I can't wait to get some time to put some "graphic design for programmers"-style articles up here, but until then little snippits like this should suffice.

381's logo blog is an excellent source of inspiration for any budding logo designers. Some of the logos on display have such subtle, but effective graphical devices that it sometimes takes a few minutes for them to sink in. It's these intangible things that make a good logo a great logo.

Most programmers cheap out when it comes to designing logos. They take a weirdo font, make it a different colour and then add some kind of sledgehammer-subtle graphic device to try and class it up a little. This kind of misses the point. The user isn't guessing what your software does. They've come looking specifically for your software.

Let us take, for example, the venerable bug tracking software. How many "bug" graphics can you abuse? Do you think any of the programmers (or testers, or clients) using your software aren't aware that it's a bug tracking program? It's like people who get the model name of their car emblazoned on the side. "Ooohhhhh, it's a Corolla!...", uhuh.

What you should try to do is invoke a sense of QWAN. You know, you hear the judges on those <Insert Contintenal Location> Idol shows talking about the 'X' factor all the time. You can't put your finger right on it, but there's some indescribable quality that makes you feel good about something.

Now, how can we uniquely define our bug tracking software? There are literally dozens (if not hundreds) of commercial packages out there. All purporting to be the best bug tracking software ever, or the most configurable bug tracking software ever. Lets say, we're trying to evoke simplicity. Ours is the most simple bug tracking software to use. This is what we should be trying to convey in our logo.

How can we convey simplicity? Well, for starters, lose the crazy font. Try something simple, like Arial. Seriously. Ramp up the size a little bit, and enjoy the simplified hinting. Next, dump the flourescent green. Switch back to basic black, or one of the grays nearabouts. If you want to get daring, go for a dark pastel colour.

Next, drop the graphic device. Yep. You don't need a little six-legged critter. It doesn't tell me simple. It tells me what I already know. If you really want something (and you most likely will, just so you can have a shortcut icon that stands out), pick something simple. How about a circle? That's the simplest machine ever invented. If you really feel a need to indicate that it's bug tracking software (besides actually giving it a meaningful name), how about using what graphic designers call "negative space".

Negative space is the unused area in your logo or logotype (what they call a font-based logo). Take your cirlce, and punch out a silhouette of a beetle. If you use a fairly simple colour (like yellow, for instance) the negative space will be quite subtle, yet still visible. If you use a more drastic colour like primary red or blue, then you're reducing the subtlety of the device.

Lastly, consider space. It's big. No, I don't mean that kind of space. Look at the letters of the font. Can they be spaced apart further? Try altering the kerning (the space between letters) and see how that looks. What about the spacing between the type and the graphic device? Make the gap bigger, smaller; play with it.

Logos get the most impact from standing apart from any other graphical elements. If you cram a logo inbetween big slabs of text or controls, it won't stand out, and it will have the opposite to the desired effect.

Have a look at some of the logos at 381, then look at the logos you've designed for your software. How can you improve them?