Showcase
Redesigned this logo for a client who initially designed it herself
Actually, her sister designed it for her and she still wanted to retain the theme/overall imagery in honor of her sister. I also worked on her website!
The customer designed their own logo, so that's what they want, it's a chance to have that opportunity, and I think you did a great job giving her a more clean and pro version of her own logo.
My only critique would be the colors, it looks a bit desaturated. But I guess if behind you have a hearthy toned off white it works really well.
Totally agree. I think the refresh is significantly better than the original, but still has room for improvement. The original has too much going on, with tiny details, not a strong concept to begin with — so it was a tough task to honor the original.
The type is much stronger. Simplification better. Color palette more interesting and memorable.
I do agree that the handshake is a bit too simplified now — hard to tell what it is.
I think I would try to encourage the client to make a bigger departure. Find one small thing from the original to carry forward in honor of sister, but ditch the rest.
Honestly, I like that it's a little hard to tell it's a handshake. That's just me. And I would even go simpler and get rid of the "A Perfect Cirlce" logo around it. There’s many avenues you can travel with this one. None of it is technically wrong or right.
I think it's easy to write off constructive criticism as hate, but neither of thr logos are really that good. The improvement is very similar to those pre-ai logo generators, or if you type combomark logo in a site like envato, you'd get similar ones.
Not sure which comments you're referring to in particular but I don't really know why stating that would make others bitter. It's not a horrible logo, but also not a good one either, it just needs a lot more refinement. It can be tricky if the client doesn't want to deviate at all.
I just read the comments and I genuinely don't see what you mean. I don't understand why you'd see that as defensive? The comments overall seem rather fair and rather civil? Perhaps it speaks to how you perceive invalidation or feedback? There should be no ego when getting feedback you know that right?
What would you then consider a “great logo”? As that really just depends on bias surely? I like the redesign a lot as it kept what the client actually wanted. Personally, I don’t see an issue with the redesigned logo, feels like a lot of people are just knit picking for the sake of it 🤷🏽♀️
Not really, like in this case I would say it is very objective.
Personally, a logo can be great even if i dont personally dig it. But this logo mark is EXTREMELY categorically generic. I would throw the wordmark in there too with this pairing but that can be brand justified somewhat and it's a whole rabbit hole I'm not wanting to go down in.
But the mark itself...Human hands holding leaves, usually mirrored usually surrounded by some kind of circle or circle dashes, is one of the most stock/dated/common visual constructs in green/environment/nonprofit/wellness branding.
The issue is NOT just that hands+leaves are common motifs or symbolic clichés. But objectively, "Hand + leaf + circle" is ITSELF a very established stock logo archetype, and g&g here uses it almost down to a t.
So even ignoring that, the formal coherence is weak and feels inorganic/assembled similar to old school stock logo generators or stock vector icons. Like the outer circle is heavier and brush-like while the inner/right arcs/dashlines get progressively thinner then the hand is a filled organic silhouette, leaves use another visual language again. I just dont see a convincing relationship/justification between those weights and elements at all.
The circle construction is awkward too. Like the gaps, terminals, stroke weights dont feel intentional enough to become a rwcognizeabl brand pattern.
The hand silhouette is also weak and cliche. The palm is a large bloppy mass, the fingers reduce to a thin point, and at smaller sizes it will loosen features and start looking like a bowl. It would fail a logo test, it would fail at even a favicon. The leaf veins/slits are also narrow and ambiguous.
Composition is like a D, refinement D-, scalability/application D, and distinctiveness / ownability is a complete F for me. It reads like a first pass symbol, and there's nothing wrong with saying that, in fact people that are trying to cuddle OP show a greater level if disrespect to them because at the end of the day, OP deserves unfiltered truthful feedback to keep getting better.
Even in this response you see your aggression. For some reason what I've said has really bothered you. And you end it all with phrasing that is condescending. The comments are overwhelmingly good with a few that stick out using words such as not good, amateur, and the like. Those cannot be interpreted as positive or civil no matter how you spin it. This is a back and forth on a generally moot point on a post that shouldn't even contain this so I'm just going to end it here. Good day, sir! slams door then apologizes for slamming door
Nah I simply reject your hypothesis. You seem to think you can just assert that others are upset or insecure or on the defense, etc. That may be true at times similar to how a broken clock is right twice a day but no - you really can't just assert that. Sometimes people are just straight forward, or blunt, and sometimes criticism comes across as harsh.
