For those of you that have suggested that "OMG Photo" is somehow offensive, here is what I tell my customers if they ask.
We all want to take that "Oh My God" photograph. That one picture that will change the world, or at least one little piece of it. We want that Oh My God reaction from our customers. All photos are God's work in some sense. Whether you are taking a picture of one of God's creations, or your ability and skill as a photographer are gifts from God. In saying "Oh My God" you are in fact praising the creator of every single picture.
Whether you believe in God or not, whether you want the name to praise God or just represent a common phrase in American life, it all works for me.
As for the name, this is something that could cause some controversy. while I agree that the younger generation does use this term all the time, you might risk offending the parents and older generations. Seems to be that they will be your target because they hold the $$, not the kids. Isolate them and you isolate the dollars.
IMHO, the name itself doesn't have a professional sound to it. The phrase, as you have already pointed out, is used quite often with youth in the American society. I therefore would nearly automatically associate the term with such. the picture I percieve of you is a young photographer targeting a young audience. If thats correct, you've done your job. If not, then maybe not.
I also whole-heartedly disagree with your assessment that its some sort of praise to God everytime it is said. I find that line of thinking, and frankly the OMG slang offensive. some of the thinkgs you saying lead me to belive you at least have a belief in God. If that's true, I suggest you continue to think about the name a bit.
Those younger, no money clients are carrying around $400 iPhones, wearing $75 pairs of jeans and $150 pairs of shoes. They may not have money, but they certainly influence the way money is spent. They are chauffered around the country with their horses in $500k trucks and trailers. Those younger, no money clients today are the older, wealthier clients of tomorrow.
nathanlake wrote:
Those younger, no money clients are carrying around $400 iPhones, wearing $75 pairs of jeans and $150 pairs of shoes. They may not have money, but they certainly influence the way money is spent. They are chauffered around the country with their horses in $500k trucks and trailers. Those younger, no money clients today are the older, wealthier clients of tomorrow.
Nathan, obviously you've made up your mind, so I don't know why I'm even responding.
I maintain that it's a risky proposition. However, no risk - no gain, so I wish you the best.
But I also maintain that here in So Cal, the kids are doing the same thing...iPhones, sneakers, and $300 jeans (they wouldn't be caught dead in the $75 ones!), living in million dollar homes, being chaueffered around in Mercedes and Lexus, etc. However, when it comes right down to it, mommy and daddy usually make the decison. There are of course some cases where the kids are so spoiled that anything goes, but thats another topic.
Now, I do understand that this is a similar approach to senior pic marketing. Create a buzz and a waned product. The business name might not even matter much at that time as long as they have a phone numer or way to contact you. BUT, the parents still play a big part in those pictures and do control the spend.
I don't mean to ramble on. I have my opinion, but its just that. I truely wish you the best in your venture.
I like the name. I also shoot some equestrian events, and see the young riders show up with (typically) mom alone in their $50K truck hauling another $200K worth of trailer and horses and tack. I live in a small community with a couple of active clubs and there are people that show up to every show even with hundreds or even thousands of dollars worth of travel expenses. There's even celebrity parents and their kids at one of the clubs that I work with. Yes... There's money here! And that moment when one of the young riders is browsing photos at my booth and yells out OMG!! I HAVE TO HAVE THAT ONE! is when I know that I've done my job well, and am going to make a nice sale. And those sales typically pay cash! It's a good feeling, and I think you are hitting the right market for the type of work that the name is attached to. Would I use it for a Wedding business? No.
As for the logos... While #3 holds a certain appeal to me, I think #2 is the better choice, although I would also drop the shutter in the O.
Michael H wrote:
Nathan, obviously you've made up your mind, so I don't know why I'm even responding.
I maintain that it's a risky proposition. However, no risk - no gain, so I wish you the best.
But I also maintain that here in So Cal, the kids are doing the same thing...iPhones, sneakers, and $300 jeans (they wouldn't be caught dead in the $75 ones!), living in million dollar homes, being chaueffered around in Mercedes and Lexus, etc. However, when it comes right down to it, mommy and daddy usually make the decison. There are of course some cases where the kids are so spoiled that anything goes, but thats another topic.
Now, I do understand that this is a similar approach to senior pic marketing. Create a buzz and a waned product. The business name might not even matter much at that time as long as they have a phone numer or way to contact you. BUT, the parents still play a big part in those pictures and do control the spend.
I don't mean to ramble on. I have my opinion, but its just that. I truely wish you the best in your venture. ...Show more →
Thanks Greg,
You are right about having made up my mind. This is not a new business. I have been doing business under this name for 5 years and it is working. As I said early on, this was not meant to be about the name, it was about the new logo.
I have pretty much decided on #2 with a couple small tweaks.
I like the 2nd and 3rd, because the 1st and the 4th seem to scream out the "cheesiness" of the "Oh My God" association to me. It could be the font or the placement. The 2nd and 3rd look more businesslike and that dissociates them from the text message meaning, in my mind.
nathanlake wrote:
This is not a new business. I have been doing business under this name for 5 years and it is working. As I said early on, this was not meant to be about the name, it was about the new logo.
