Surprised no one has mentioned this yet: you should either rename your product, or make it abundantly clear that this is not affiliated with, or in any way related to, Sketch, the popular vector design software [0].

I was trying to find some official statement from Sketch about this product and it took far too long for me to realize they are not related.

[0] https://www.sketch.com/

damn, thanks for this comment. I didn't go to their website, but I opened the comments fully expecting the vector design program built this especially with that title.

As evidenced by any example I've seen from these "AI logo generators," image-generation models simply cannot do logos well.

They always create insanely detailed illustrations (not logos) that feel like clip art or anime. Is this is a data-set issue (too much art station/deviantart scraping) or just a taste-issue on the part of the creators of these tools (bad prompting)? Or can image-generation models simply not do "simple" well?

I cannot imagine relegating something as important as your logo to some low effort AI bullshit. This is a symbol for your whole company. If you can't put in the effort here then what good are you?

The output you get from 99Designs is hardly better and this is the first step for tiny companies.

The UX looks amazing. What makes this a 'Logo' design tool? The intro video, and many of the examples appear to be artwork, not really logos. Is the output a vector image (a definitive prerequisite for logos)?

Pricing doesn't look right, particularly the monthly subscription model.

What is the target market? Is there a hidden market where people need to create logos often enough to justify the subscription?

I signed up but you cannot generate without paying. I’m not a fan of this UX pattern. Bait and switch.

I’m glad you have the pricing clear in the front page so I won’t use it, unlike another similar service I tried that after wasting my time generating logos with prompts and details only to ask me to pay to download it..

"Get Started" and/or "Try it yourself" redirects to sign-up page. No, thank you. Not interested.

Also, I took a screenshot of the "input" in the YT video and asked GPT to make a logo of it. Honestly it did 10x better job - https://pasteboard.co/4m3JLt5Oxzzy.png

Sketched something, described it and hit generate. Immediately asked to pay.

I can't even trial your product without signing up for a $19/mo subscription? That's not going to happen. Especially when your product doesn't seem like much more than a UI frontend for what I can do with MSPaint and free tools in just about the same amount of time.

IMO Hacker News needs a new rule to ban this tidal wave of wrapper spam.

The rule could be "If your paid website/startup does nothing more novel than common-sense prompting Bing or Bard or Meta would do for free, it doesn't belong here".

I'd be surprised if this website gets a single paying customer at all.

My prediction. You won't survive a month with this kind of behaviour. The competition is dire, and it's all about understanding the needs of your users and helping them to grow and prosper. Milking money out of people is outdated and obsolete approach. I hope, you can understand it. :)

What behavior is that? It seems like they are upfront about the cost right on the landing page.

Dark UX patterns.

What dark UX patterns are you referring to?

What's a good alternative for generating a logo with similar tools to this?

You could use Stable Diffusion yourself, and I'm sure there are other such services that wrap SD, as this one does.

Hire a designer.

How about for non-luddites?

Hire a designer that uses adobe illustrator.

If you need to 'generate' logo, do you actually need one?

Looks cool - if it’s similar to the pixlr tools it should be pretty useful, though very niche.

Maybe for the intro video have it be drawing a normal logo like most people would be doing instead of the weird space jellyfish.

Does this tool actually generate vectors? Or is it really just an AI image generator with an image to SVG converter added on.

Based on the complexity of the logos it generates, I suspect it might be the latter.

"combine this two and create the image I have in my mind"

OK, this is obviously a powerful tool for exploring ideas, but it doesn't look anything like a tool to exactly render your mind's-eye, and especially, logos, which are often abstract, and consist of interlocking ideas.

Current AI models do not seem capable of that logical 'click'; witness their difficulty with simple math. They 'fuzz' solutions.

Yet again, another company just launches a product that slaps a UI on top of stable diffusion and tries to make it pass as some revolutionary product.

in the video, it seems like you were designing something more complicated than the logos I was expecting-more of a vector illustration. It seems roughly in line with stable diffusion, and other models which struggle to make the clean, symbolic logos I would love to have.

I don't see a single good logo on this site (some mediocre maybe), they're all too complicated and poor quality. Maybe pivot to an illustration generator.