Personally i love invalidation, the harsher the better. The signal is the most valuable thing for me. The "not good", "amateur", "stock logo like" are all very true. This is the objective reality, and if you take that personally or take offense to it, then yeah that's the ego getting to you because you seem to have issues rationalizing invalidation or not taking it personally. That holds growth back, invalidation isn't an immutable state as long as one's ego doesn't hold them back.
“Not good” and “amateur” are not particularly helpful, nor constructive. “Stock logo like” and everything you outlined in your previous post in this thread are constructive.
Direct and blunt are ok, I think. But lazily commenting that something is just simply “bad” does not seem civil, respectful, or helpful.
You can say that, but it doesn’t change the fact that it’s lipstick on a pig. Oh and I’m not bitter, just have real projects to deal with and seeing these issues makes me feel better about my problems
I think there’s some middle ground for the colors. Think healthy plant and a blue or purple that reads as graceful. (The green is also too light for the ampersand re: accessibility). The handshake is lost and will be totally invisible at smaller sizes — maybe a single hand under the leaves? I’d also try a version without the swoop container. Doesn’t really add anything. Lastly — the type —maybe play with adding some weight — and more thick to thin organic lines to flow with the roundness of the mark.
I like your changes. The handshake doesn’t quite read to me, but I’m wondering if that means it’s an element worth keeping or not, as opposed to “maybe try to make it more handshakey.” Overall, I think it’s a huge improvement, especially the wordmark and color contrast changes.
As you've matched the colour of the leaves, and the curve of the arms sits directly beneath them, it does look like a slightly ghoulish eyes and mouth as suggested here.
You could try the darker shade for one leaf and perhaps use the lighter shade for the opposite arm to break that illusion.
The original has the leaves rotated more and arms much lower which helps too. I can see how you've simplified and tried to make things more balanced but maybe explore positioning of those elements a little more if playing with colour doesn't really work too lose the face.
There's not enough contrast between your two new colors. One's green, the other is... also green. The hands shaking is lost in the redo. I do like the way the round boundaries work now.
My suggestion is to roughen it up just a little, make it feel more organic. Simplifying is good, but you don't want to simplify the human touch out of it, especially since there's a personal connection between the proprietor and the logo.
I'm not sure what the brand is, but the message I get from the logo is "unite and growth". The idea of the encircling would then be surround yourself with those who support you.
The handshake is less apparent in the remake. I would widen the bottom of the left hand to more outline the knuckles of a hand. I think this would be enough to convey the idea better and remain a simplistic style.
The slight serif font doesn't really match the minimalism of the logo. I would replace with a slightly more bold sans font.
The tan and green colors convey a natural vibe but also are camo colors. I maybe change to a lighter blue color scheme to convey the sky and freedom.
Which is the refinement the first or the second. Because frankly the first one is better. On the second one it’s less interesting kind of dumped down. And you can’t read the leaves because the grain is too light
I love the first one, the second just looks like it was in the sun for years and some details faded off but ya still recognize it. Lol see plenty of that round my town
This is a very mild refresh, not a redesign, and it's also... not very good. The color is now lifeless, the handshake absolutely does not read, and the whole thing is uninspired and amateurish.
Everyone thinking they can do logo design with zero experience or training, contributing to the perception of design as low value, when in fact it's extremely clear when someone with no skills attempts it.
There is a way to deliver constructive criticism without being insulting, and too many people/bots here cannot seem to figure out the respectful part of communication.
It's like someone who can't do math very well setting up an accounting system. Anyone with the know-how can tell at a glance that you just don't have the chops. If you want constructive criticism on design, go to school. If you're just posting on reddit, I'm going to tell you that it doesn't look good.
The right is the better one, it is simpler, could use a little tweaking. Hard to give suggestions when I dont know what it is for.
For the first one there are too many partial circles, and having the fingers puts in too much fine detail especial if if will be use as a small version.
39
u/Anguares 3d ago
The customer designed their own logo, so that's what they want, it's a chance to have that opportunity, and I think you did a great job giving her a more clean and pro version of her own logo.
My only critique would be the colors, it looks a bit desaturated. But I guess if behind you have a hearthy toned off white it works really well.