Back to the Drawing Board (So to Speak)

Jeff Puthuff
by Jeff Puthuff
back to the drawing board so to speak

Due to overwhelming (negative) reaction to the choices we made for Monday’s logo poll, we are starting from scratch but this time with professional graphics designers. Several have expressed a desire to offer their services, gratis, for which we are eternally grateful and we hope to provide the winner with something. I’m thinking a permanent, prominent link on TTAC to their portfolio or business site and the glory and recognition that goes with being “Designer to TheTruthAboutCars” or somesuch. I digress.

Some of the more considerate commenters on that original post mentioned that we need to explain what we’re looking for. Well, if it were that easy . . . we’re not designers. (You’re shocked, right?) We’re writers and researchers and snarks. Big difference. But, after some research, I’ve come up with some guidelines and desires for the new logo:

1. We prefer a vector or, at the very least, high-resolution. We’re going to be shrinking the logo for business cards and stretching it for t-shirts and beach towels and the last thing we need is pixelation.

2. Maximum of three colors (we can’t afford more). They don’t need to be the exact colors used now on the site but please keep it simple yet manly.

3. That said, the logo should work well in black and white, too.

4. We’d like it to somehow convey/emphasize “Truth” since that’s our mission.

5. A favicon would be awesome, too, but isn’t necessary.

Jason Parry (JayParry) designed “Angled Grungy” (my name for it), the winner of Monday’s poll with nearly 23% of the vote. “Gavel” was a close second, losing by only 24 votes. There were a lot of commenters who said they didn’t like any of the choices, but they were in the minority as more than 850 people voted and “Angled Grungy” (our favorite) was consistently (all day) in first place. Jason’s logo automatically gets entered into the final round.

Here’s a taste of new submissions and old favorites. We’re accepting submissions until Sunday. Thanks again, artists!

I’m allowing comments but you must keep them civil and constructive. No “these are all s**t” (and the like) comments will be tolerated. It’s fine to not like something but at least be considerate of the people who contribute their time to this project. It ain’t isn’t easy and none of us are being paid for it.

Join the conversation
2 of 39 comments
  • Elloh7 Elloh7 on Feb 26, 2009

    @Tiki: Thanks for the resources. Designers and artists of all colors can always use more resources. :) I'll check out the other link too, sounds interesting.

  • Jeff Puthuff Jeff Puthuff on Feb 26, 2009

    What Knight said. Spot on. I'm very pleased with the quality of the comments on this thread. I truly appreciate it and have learned quite a bit.

  • Alan The Prado shouldn't have the Landcruiser name attached. It isn't a Landcruiser as much as a Tacoma or 4 Runner or a FJ Cruiser. Toyota have used the Landcruiser name as a marketing exercise for years. In Australia the RAV4 even had Landcruiser attached years ago! The Toyota Landcruiser is the Landcruiser, not a tarted up Tacoma wagon.Here a GX Prado cost about $61k before on roads, this is about $41k USD. This is a 2.8 diesel 4x4 with all the off road tricky stuff, plus AC, power windows, etc. I'm wondering if Toyota will perform the Nissan Armada treatment on it and debase the Prado. The Patrol here is actually as capable and possibly more capable than the Landcruiser off road (according to some reviews). The Armada was 'muricanised and the off road ability was reduced a lot. Who ever heard of a 2 wheel drive Patrol.Does the US need the Prado? Why not. Another option to choose from built by Toyota that is overpriced and uses old tech.My sister had a Prado Grande, I didn't think much of it. It was narrow inside and not that comfortable. Her Grand Cherokee was more comfortable and now her Toureg is even more comfortable, but you can still feel the road in the seat of your pants and ears.
  • Jeffrey No tis vehicle doen't need to come to America. The market if flooded in this segment what we need are fun affordable vehicles.
  • Nrd515 I don't really see the point of annual inspections, especially when the car is under 3 years (warranty) old. Inspections should be safety related, ONLY, none of the nonsensical CA ARB rules that end up being something like, "Your air intake doesn't have an ARB sticker on it, so you have to remove it and buy one just like it that does have the ARB sticker on it!". If the car or whatever isn't puking smoke out of it, and it doesn't make your eyes water, like an old Chevy Bel-Air I was behind on Wed did, it's fine. I was stuck in traffic behind that old car, and wow, the gasoline smell was super potent. It was in nice shape, but man, it was choking me. I was amused by the 80 something old guy driving it, he even had a hat with a feather in it, THE sign of someone you don't want to be driving anywhere near you.
  • Lou_BC "15mpg EPA" The 2023 ZR2 Colorado is supposed to be 16 mpg
  • ToolGuy "The more aerodynamic, organic shape of the Mark VIII meant ride height was slightly lower than before at 53.6 inches, over 54.2” for the Mark VII."• I am not sure that ride height means what you think it means.Elaboration: There is some possible disagreement about what "ride height" refers to. Some say ground clearance, some say H point (without calling it that), some say something else. But none of those people would use a number of over 4 feet for a stock Mark anything.Then you go on to use it correctly ("A notable advancement in the Mark VIII’s suspension was programming to lower the ride height slightly at high speeds, which assisted fuel economy via improved aerodynamics.") so what do I know. Plus, I ended a sentence with a preposition. 🙂