• READ BEFORE POSTING!
    • If posting a video, please post HERE, unless it is a video as part of an advertisement and then post it in this section.
    • If replying to threads please remember this is the Promotion area and the person posting may not be open to feedback.

watch Production Logo

It looks good, but if it's going in front of anything shorter than 90 minutes, then it's about 14 seconds too long. Gotta keep em short.
 
I like to keep it short. Mine is around 4 seconds long!

Check the beginning of this film: I like to start my films out with introducing music or the atmospheric sounds, so i can put the logo above it instead of just black!

https://vimeo.com/35809557
 
Looks good. Maybe a little slow. Logos = branding, which is completely fine! I honestly dont know any large companies that are logo free. It is more important for a small company to show a logo because it is all about visibility. That's absurd to suggest to not use a logo.
 
Looks good. Maybe a little slow. Logos = branding, which is completely fine! I honestly dont know any large companies that are logo free. It is more important for a small company to show a logo because it is all about visibility. That's absurd to suggest to not use a logo.

With films one needs to brand the filmmaker's name, not the film production company as they're one-off entities.

For legal reasons, each film you make needs to be under a different production company LCC. Use the same logo in more than one LCC, you open the door for lawyers in a dispute with one of your film (current or previous) project to attach another project's revenue to the one in dispute. You'll be kicking yourself for letting your Blair Witch revenue get sucked up by the investors of your Battlefield Earth project suing you over a dispute -- all because you use the same logo in both films.

In addition, if you do sell your film, likely the distributor and the E&O insurers won't want to see a logo used in previous projects either.

We are not Warner Brothers. We are Joe Nobody with a film. Dazzle us with content instead.
 
With films one needs to brand the filmmaker's name, not the film production company as they're one-off entities.

For legal reasons, each film you make needs to be under a different production company LCC. Use the same logo in more than one LCC, you open the door for lawyers in a dispute with one of your film (current or previous) project to attach another project's revenue to the one in dispute. You'll be kicking yourself for letting your Blair Witch revenue get sucked up by the investors of your Battlefield Earth project suing you over a dispute -- all because you use the same logo in both films.

In addition, if you do sell your film, likely the distributor and the E&O insurers won't want to see a logo used in previous projects either.

We are not Warner Brothers. We are Joe Nobody with a film. Dazzle us with content instead.

I'm not sure I agree with this assessment. For legal reasons, you definitely should LLC each individual production, but using the same production company logo at the start of all your films won't give anyone that sues you legal standing to tie separate films to one another. If it did, even the big boys wouldn't do it.

And if you sell your movie to someone for distribution, and an agreement is reached to show a different logo at the start, it can always be changed.

I gotta agree with DeJager on this one. If you're looking to get your name out there, then using a production company logo is a great way to help with that. And since name recognition is the biggest battle, changing it from production to production will just make it more confusing and harder to remember...
 
quick new production logo I came up with the other day. Tell me what you think!

I'm seeing that effect (used in your logo) popping up in many things right now. I'm assuming it's an AEFX template from somewhere.

Not sayin' it's bad to use somethin' that looks cool... just that, it ain't so original when I see it three times in a day, in different places, on the same site. Check some recent posts on IT & you'll find 'em.
 
It does look like a template to me, too. And it reminds me too
much of the Universal logo.

I think it's the right length. The famous "Fox" logo is 20 seconds
with the full fanfare and 12 without it - so you're in the right
neighborhood. However the MGM logo is only 8.
 
Wow, thank you all for your input on logos.


I'm seeing that effect (used in your logo) popping up in many things right now. I'm assuming it's an AEFX template from somewhere.

Yes, I know exactly what you mean. It was a very basic CC Sphere and Grid effect in AE. Now that you mention it, I see it in many places too. I'll try and work on something more original.

Thanks!
 
I'm not sure I agree with this assessment. For legal reasons, you definitely should LLC each individual production, but using the same production company logo at the start of all your films won't give anyone that sues you legal standing to tie separate films to one another. If it did, even the big boys wouldn't do it.

The question is this: Can you afford to pay a lawyer to argue they can't tie the separate films to one another? We're not the big boys, we don't have lawyers on staff nor liability insurance against frivilous lawsuits. But what we can do is make it as difficult as possible for someone to even THINK about suing us.

We've seen plenty of tales of woe in this forum that could have been prevented with a few simple precautions and this would be one of them.

We can agree to disagree.
 
The question is this: Can you afford to pay a lawyer to argue they can't tie the separate films to one another? We're not the big boys, we don't have lawyers on staff nor liability insurance against frivilous lawsuits. But what we can do is make it as difficult as possible for someone to even THINK about suing us.

We've seen plenty of tales of woe in this forum that could have been prevented with a few simple precautions and this would be one of them.

We can agree to disagree.

I understand your point and can see its validity, but truly, what are the chances of an independent filmmaker getting sued by investors? And even if you were sued, what are the chances that any of your films have made profit enough for them to be considered an asset in a lawsuit?

I personally haven't read a single post on this forum where someone got sued for something related to their film, and had to relinquish profits from a different film to help pay off the lawsuit.

But maybe I'm missing something...

I just think if the goal is name recognition, the possible benefits of using the same logo on you films outweighs the possible problems.

But like you said, we can agree to disagree.
 
I understand your point and can see its validity, but truly, what are the chances of an independent filmmaker getting sued by investors? And even if you were sued, what are the chances that any of your films have made profit enough for them to be considered an asset in a lawsuit?

The actual value (or lack of one) of your assets won't prevent someone from trying to sue you. While the chances of being sued are low, you have to agree that the film business seemingly tends to attract the nutty personalities in our society -- when the $$$ return on a film doesn't meet their expectations, anything can happen.

This isn't just limited to logos . . . I just habitually keep all the potential lawsuit openings tied shut. :cool:
 
Limited Liability is just that, there's a lot of protection covered in it. Plus, a company investing in another company isn't any different than a person investing in another company, so "Bob Productions, LLC" investing/owning/producing "Bob's Movie, LLC" is just as protected as Bob himself is producing "Bob's Movie, LLC", the logo doesn't matter.

The reason I say keep it short is because of the medium it's going to be aired the most on, in this case, YouTube where people won't sit through 15 seconds of logo to see someone get kicked in the groin. Putting a long logo at the end is fine, people have already seen and hopefully committed to the product, or short that you have posted. Even TV sticks to the short logo rule. Granted, airtime is expensive but they don't want to lose viewers to people changing the channel when a prod co logo comes up. Some TV ones are even a half second flash, and that's it. Openings are the same way, where a show might have had a 90-150 second intro 20 years ago, now it's about 40 seconds in the first season, then usually squished to 5-10 in subsequent seasons.

On a DVD or a theater screen you have a captive audience who's already paid to see your product and there's a very little chane of them walking out a minute in, play as many long logos as you want. The rules, or better yet strategy is different.

Edit: forgot to mention that I totally agree that your logo is a part of your marketing and brand identity. Show it, be it, just don't be so in your face with it that it drives people off. We like to put website info at the end of the video with logos and what not, then the ones we sell as downloads we watermark the preview copy (which also is really effective).
 
Last edited:
We like to put website info at the end of the video with logos and what not, then the ones we sell as downloads we watermark the preview copy (which also is really effective).

I agree with you that you the website address should be the last thing viewers see, and long enough to burn into their brains.
 
Back
Top