1) The instructor moved some Photoshop content ahead in the schedule and flipped Modules 5 and 6. Grades will be updated the next day. 2) The class will discuss logos based on readings about simplicity, colors, omitting taglines and company names. 3) Students will work in pairs to analyze logos using criteria like simplicity, colors, being describable and memorable without including additional text. They will then share their analysis.

3. TODAY Updates: AKA What Phill Did to the Schedule Talkin’ Module 4 (just a little more) Readings: logos Activity 1: based on the readings– logos! Activity 2: Go into Photoshop and Mix it Up

4. UPDATES As I told you at the end of last class, I moved a lot of the Photoshop stuff from just after spring break up/ahead. Because of this, I also flip-flopped Module 5 and 6. If you’d been looking ahead, you might have noticed that and said “wait a minute!” If not… proceed without fear. It will actually make MORE sense this way anyway. I will be updating grades tomorrow.

5. MODULE 4 I’m hoping some of you got a good start on Mod 4 (or at least looked at some code). Does anyone have questions or concerns?

6. READINGS To start off looking at today’s readings, is there anything in particular anyone would like to talk about relating to the logo articles?

7. IF NOT… I have a pair of activities I want us to undertake that I think will help you to better understand logos and their functions. First, though, let’s talk about what a logo is for.

8. What a logo is for:

9. SO WHAT MAKES GOOD? Two of the readings for today, when combined, give us a great heuristic (big word for tool) for looking at logos. Four things to think about:Simplicity, Colors, Omit the tagline, Forget the company name And five things you need: Describable Memorable Effective without colour Scalable i.e. work when just an inch in size Relevant to the industry in question

10. IN PAIRS I want you to pick a logo, off the web (or that you know and can locate on the web) and look at it, critiquing it rhetorically based on those nine things. Don’t worry! I brought an example.

11. The Memphis Grizzlies 

12. HOW’S IT WORK? Simplicity: The new Grizzly logo is simplistic, but it still includes enough detail to be distinctive. Colors: Notice the new colors, much less spread across the spectrum. Omit the tagline, Forget the company name:Notice that unlike the first logo, the old logo, which incorporated the name of the city and team, the new logo can be used without it and still evokes the team.

13. MORE And five things you need: Describable: “it’s a bear’s head” Memorable: “Remember that bear’s head?” Effective without colour: Scalable i.e. work when just an inch in size Relevant to the industry in question: this is up for debate, but the secondary logo definitely is.

14. NOW YOU DO IT And then share the results. I’ll float around and see how it’s going.

15. ACTIVITY 2 In one of the other readings, you read about logos that are “weird” but work. I’d like you and your partner to locate a logo that is likewise weird (breaks the rules we just discussed) but works. Be ready to tell us the logo and tell us WHY it still works well.

16. FOR NEXT CLASS March 3Photoshop day follow-up: watch iTunes style Photoshop tutorial Please bring headphones to class! They will be a big, big help! Twitter question for today: If you had to create a logo for yourself, what sort of image would you pick?