New to Typophile? Accounts are free, and easy to set up.
I'm currently building my portfolio up to apply at some art and design schools so I decided to create an identity for a fictional museum of art based in Mexico. I am now debating on the logo and have created several versions:
1. http://droplr.com/43FfS+
2. http://droplr.com/4yB6u+
And I have now pretty much started over and come up with this (also attached):
3. http://droplr.com/8nkb4+
4. http://droplr.com/8nZ4Q+

The "brief" for this project is to create an identity that would be a re-birth of a dying organization. It fails to attract the younger, sophisticated visitors it needs to remain open and fund services for the public. It needs to change its damaged image (no existing or marketed identity) and represent itself as something clean, modern and luxurious without losing its historical significance.
I would greatly appreciate any honest critique. Thank you!
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Centro de Arte 4.png | 19.63 KB |
30 Dec 2009 — 9:26pm
What if a large bold "C" is the circle and the "a" is its center?
hhp
31 Dec 2009 — 12:43am
Something like this?
31 Dec 2009 — 7:32am
Or even make the "a" white (negative) inside the black (positive) body of the "c". The bottom bowl of the "a" might need to be black.
hhp
1 Jan 2010 — 8:47pm
That's an interesting idea but I'm not sure it works too well for smaller sizes. I took a look back and tried Archer:
What's your feedback on the type choices for conveying a modern approach to historical art?
2 Jan 2010 — 2:27am
This last iteration is the weakest of the three, in my opinion.
The second one is the one that better conveys "modern approach".
4 Jan 2010 — 12:37pm
I agree with riccard. That mark would also be fun for a business that involves ears because it kind of looks like one, imo.
5 Jan 2010 — 3:07am
Centro de Arte
@ - seriously it's almost too good to be true. sure it all comes down to the implementation and treatment, but it's an immediate.
@rte
...presuming it translates
exhibition @
----------
Paul
13 Jan 2010 — 1:37pm
Is there a reason that the 'a' has remained the same in each of these versions? It only really works for the first version. I think the newer posts could benefit from a more congruent 'a'.
———
penn