The most telling thing? this site's logo wasn't generated using itself.

> Sign in to zwlmstvfiyezbbehpfyk.supabase.co

lol did your cat jump on the keyboard just as you were naming the supabase project?

After all the work I had sketching a penis I got hit with the paywall without even seeing a single result

I think you need to give us the ability to test the creation of the logos before signing up. Maybe ask for payment later on when the user wants to download the logo?

Absolutely. I didn’t even get to see it work before being hit with a pay link. Maybe the onboarding could show some real-world examples, best practices, and who this is best for?

agreed, and maybe ask to login to save logo or unlock more features, but I agree that you should let user play around a bit without needing to sign up!

I went through the trouble of signing up, drew my sketch and prompt, clicked "generate" and it just sends me to a pricing page with minimum spend $20/month

Come on, just let us try the damn thing one or two times - nobody's actually going to be satisfied with the first logo they generate, so it's not like you lose the sale.

So, I just logged in and there is no free plan at all to try your service as well as no way to delete my profile. That's very disrespectful to the users and goes against GDPR.

My advice, add free plan and an ability to purge the profile.

Having said that, how do I delete my profile completely?

That looks like great illustrations, but bad logos.

I tried signing up with google and the long random subdomain that ended in .supabase in the permissions granted modal was pretty off putting. I said yes bc I know this is a new service but if I was a random signup that would cause me concern and I’d not continue signing up. Hope this helps!

this is more of a sketch to image than sketch to logo in my opinion

I don’t really want to sign up before playing with it, maybe you can find another way to achieve your goal?

On that note, is this lead gen for something, or do you plan to charge designers for access to the tool?

I'm amused at how upset people seem to be about being asked to sign up and pay for this service. I don't remember seeing comments like this on other launch threads on HN.

Sign up for free, try it for...not free. Go fuck yourself!

I’m glad you have the pricing clear in the front page so I won’t use it, unlike another similar service I tried that after wasting my time generating logos with prompts and details only to ask me to pay to download it..

My prediction. You won't survive a month with this kind of behaviour. ... Milking money out of people is outdated and obsolete approach.

After all the work I had sketching a penis I got hit with the paywall without even seeing a single result

So, I just logged in and there is no free plan at all to try your service as well as no way to delete my profile.

I went through the trouble of signing up, drew my sketch and prompt, clicked "generate" and it just sends me to a pricing page with minimum spend $20/month Come on, just let us try the damn thing one or two times - nobody's actually going to be satisfied with the first logo they generate, so it's not like you lose the sale.

I think you need to give us the ability to test the creation of the logos before signing up. Maybe ask for payment later on when the user wants to download the logo?

I didn’t even get to see it work before being hit with a pay link.

I don’t really want to sign up before playing with it, maybe you can find another way to achieve your goal?

Oh, most of them are dunking on it because it's ai "art".

Keep it civil.

How did you train your AI? Did you use ethically acquired data sources?

If I see a photo online, I don't need to pay a license to see it, for my brain to process it.

If after I produce the same image, then yes you could argue I'm an infringing but only when I do actually produce it.

This push for licensing works for the purposes of tranining is not german to the purposes that copyright sets to achieve. It slows down progress, makes it extremely more expensive for small players to partcipate. AI tools enable way more creative expression, than the rent seeking done by descendants of authros dead for over 50 years.

Germane. And this is still a disengenuous argument wherever someone is making it. We should not defend corporate exploitation of millions of people by citing how human beings do things. Making it harder for artists to make a living by beating them over the head with their own work does not "enable way more creative expression". Writing a prompt hardly counts as "creative".

Thanks for the correction, I believe the correct one is "germane" though,no?

> Writing a prompt hardly counts as "creative".

clicking a camera shutter is not creative either. Choosing the subject and which picture is worth preserving is.

I am a douche for correcting you with the wrong word.

I don't like the camera comparison because cameras don't require other content to function.

What about open models that don't benefit a corporation?

