I hope that in a not too distant future Ill be able to make knives good enough that I feel comfortable putting my mark on them.
So my question is: Is it better to go with name or logo? Or maybe both?
Pad, after a long time considering this question, AND researching history, this is my take:
Historians love to trace an object back to it's maker, whether it's a beauty or a beast. It kind of defines the times. They don't care how great it is, just about when, by whom, and for what.
Collectors do it too. For different reasons, but the same questions.
For a long time, I didn't put on a mark, for the same reasons you are concerned with. I've since decided that that view is too, well, too selfish for want of a better term. I take up space in this world till I'm gone, then someone fills my place. It would be arrogant of me to think I am the only one that could fill my space.
It's also narrow minded to wait till you are "famous" or "discovered" to make your mark on your work. You may never be famous, nor even worthy of any recognition at all.
I have some books. Some first editions, signed by the author. They were just starting out. Some are still alive, even. My Stephen King collection comes to mind. Some are worth, well many thousands..........and the writing is terrible!
But, it's his FIRST stab at his craft, and it yeilds a lot for a researcher. It's history in our life time, if you know what I mean.
So, I think you owe it to mankind to mark your work, maybe not for you, maybe not for any benefit to you whatsoever, but it may just be the clue somebody needs to identify our existence a few hundred years down the road.
So, your name or your mark or both should be the norm for all of us. Just leave enough clues so that others may find who made the thing in question.
And, besides, you "may" become famous, and your early work will be worth a ton!
HTH.