I have pretty much decided on #2 with a couple small tweaks.
Gosh, I totally agree. The critique on the name is just not appropriate. This is a question about the effectiveness of the logo. This thread would be a boon for a psychology major, it is filled with hindsight reasoning, confirmation bias, etc etc. In the wild I'm guessing that very people even give a second thought to the name. A number of people probably have no idea what it means. It could very well be the photographer's initials for all anybody cares.
I'm a pro horse photographer too, 20+ years. The logos look to me like they were designed/drawn by someone who does not know anything about horses.
The horse in the first one looks like it is smiling, the second one shows a horse with a ewe neck, (its concave instead of arched), lumpy muzzle and no chin, and the third one has completely deformed hindquarters, tiny head, and is not really in a correct canter or trot position. Personally, I would dump all of them.
You know, as a horse photographer, how picky the buyer is about leg, head, neck, etc. position. If you are specializing in a particular breed or discipline, I would look for a good horse artist or graphic designer to make a logo based on one of your photos which best represents that discipline.
If you are doing very general horse stuff, then perhaps a silhouette, again based on one of your own photos.
photoelle wrote:
I'm a pro horse photographer too, 20+ years. The logos look to me like they were designed/drawn by someone who does not know anything about horses.
The horse in the first one looks like it is smiling, the second one shows a horse with a ewe neck, (its concave instead of arched), lumpy muzzle and no chin, and the third one has completely deformed hindquarters, tiny head, and is not really in a correct canter or trot position. Personally, I would dump all of them.
You know, as a horse photographer, how picky the buyer is about leg, head, neck, etc. position. If you are specializing in a particular breed or discipline, I would look for a good horse artist or graphic designer to make a logo based on one of your photos which best represents that discipline.
If you are doing very general horse stuff, then perhaps a silhouette, again based on one of your own photos....Show more →
I had the same idea and today send a couple of photos for the artist fo work from. I don't really specialize, but sent Arabians since they are the most photogenic (IMHO).
Good idea. Do be careful that the finished drawing is not *too* Arabian looking, or any other recognizable breed for that matter, as horse people are very breed/discipline sensitive. If they see a breed/discipline, any breed/discipline, they automatically think "Oh, they ONLY shoot *brand X* horses."
The horse world is very specialized, to the point of fracture. I shoot all breeds, so I have 5 different business cards, 3 with each draft breed (I do a lot of draft horse shows), and 2 that are very general, light horse. One is a beautiful head shot, totally non-specific, generic leather halter, no other tack, plain bay. My other general one shows a tight close up of a horse's eye with forelock falling all around. Its cropped too close to see what breed it is. If I started to shoot a lot of any particular breed, I would make a card that shows that breed, for that crowd.
If the horse in a photo is wearing a bridle, I will be instantly associated, exclusively, with that type of discipline.
So, it can't be English, Western, hunter, draft, driving, or dressage. Show halters are also breed specific, same problem.
I come from a design background, web/graphic design, B.S in Art, minor in photography etc. created many logo's and collateral materials for companies back during the internet boom (that was good freelance money hahah).
Anyhow, #3 gives the most "high end" look with the serif font and thin lines. If the horse is illustrated better and cleaned up a little, it can work. Also, the "P" is too thin in that font compared to the other CAP letters, that font wasn't really meant to be used as ALL CAPS. Unless you go in and are able to extend the P in illustrator after outlining the font yourself.
#2 is a more modern design with sans-serif fonts. I would say get rid of the semi highlight color differences on the text and horse. The best way to check for a logo, is to turn it into a 2-bit (pure black and white with no shades of gray) design. You can play with colors after the "look" of the logo but if it looks good in black and white, then you have it. In that sense #3 is a little busy with the horse and the semi circle, the line weights are very similar which makes the design of the horse not stand out.
#1 well.. too much gradients and shadow. Shadow's and highlights can be added later depending on where the logo is used, the primary logo shouldn't have any shadows or highlights.
#4 seems like a web logo...
my 2 cents.
PS: the horse doesn't even have to be that realistic in the design. Specially if it is in the #2 (it wouldn't work in #3) Look at the current U.S. Postal Service's "eagle" logo. It's simplified and very well done, considered a very good redesign that cost over millions of dollars in the image overhaul. The logo's that stand out are very simple. Just look around you at daily stuff you see everyday. of course... coming up with the "simple" that looks good doesn't happen in one sitting =)
the majority of customers (unlearned fools!!! j/k) don't really know what's good design or not. There might be a preference over one thing or another, but getting "ideas" from a variety of "professionals" will improve the image of the "company"
If what the target customers is all that mattered, then we wouldn't need Design Firms to create an image that grabs people's attention.
Example would be a good photo. Customers might like one photo over another but they wouldn't be able to explain exactly why they like it, while a professional photographer with a strong background would be able to know from art history, etc. The exact reason why something is better or not...
sorry... i'm rambling... i'm stuck waiting for jury duty and it's very boring hahah.