Open models exist because silicon valley corporations with massive VC funding or institutional capital like Meta and Google stole millions of works from across the internet. Abusing the reputation of open source software does not mean you had permission to use that art in your model, and it doesn't wash away the ethical stain on these models.

I'd be very surprised if they trained at all. Everything I see in the examples is easily generated from AWS / GCP / OpenAI API prompts, in other words, another wrapper in the tsunami of wrappers.

What are ethically acquired data sources? Not obtained from forced labour of kids in Africa?

It's fairly obvious they are asking if the content was licensed

Ah, I thought HN was anti-copyright.

yep, all HN users agree on all topics. That's why there are never any disagreements.

So open source models are OK? No corporation benefits from that. What about people who are learning to be artists? Should they have to license works before they observe them? They can't be incorporating elements from other artists without payingnthem, surely.

I see a lot of this knee jerk generative algorithm bad on twitter, reddit, and spaces like that. Hopefully HN can be more nuanced.

Information wants to be free. That doesn't stop being true when the information is art.

Open source models are built on VC capital and stolen labor.

Obviously your bullshit point about artists learning to be artists is bullshit. AI art models are not people. Bringing up how people learn is completely irrelevant to the regulation of these models. Artists are happy to teach other artists because it actually grows the artistic community and maintains the skills humanity needs to produce art. Obviously they feel differently when some corporate tech bro fuck who isn't part of the community extracts the value from millions of people at an industrial scale to produce a computer program to displace them and threaten their livelihoods. This is easy to understand and no amount of handwringing and anthropomorphizing will change these facts.

When we don't live under a capitalist economy, maybe we can talk about your entitlement to other people's work. Until then, professional creatives need to eat and pay rent, so fuck off.

It is no different than any other time in history. No one cared when blue collar workers were being automated but when suddenly it's my white collar job?

A lot of people cared very much but we elected Reagan twice in the 80s so he we are. They've also been trying (and failing) to automate and outsource programming for decades. There's also a pretty big difference between the automation of repetitive assembly line tasks and the automation of culture itself imo.

I think I've talked to you before on threads about AI so I won't belabor my points any longer but just know that while you believe them to be different, many don't.

I’m disappointed it has nothing to do with the logo programming language.

Sketch Logo AI is a tool to simplify 2D-3D logos, illustrations and tattoo designs, making the creative process a breeze. This AI-powered tool saves hours of additional work and also empowers users to bring their ideas to life without the need for advanced design or drawing skills.We have 4 features which are Sketch to Logo which allows you to create designs with basic sketches, Logo to Logo which allows ou to transform your logo into anything you want, 2D to 3D to create stunning 3D designs and Image to Art option to create unique pieces of art.

Although there are other similar tools available online, few offer the unique capability of Sketch Logo AI, allowing users to infuse their creativity into the design using the Sketch tool. Moreover, it can be challenging to find an app that encompasses all the features present in Sketch Logo AI. This tool provides a comprehensive solution for all design needs, serving as the go-to application for designing, editing, and adding fonts—an all-in-one creative powerhouse.

The company's vision revolves around providing an all-in-one creative powerhouse for designing, editing, and incorporating fonts. Sketch Logo AI aims to be the go-to app for individuals seeking a user-friendly yet powerful solution for their design requirements.

There is a class of tools that have high demand but also high supply - for example, online json formatters, or doc-to-pdf conversion tools. Occasionally very useful but not a daily tool, and not something to subscribe to etc. Suppliers often struggle to make money and more often than not don't make much, either with something like adwords or gray/black data brokering.

On the good side, AI logo design has strong demand, but I think it probably fits with the many other high but infrequently demanded tools that are (relatively) easy to construct by a modern programmer and deployed on a cheap VPS for fun. Maybe you wish to become a "secret weapon" for fiverr logo designers, who very well might pay a monthly subscription and consider it money well spent?

> high supply

Yep. There are ~a lot~ of these things out there and while I agree with you re: pricing strategy I think the most important thing is to do something the other 50+ generators aren't.

The drawing aspect is a good start but I don't think it's a huge differentiator. If you subscribe to creative cloud for one month you get that AND the ai powered generative aspect and 20+ other hugely powerful tools.