and 2 of the top 4 designs were created by amateurs who learned about the contest from our blog. The other two winners are professional designers. When we selected the winning designs, we didn’t know anything about the designers, and it was really exciting to discover that one of them has dreamed about owning a Tumbleweed Home. We also gave prizes to a few of the runners up … many of whom were also amateur designers.
Vote for your favorite logo
Below are the 4 logos selected with our current logo at the bottom.
Logo #1 |
Logo #2 |
Logo #3 |
Logo #4 |
Current Logo |
Loading ...Deciding a winner
Deciding on the final logo will be a long and slow process. Originally, we were going to test all the logos against each other and award the top logo designer a set of plans. However, we decided to award each designer with a set of plans. Woohoo!
We’ll still test the logos on our homepage. But we also want to hear your feedback. Which is your favorite? You can vote above.
How testing works
Testing logos on the homepage is done with the use of Google Website Optimizer. With it, each visitor will see a randomly displayed logo on the top of the page. From there, we will measure click-through-rate (the % of visitors who will visit a 2nd page on our website). We test all types of things on our website, and in the past I’ve tested the logos that we designed ourselves. Typically, a logo on the top of the page might not make a huge difference, and it can take up to 1 month to find a definite winner. I’ll keep you updated as the testing process moves along.
They all look nice, really. Although they all miss the essential purpose of a brand which is to capture the essence of what the company does. If I didn’t know – I wouldn’t know what Tumbleweed does.
The look and esthetic of this site is fantastic – and I fear that all of these brands don’t live up to the potential of the company.
What is the iconic image of Tumbleweed – for me it is seeing the house rolling down the road.
I don’t think you can go wrong with any of these brands, but I think that if you give some more thought to it you could find one that shows the positioning of the brand in a way that conveys the basic purpose of the company better.
Reply to this comment
perhaps you could tweak the windows to the gothic small window.
Reply to this comment
Originally I was going to pick either option 3 because I like the little house on the green hill – especially since I am currently building a little house on a gree hill. But I agree with what Brian said – I wanted to see something that really symbolized the Tumbleweed Tiny House – so I went with 2 since it has the gothic arch.
Howver, if option 3 had a gothic window, I would vote for that.
Reply to this comment
Sean Glenn reply on March 23rd, 2011 8:41 am:
To me though, #2 is kind of scary looking. Like a black and white horror movie (or something out of the rainy scene in Rocky Horror). I agree with Brian, I want to see the “tumbleweed” aspect of these homes. That’s what’s so exciting to me. I also think that brighter colors would be better because by buying tiny homes and living a more sustainable life we are “brightening” the future for everyone. The black and grey gives #2 a sort of old, gloomy feel. I want new and refreshing.
#3 is my favorite. It is simple, clean and clear. I think that it has the potential to reach the “tumble” bit that we are missing.
Reply to this comment
I would have picked #2, however, most of the Tumbleweeds I’ve seen do not have Chimney stacks. So I picked 4 because none of the houses really look like a Tumbleweed to me, PLUS the fact that Jay has pictures next to the logo already, so no need to clutter up the view with a drawing of a cartoon house. I like the simplicity of #4..and that Tiny House Company is written in tiny letters! Very clever!
Simplicity is what we are going for in Tiny Houses…I believe either #4 or the original logo will do the job for that.
Reply to this comment
Number 3, and this is why: The earth is green, fragile and small relative to the house, our footprint. The house is mostly a roof not space so it reflects its tinyness. There is no visual barrier between the drawing and the text so they live on the same semantic plane. The green color of the earth is that of the text – Tiny House Company – connecting them as a whole, one could say they carry the same values. Just sharing what came up to my mind. Good work!
Reply to this comment
I, too, was wanting lines that looks as tho’ they might roll along with an adventurous breeze. The softer lines of logo #1 house graphic and the text of #2 logo would be the ideal combination ~ positioned just like logo #3, with no dividing line. Great idea to provide all 5 designers with house plans.
Reply to this comment
I selected Number one, because the house which had the line of the gothic window, reminded me of an acorn, which I thought a great image, encapsulating the thought of a tiny home which has the potential of something much larger. However, I really preferred the logo which was a wordmark. Best of all, for me, would have been to incorporate the ‘acorn’ image, quite small, with the wordmark (but this was not an option) possibly in the counter of the ‘b’ or the cup of the ‘u.’
The word mark was rendered in a clear bold font with the ‘tiny house company’ neatly nested/encapsulated in a different color among the larger letters. Gives a nice sense of protectedness while retaining a clear identity.
Reply to this comment
The graphic, layout and text sizing of #3 is far and away the best of these. But the font is all wrong – too stylized and formal.
The font of #2 is playful, creative, informal and evokes motion. I hope you set up the contest so that you could combine the best features or each into a winning combination.
Reply to this comment
Joseph LeBlanc reply on April 3rd, 2010 4:23 pm:
I agree with Robert about the fonts. I like the fonts on #1 & #2. And I like the logo concepts of #2 & #3.
Reply to this comment
Since I need to make a choice from this bunch, I picked #3 for many of the same reasons others have mentioned, but am bothered by the type face used, and the decision to go all caps. The letters feel “fragile”, not something you want in a house! I would take something close to the “wordmark” in #1, keeping “TUMBLEWEED” in caps which gives the name a solid foundation and that big idea feel, but the “tiny house company” in lower case, which underlines that “small” feel.
I’m so inarticulate today. Rats! I should have entered this contest.
Reply to this comment
I disagree with black as your color choice. Black denotes a product that is trying to be “cool”, slick, extravagant. I would rather see you use warm, friendly, happy, eco colors.
Reply to this comment
I’d like to see 2 with the font from 3
Reply to this comment
tweak #1 with the Gothic arch and you got a brand going.
Reply to this comment
They’re all very nice, but it’s #3 that catches my fancy. There’s something about the house that’s very soothing…the clean lines maybe. Everything about it reflects your company’s image: simple, clean, green, open, and elegant.
Reply to this comment
Since you are not selling teapots, churches, or large overhangs numbers 1, 2, and 3 are misleading. I vote # 4 for clarity of design, color, large letters for Tumbleweed and small little letters for Tiny House Company. IF you put a “house” on the logo, I REALLY think it should be proportionate to your rolling tumbleweed original structure. Why use anything else? Whose house designs are you selling anyway? I find it misleading and visually cumbersome to have to look at an acorn and translate it to a lean mean rolling machine! No offense intended to the designer. Frank Lloyd Wright did cantilevers and great overhanging eaves. Just be clear and simple and straight forward like your exquisite little homes are – remembering that “less is more” (except when giving my opinion it seems!) Cheers!
Reply to this comment