Logo Critique
- Started
- Last post
- 21 Responses
- Al_dizzle2
the four lines on the bottom don't immediately make an 'M' for me.
I wouldn't have read it as 'Totem' if you hadn't described it as such.Otherwise, I dig the style
- Yeah I know what you meanWhiteFace
- This seems like one of those cases where it doesn't necessarily have to be readableyuekit
- yeah, it doesn't have to be readable, just recognizable. Great work man! I'd say leave it as it is nowMiguex
- Thanks, appreciate it! Yeah readability isn't really high on my list of prioritesWhiteFace
- i def like the design, but couldn't make out Totem either. Which is ok. As a symbol it's coooool!CGN
- pinkfloyd0
I like where it's going. Flesh it out, it's almost there.
- pinkfloyd2
I may even take out the 3 left vertical rectangles in each row to make it more simple.
- studderine0
Pretty cool concept. I agree with the others, just needs some tweakin.
- WhiteFace4
- Looks too skinny now. Add that bar back for the E.bainbridge
- EightyDeuce1
Reads as TOTETM following the way the first two T's are read. Dig it though, keep tweaking it.
- Yeah i can see that, following that rational... http://www.nick-whit…WhiteFace
- < this - the linked version reads better but I still am getting OEMtimeless
- CygnusZero40
Looking at it without reading anything about it, idk what its supposed to be.
- I'm not too worried about that as long as it's recognisableWhiteFace
- ORAZAL-1
I find it too complex for a logo but great as signature if it's for your personal use.
- Depends on its use. I think it's distinctive and bold enough to be a logo. AS long as you don't put it on a shoe or something.bainbridge
- juanluisgarcia0
i read OEM initially and in the second iteration but i like it
- utopian3
At second glance, I really like it the way it currently designed. And I do like how the word Totem is buried and somewhat encrypted within the mark.
- oey2
- MrAbominable0
like where these are going.
- hans_glib2
don't listen to these numpties - the first version is the best.
it's a logo not a logotype so fuck readability. the later versions suffer from the dead hand of design-by-committee.
- <pressplay
- couldn't agree more, was about to say the same thing.monospaced
- haha thanks, but if I make the 'M' three lines then I need to increase the width of the bars to compensate and that unbalances the whole thingWhiteFace
- That makes sense. Good work man.monospaced
- The second version is the one that looks like a totem the most out of the three.ORAZAL
- yuputopian
- OSFA1
I like the first one but... keep the M to three lines, not 4.
- WhiteFace2
- hate to say it but I preferred the originalfadein11
- ^^Roberthannink
- hans_glib0
- phunnystewart
- ^je reste ma valisehans_glib
- phiny? phuny?i_monk
- oh dear. plessey. very famous logo from way back whenhans_glib
- Good pointWhiteFace
- I once wanted to start a brand called 'mumunumumu' purely based on how satisfying it was to write in 'block' cursive. Of course, a product would've helped...detritus
- ...and the website would be a pure cunt to search for.detritus
- I've never seen this logo or know this company, so objectively I think this logo sucks.iCanHazQBN
- ...I have no attachment to the brand. Whereas you are biased because of your previous experience with the brand or nostalgic reasons.iCanHazQBN
- You like it because you're used to it, not because it's an especially great design. Basically it's grown on you over many years.iCanHazQBN
- Never heard of it.
qbnrs 1, hans_glib 0i_monk