- When a logo has images and words both, the rule is simple.
Their styles must be compatible.
If you have an engaging graphic, which is the only kind
you should have, it means that in almost every case,
your type should be a conservative style.
For example, repeating lines create this image,
and when we add the name, we see what it is,
a handshake stylized, which is interesting.
Without the name, I'm not sure we'd make that connection,
but for this to work requires a typestyle
that's like this one, like the image.
It's bold, it's basic, it's hardedged.
This typeface is Gotham Bold.
The wrong thing would be to introduce a second style.
That'd give us two things with completely different
form factors, so there's just cross talk.
Can't hear either one.
Another example, fun picture, this is for our restaurant.
Our name is handsome, but very low key,
because all the visual interest is in the picture.
Again, conservative type choice,
beautifully done here, very stylish.
What we can't do is throw in something fancy, because now,
again, we have competing voices.
In this case, it's made worse because
the type is light, airy, squiggly, kinda hollow.
So, rule of thumb, don't mix styles.
Which goes back to the idea of having just one
strong feature, and if you don't have an interesting graphic
that doesn't mean you should be fancy with your type,
you know, to make up for it?
It means you should throw it away.
A logo of words only will always be better than
a logo with a weak graphic.