Why I pulled my logos from Brandstack today.

As the title states, I’ve deleted a few logos I had today from the instant identity website, Brandstack, formerly known as Incspring. I had created my account roughly after quitting my full-time job this past May. It was an attempt to explore multiple streams of income until things picked up speed as I geared myself to freelancing and consulting full-time.

I had uploaded a portfolio piece, two were ‘recycled’ works, and one – the one that made me hurt the most – I created off of Twitter brand hype from the site. (I mean, it’s all about following trends right? The Twitter brands part anyway.) After a little while I started actually perusing the site more thoroughly. What I immediately started discovering was that:

Some brands too similar to famous brands

like Sprint’s ‘pin drop’, and the paper plane from Yousendit. I will not say that they are outright infringement, but absolutely no creativity or originality, which if you ask any professional will tell you is crucial for a successful brand. (The Sprint look-a-like was rotated, colored differently, was short one fan pane, and basically it. Even the font for the company name looked very similar to Sprint’s logo).

Sprint Look-alike

There was abuse of vector clip art

as blatant as GoMedia’s Arsenal. Literally just dragged and dropped into the canvas. Some are just too recognizable to give the brand any originality.

I understand that Arsenal is royalty free and whatnot, but I would recommend at least using some imagination when incorporating them into a logo.

I understand that Arsenal is royalty free and whatnot, but I would recommend at least using some imagination when incorporating them into a logo. I used one of their halo’s on my art and poetry blog logo, but it is not the actual logo itself. If you take the halo away, my logo is still my logo, 100% recognizable.

If I was Simon Oxley and had known my vector clipart of a little blue bird became the (unintentional) brand mark of Twitter, well I would have charged a whole lot more for it. At the same time, as you’ll read further, that stock vector bird is not exclusive to Twitter at all.

Essentially, such a scenario hurts both the designer and the consumer/client in several ways:

What this means to you if you’re a designer

you are cheating yourself of financial gain. And if you especially design logos to just sell as is without a particular client in mind (and these logos make up 75% of your portfolio), you are also seriously hindering your ability to gain skills as a designer rather than just create art. As both a designer and an artist I can tell you the two are very different extremes. Not just that, but what about your credibility, rapport, and client experience as a professional?

Let’s say you did like me and decided to simply upload rejected concepts for logos you’ve done for direct clients. What then? In the heat of the moment you made yourself a couple of bucks. Instant satisfaction. If you’re not an instant hit, however, or didn’t get enough retweets, dont have an already trendsetting blog, nor did you actively market yourself all over the internet that you just made a new green logo for example… we’ll you’re then kind of SOL. Your logo gets pushed to the back, and if you priced it a bit high for the quickie shopper, then it just sits there.

Such prices will drain the glow of the logo you just polished.

If you didn’t buy the domain someone else will eventually get it, and the point that you premeditated your logo on is kind of hard. perhaps you can stick a new company name on it… but would it really fit like a glove? Is this fast paced consumer really trying to be creative and imagine what they could do with your mark or is s/he trying to get instant satisfaction as well? Maybe either or, but if you think about it, more than likely not.

The price tag also seems to fluctuate, I am seeing a bit more in the four figures, but again, who is going to just pay $1000 for a logo on the fly? I’m sure someone might. Likely it’s you? Maybe, if you are one of those with enough exposure. Of course if I am looking to purchase something quick and easy with a simple definition, I’m usually looking for free to $200. Such prices will drain the glow of the logo you just polished.

Not to mention, let’s say you fall into my trap and get into the twitter logo hype and design a Twitteresque logo. What did I just do? Sell myself short a few grand if it was ever to come to a sale. Just like the poor ‘original’ Twitter bird.

What this means to you if you’re a client

or thought of purchasing a logo-on-the-go you have to think of the ramifications of buying something so cheap. You might considering this as a way to keep your budget from exploding as you are starting up your company. One thing to think about is how original is the design you purchased. Ask yourself the following:

• Do you have a way of knowing if this is a recycled logo?
• What if the recycled logo is too similar to the logo the client before you already purchased?
• It’s crucial for viral marketing before your launch, but does it stand out as unique and does it instantly identify you and your company?

It would be very unpleasant to compete for a lot of people’s visual memory before you can ingrain in their head your name or motto or purpose in general.

Now how the heck are you going to brand yourself with that? it’s a logo, a brand, made solely from artwork everyone can download and use?

Going back to Twitter, did you know Twitter can’t do much more with their little bird than just place it on their site? Or some of the other birds flying around their site?

One major concept to keep in mind is that stock artwork has limitations. You can buy it. Work with it a little, and of course print it. But did you know that many stock sites set limits on how much you can print before you have to go and buy an Extended license with a wider scope? Many. Dreamstime for one. Stockxpert is another, and several others.

Twitteresque stock art logo

So what does that have to do with Brandstack who sells logos and not actual “stock”? Well for one, there is a logo that is made up of nothing but a well known blue bird icon (seen on one of Twitter’s error pages) repeated to form a shape. Now how the heck are you going to brand yourself with that? It’s a logo, a brand, made solely from artwork everyone can download and use

(I will be covering the need for a solid brand from the get-go in a future article.)

..I believe they need to rethink their quality standards. I also heavily disagree with the concept of this particular company and believe it does my clients and myself an injustice…

All in all I will not deny that there are some spectacular logos on Brandstack, and some very talented people. If some people want to try and make money designing for Brandstack and/or other brand and identity crowd sourcing sites that’s their prerogative. I have no ill opinions of the owners of Brandstack whatsoever. I am not trying to directly defame any of the designers finding their niche there.

However, I believe they need to rethink their quality standards. I also heavily disagree with the concept of this particular company and believe it does my clients and myself an injustice, and hence I will refrain from doing business there.

I am building my brand on helping people build their brand. What kind of person would I be if I just sold one fine hand crafted brand rejected by one client, and sold it (at a fifth of the cost) to a passerby? How would the original client feel? I know I didn’t feel good just thinking about it. My prices are firm and firm for a reason. My work is unique and carefully thought out for people who are unique and have carefully thought about the impact they want to make.

What do you think of crowd sourcing logos? What kind of experiences have you had with them?

Update: I have included visuals however I do not want to target any designer in particular. My goal is to drive the point home.

Related posts:

1. 5 Branding Basics Every Logo Designer Should Know