PDA

View Full Version : Logo Critique....:-)




switters
Sep 24, 2006, 10:47 AM
http://www.conceptualdesign.net/angularLogo.png



mufflon
Sep 24, 2006, 11:02 AM
as a complete layman I would like to comment that 1-5 seems to have very thin lines - would be nice to increase them a little bit so you notice them more. 6 seems to be too much thickness, but looks nice :)

Hmmm they seem to be very complex overall, a possible way to work with this is to make two different logotypes - one containing the graphical logotyp (in this case the angle) and another both the graphical logotype and the name spelled out - if the graphical logotypy makes sense, then so will the one containing text.

alas, there will most probably be more skilled people commenting, but this is how I would approach it.

iGary
Sep 24, 2006, 11:05 AM
I like 6 the best, but you need to find a different font.

switters
Sep 24, 2006, 11:25 AM
Thanks for both replies, I will edit the line thickness/thinness for #6.

Concerning, the fonts used, do you suggest changing both (1.gular & 2. systems) or one?

Do you have any font suggestions?

You people are life savers....//// :-)

Doctor Q
Sep 24, 2006, 12:00 PM
I think the letter A should be visible, not implied, so there's no confusion about whether the name is Angular or ngular.

I'd vote for #2 first, with second choice #1.

xsedrinam
Sep 24, 2006, 12:57 PM
I like the idea. What about taking the Level and making it vertically down and or tilted and adjusted to suit to make the A?

switters
Sep 24, 2006, 01:23 PM
I like the idea. What about taking the Level and making it vertically down and or tilted and adjusted to suit to make the A?



That's a great idea, Thanks, I will try that.

:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :D

ATD
Sep 24, 2006, 01:26 PM
A few things are standing out on all of them that I would work on.

Your graphic is overwhelming the type both in size and importance, personally I would have the type read way up front then the graphic.

Economize. You are using a number of different things to support your concept, start subtracting. Hit one point home hard. To many ideas just dilute your message.

They feel a little too light and airy.

tjwett
Sep 24, 2006, 01:36 PM
way too busy. a nice angled "A" at the front should be enough with the proper typeface.

switters
Sep 24, 2006, 01:42 PM
I combined the previous 2 comments and will refine it a bit.

Here it is.

Thanks for the insightful remarks.


http://www.conceptualdesign.net/finalversion.png

oops, previous 3. sorry

eyup
Sep 24, 2006, 01:46 PM
A few things are standing out on all of them that I would work on.

Your graphic is overwhelming the type both in size and importance, personally I would have the type read way up front then the graphic.

Economize. You are using a number of different things to support your concept, start subtracting. Hit one point home hard. To many ideas just dilute your message.

They feel a little too light and airy.





yeh - I agree - it's a tadge too complicated - how about using the A with the cross bar as the angle identifier...

Mydriasis
Sep 24, 2006, 01:54 PM
I like the idea its a good start, but you have to keep it simple!

I think angular is a little too hard to read, you kinda have to guess the first letter.

Here is a really quick, but simpler version of your design...

my 2 cents

switters
Sep 24, 2006, 02:13 PM
Thanks for putting in your thoughts, much appreciated.

here is a revised version.

I need the L/building in htere, it's for an architect.

http://conceptualdesign.net/finalversion2.png

jamdr
Sep 24, 2006, 02:35 PM
The last one you put up is the strongest I think. However, I still don't like the font for "systems" and you really need to get rid of the "l" building. There is no reason for it. You should choose either the angled "A" (which is starting to look very nice) or the building (which doesn't look as strong) but having both still makes it too busy.

I don't think you need both to get your point across. It's overkill and doesn't look as professional.

switters
Sep 24, 2006, 02:55 PM
ty JAMDR

I personally like the one with the building, but I also see your point of a logo being visually cluttered.

so here's another example using your critique:

http://www.conceptualdesign.net/finalversion3.png

Snark
Sep 24, 2006, 02:58 PM
As has been said, it's getting there. But I would strongly give some thought to William Faulkner's advice to "Kill your darlings. (http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1282093)

You've got the logoform "A" going on, the relatively quirky font for "ngular", then you've tweaked the "g" in that, you've got the building letterform, and you've got the second face being used for "systems." It's just too, too much.

Keep paring down. Shoot for a result that hits a single visual note; it feels a bit like a cacophony to me right now.

Snark

eyup
Sep 24, 2006, 03:16 PM
As has been said, it's getting there. But I would strongly give some thought to William Faulkner's advice to "Kill your darlings. (http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1282093)

Keep paring down. Shoot for a result that hits a single visual note; it feels a bit like a cacophony to me right now.

Snark


aye snark is right - not sure if this looks architechturish enough tho...

Aperture
Sep 24, 2006, 04:45 PM
I have no experience from design, but I feel the L building really isn't needed and adds confusion.

Just my two cents.


Kevin

apfhex
Sep 24, 2006, 04:58 PM
I have no experience from design, but I feel the L building really isn't needed and adds confusion.
I agree. Keep with a regular "L".

so here's another example using your critique:

http://www.conceptualdesign.net/finalversion3.png
This is a lot better than your first ones. It's getting there. I think what eyup posted above is a little more like what you should go for.

irmongoose
Sep 24, 2006, 05:07 PM
switters: I really like your last one. But I also feel the difference in the line width in the letters make the 'A' stand out a little too much. Also, I feel it is too bad that the whole logo cannot fit where the 'G's bar ends.

