Thursday, October 21, 2010

Brent Ellis’ Post

I am a member of Cross Church, at the Springdale Campus. Many people most likely have never heard of Cross Church. Why? It is the brand new identity of First Baptist Church of Springdale, and The Church at Pinnacle Hills. I would say a lot of people, even across the country have heard of those names, especially here in Northwest Arkansas. One would beg to ask the question, “Why change the name of a church so well known? Wouldn’t that minimize the recognition and legacy the church has built over the years?” While the well known name is no longer, at times, you must make a decision that may seem to be going backwards, but necessary to go forward.

In January 2011, we will be launching a new third campus in Fayetteville. With that, we would have First Baptist Church of Springdale, The Church at Pinnacle Hills, and the new campus, which would also need a name. You can’t simply carry over the name First Baptist Church of Springdale, because it has a specific location, which is why we have The Church at Pinnacle Hills, located in Rogers. Keeping in mind, this is all one church, many locations. If you continue to add names, it would not be recognizable as one church. Unity is very important for building a strong identity, the foundation really.

In recently researching about logos, the background of the organization is of great importance in the logo, as well as the name. Our missional vision is to “Reach Northwest Arkansas, America and the World for Jesus Christ.” We are a very cross-centered church. The logo is obviously reflective of that. The 3 crosses are a great representation of when Christ was crucified with the 2 thieves. One thing that is great about this logo, and that we have studied, is it works in black and white. No matter what medium this is placed on, be it a newspaper ad, a fax cover sheet or other publications that are primarily in black and white, it is still very recognizable. It is also good for sizing. Obviously it can go as large as needed, but can (and is) used as an end mark of articles in our church magazine. The type used on this logo is different than the last. It uses a Sans Serif font, where the last one was a serif font, very similar to the almighty, Trajan. I am not certain, but my guess is the choice is for a couple of reasons. The first being a new identity, you wouldn’t want it to look the exact same as the last and have a clear distinction between the two. The second being that it is a more modern and “youthful” font; that may not be the right word, but compared to Trajan, it is much more “youthful.”

The color choice for this logo is somewhat carried over from the last. The colors are a bit darker, but also adding a fourth and fifth color to the palette. The darker colors give more solidity and that’s a good thing. Nobody wants a logo that seems weak. The color is also an element that blends the mark and the type, with the maroon color in the mark, and the word “Cross.” The gray, also in the type, is a great combination that compliments these deep, rich colors.

One of the things we discussed in class is that simplicity is important, and I am learning that more and more everyday. I’m learning to love simplicity. Pastor Floyd mentioned many things about how this change will strengthen our identity, and he said something very profound; “By changing our name to Cross Church, we will strengthen our identity by providing: Greater simplicity, because less is more.” Our name and our mark, our identity, tell exactly who we are and what we are about; the Cross of Jesus Christ. The name change and logo both are very successful, and I couldn’t be more excited about it.


  1. I don't know why, but I don't really like this logo....I prefer the black and white version better actually. I like the positive and negative space they use, but in the top one they use too many looks childish. I think a logo should stick to two or three main colors at the most (unless they are a daycare center or a place that is meant to draw kids in...) Anyways I think a quick solution for this is just follow the original colors of the text- blue and red. They seem to randomly throw in green and yellow and it loses its classiness and boldness, I think it would have been much better if the yellow was blue and the green was red.

  2. I think that both the black & white and the colour logos both work... I also like the fact that the black & white (really grayscale) logo is not just the colour logo converted to grayscale, but is actually a separate logo and i think it works better than a grayscale version of the colour would work

  3. i have to say that the grey scale logo stuck me as the better logo as well. I think that the color version does work and the colors have a greyish tent to them that dull the colors but allow them to be bright as well. As far as the colors go I do not think they are childish but the gery scale does strike me as the better of the two. I love the use of pos. and neg. space and the imagery it projects. It is simple, clean, and gets the point accross; which is what a logo should do.