Feedback please!

omfaonline's picture

Hello there,
The company works in the field of facilities management, which is defined as:

"a profession that encompasses multiple disciplines to ensure functionality of the built environment by integrating people, place, processes and technology."

and

"(the) integration of processes within an organisation to maintain and develop the agreed services which support and improve the effectiveness of its primary activities."

Please check out the link and let me what you think of the logo, font choice, and colors (gradients vs. flat):

Logo table

omfaonline's picture

wow.. this forum isn't what it used to be, that's for sure..

hrant's picture

You're right. :-/

I think part of the "problem" is things like Twitter: people get their fix in more private circles.

hhp

omfaonline's picture

it's sad really.. although I am not an old member or anything, I do remember a time when it was bustling around here..
so, what is your feedback on my project? :)

hrant's picture

Well, I'm not really a graphic designer (I just make fonts) so I was just keeping quiet, hoping from input from the pros (which I think you'll probably get, eventually). But I do enjoy giving my opinion :-) so here it goes:

I think it's very nice. It's simple without being boring, and the shapes seem to nicely fit what the company does. Of those four fonts (all of which make sense actually) I like NeoSans the most and Bourgeois the least.

Colors: I don't do colors. :-)

hhp

timaarts's picture

Could you try a lighter weight Klavika? And maybe give it some more space to breath (line height).

I like the mark although I think you can tweak the flag a bit more to make it even better.

In general: don't make gradients an essential part of your brand. I don't really like the colors. The blue one I like the most. Maybe a yellow?

omfaonline's picture

Check this and this.

- You're right, gradients shouldn't be an essential part of the brand (I think the one-color version of the logo works without a gradient though, no?).
I like the blue version too because it works well on light/dark backgrounds (I feel yellow looks less elegant on light backgrounds).

- I tried the lighter weight Klavika and it doesn't look bad. The way I see it, Trade Gothic and DIN was too dry with no personality, Bourgeois seems fitting and has personality but there is something unsettling about it (it gives a "1984 Big Brother" type of vibe), Benton Sans has more personality than the usual generic corporate fonts, but it feels too "deja-vu", and Klavika sends a subtle "Facebook vibe" that says “hello I’m here!” a little too loud. Moreover, I feel that square sans-serifs in the vein of Klavika are very commonplace in the corporate arena. Neo Sans feels futuristic and clean without being too angular, and its curves contrast with the 90 degree angles in the logo directly above it, hopefully creating a nice tension:

- Do you have any tips on how I can further tweak the flag?

hrant's picture

Benton Sans isn't working there at all - it looks decades too old.

BTW, an optical illusion you'll have have to compensate for: for the vertical lines of the "M" to appear as thick are the horizontal lines of the "F", they can't be mathematically equal, they have to be thicker.

hhp

omfaonline's picture

You're perfectly right, thanks hrant.

Panda's picture

I like the fact that it looks like a logo made out of Op Art.

eliason's picture

For what it's worth, I would never get EFM out of that logo. It looks like FIII to me.

omfaonline's picture

@Panda
I'll take that as a compliment :)

aluminum's picture

Yea, I don't see 'EFM' either. I see FIII with a flag. I don't know if that's an issue or not.

It's a nice geometric logo. The flat versions have a bit of an 80's vibe to it, but that's not necessarily bad. It's solid. And the gradient versions are a nice use of a gradient.

litera's picture

I would just like to say this: NeoSans.

Syndicate content Syndicate content