Concerning eyup's version, I think it looks too "sci-fi" for an architecture company.

I feel that the single red angle is very powerful... only the lettering that needs to be fixed.



irmongoose

GoCubsGo
Sep 24, 2006, 05:16 PM
#6 is my favorite, but took me a minute to understand the A in angular. I like the overall look and it's actually quite creative...hard to do in logo design sometimes.

apfhex
Sep 24, 2006, 07:03 PM
Concerning eyup's version, I think it looks too "sci-fi" for an architecture company.
Unless they specialize in super modern architecture. ;)

I think some information about the company could be useful for the critique, actually.

switters
Sep 26, 2006, 09:20 AM
Well, a friend of mine just graduated graduate school (architecture) and is starting a his own firm.
He made up the name and hired me to design a logo.

Revised logos:

http://www.conceptualdesign.net/logorevised.png

Mydriasis
Sep 26, 2006, 09:37 AM
I say the top right is the best but the Angular font still sucks, well no sucks is too hard, but I think you could do better ;)

I think you like that font a lot though so hears my suggestion:

if you want the top of the 'L' pointy then make the bottom of the 'G' pointy as well. (like in the third row second column)

the downslash in the 'G' and the 'R' is too fat

watch the spacing, it looks funny

only MHO:)

switters
Sep 26, 2006, 09:52 AM
Fixed the spacing issue on the top corner one and got rid of the pointy angles on the fonts.

http://conceptualdesign.net/logorevised2.png

Mydriasis
Sep 26, 2006, 10:02 AM
I like it better ;)

johnathan.macle
Sep 28, 2006, 04:39 PM
Hi, I was wondering if you guys could Critique my logo aswell.

http://www.atomicsource.org/Atomic%20source%20wil%20be%20active_files/Logo%20png%20final%28620.png

AtomicSource.org (http://www.atomicsource.org)

It has been based of a design I seen, it incorpirates the letters A & S and also manages to look a little bit like an atom. Any suggestions please dont hesitate to make them :)

P.S. I know their is a slight kink in the joint fom A to S.......im working on it :p

mustard
Sep 28, 2006, 11:47 PM
Hi, I was wondering if you guys could Critique my logo aswell.

http://www.atomicsource.org/Atomic%20source%20wil%20be%20active_files/Logo%20png%20final%28620.png

AtomicSource.org (http://www.atomicsource.org)

It has been based of a design I seen, it incorpirates the letters A & S and also manages to look a little bit like an atom. Any suggestions please dont hesitate to make them :)

P.S. I know their is a slight kink in the joint fom A to S.......im working on it :p

For some reason I can't get passed the idea of it looking like a pentagram

SBT
Oct 2, 2006, 01:51 PM
Yeh, i like the last one switters. Nice one. Although if the special "L" was something important then it also seems ok to have that in. The 2 are similar, possibly the normal "L" being simpler.

e-coli
Oct 2, 2006, 02:57 PM
Fix the type weight. All the letters including the "A" should be the same weight.

And IMO, I'm not crazy about that font.

Have you tried Avant Garde Alternate? Might be nice and subtle while still typographically solid.

e-coli
Oct 2, 2006, 03:00 PM
Hi, I was wondering if you guys could Critique my logo as well.


Anarchy!!!!!

I don't see the "S" at all, and it doesn't really look like an atom. Keep going. You can do better.

ATD
Oct 2, 2006, 07:18 PM
And IMO, I'm not crazy about that font.


Same here. The font doesn't come across as an architectural font, particularly for a firm that has Angular in the name.

ATD
Oct 2, 2006, 08:18 PM
Hi, I was wondering if you guys could Critique my logo aswell.

http://www.atomicsource.org/Atomic%20source%20wil%20be%20active_files/Logo%20png%20final%28620.png

AtomicSource.org (http://www.atomicsource.org)

It has been based of a design I seen, it incorpirates the letters A & S and also manages to look a little bit like an atom. Any suggestions please dont hesitate to make them :)

P.S. I know their is a slight kink in the joint fom A to S.......im working on it :p



Same as what others said, it doesn't read as atomic. I see a lot of people try to use objects to create letterforms and they seem only to work a small percentage of the time. It's usually a case that the objects read but the letters don't, the letters read but the object don't or it can look very cartoon like. In this one the A reads but the S doesn't and I don't see the object as atomic. It might work far better to use regular type forms with a hint of the atomic circles around it.

dogbone
Oct 3, 2006, 04:32 AM
Switters,

I can't see that typeface working for the reason that it is a non angular font so that it doesn't sit well with the 'angular' theme.

I like the initial A and I think it is a strong enough motif to be able to work without the red bit.

MacBoobsPro
Oct 3, 2006, 05:15 AM
I havent read all the posts. Sorry im quite busy. But when it comes to logos the more simple the better.

So eyup's is the direction to take in my book


aye snark is right - not sure if this looks architechturish enough tho...