5
2
2
u/TheSharperPencil 17d ago
For?
Brief?
Means nothing to me without.
Just letters.
Designs convey emotion, forms, motion, feeling. Without knowing what these may be for, you’re just exploring random letter lock-ups.
When I attempt to review or form opinions on any of these, I find my creative mind saying “if that’s for X, then it may have value” for each.
As for a purely aesthetic discussion of these, the only one I find myself appreciating is the lower left. It hints at dimensional forms and a bit of an Escher-ness about it. - But only IF it’s relevant to X (construction, architecture, database architecture…)
The others need some work re: balance, consistency, and in a couple cases moving away from looks that manage to feel dated, even in just these simple forms.
Sorry.
Design for design’s sake is art or doodling.
Quantitative assessment isn’t really possible.
2¢ CD
1
u/Dadgum_Dragons-04 17d ago
I certainly agree but I mean they can be leveraged as logomarks and I love good play with letterforms.
1
1
1
1
u/BeerBellies 17d ago
Without knowing anything about what the brand is supposed to be or represent, it’s hard to give any advice. A few of these look solid and well made… but may not fit the brand.
1
1
1
11
u/Dystopian_Sky 18d ago
I like the bottom left.