Logo for a client - Liquid inspired

breakandassemble's picture

Hi all, designing a logo from a drawing I made,
I need to make the type more legible for the client,
any advice is welcome! The company name is liquid violet.
They are a young

The below was sent to the client as explanation:

'The logo here is typographic. A bespoke
typeface has been created for Liquid Violet
which draws on liquid forms taken from the
name. This logo represents a more modern
approach. Please note the typeface can be
made more legible if desired and the word
‘liquid violet’ can be placed within the
logo-mark.'

Liquid seems to be more legible than violet right now?

Thanks all.

breakandassemble's picture

Apologies for the sizing! hopefully you can get the jist!

litera's picture

It's very interesting, but has severe legibility problems. And I'm also not sure about these thin outlines. This will make it problematic on some applications.

Tristan Bowersox's picture

It's a fun wordmark! I find the geometric version to be a bit harder to read, especially the _t_.

breakandassemble's picture

I quite like the geometric interpretation of the drawing however do you think it may need to revert back to hand some 'kinder' edges like the drawing? I will get that line thicker - what do you see as being the 'problem characters' with legibility?

Tristan Bowersox's picture

Well keep in mind that this is coming from someone who still can't read or write cursive, but... I guess if I had to narrow it down, aside from the /t/ there's the /d/ and /ol/ that might be hard to differentiate. The /u/ and /v/ actually differentiate surprisingly well, but of course I already know what it says. The amount of delay for someone to read it is probably very small, however. It's just that, as a logo, I feel it should be quickly legible (though there seems to be a trend away from legibility in logos).

There are a couple things that are kind of weird in the design of it—the narrowness of the /d/ and the space in /le/...or maybe it's the width of /e/. That /t/ might actually work if the circle were lowered a bit.

The thing is, I understand all your decisions, they all seem reasonable, and it looks really good overall, so I hesitate to critique it too harshly.

On the subject of small sizes and line thickness, you could produce a non-outlined version for small applications.

breakandassemble's picture

Legibility has to be top unfortunately, so gone with a frankfurter cut...all advice welcome again to get this right. Thanks.

Still playing around with shapes and overprinting at the moment, ideas are there though...

Justin_Ch's picture

I like the outlined version. Without the outline it does look a bit like "vialet" because the o connects to the l in the conventional place for a script a. You might need to have some subtle differences between the outlined and non-outlined one because I also think you need to do something to open the bottom of e a bit.

litera's picture

Now these are much better. I like the outlined as well, although I would make the descender of /q/ to go from the circle and not behind... The same thing with /d/.

hikster's picture

wow, creatively done and apt for the topic :)

litera's picture

P.S. Not to mention that you have a problem with /e/. But I'm sure you'll come up with a better solution.

breakandassemble's picture

Thanks for comments - I tried the 'flow' of q and d as litera suggested.

Also applied a bit of colour and a logo mark (as requested by client). Ithink it looks nicer without the mark. Almost impossible to get a generic mark for the company. Tried referencing droplets.

Think im scraping the filled in approach. Any thoughts please?

Frode Bo Helland's picture

Maybe try a top join (with a loop for l) between o and l?

Tristan Bowersox's picture

I'm sad to see the much more unique wordmark go, but this is definitely clearer. Except that in the solid version, the /o/ does look like an /a/. Why not cut into the letters where the lines in the other version are necessary for readability? Kind of like VAL does on a lot of characters because it's so fat.

Disconnecting the /t/ does make the /e/ clearer, but it seems, well, disconnected. Especially since the negative space there is larger than between the two words.

As for the mark, could you make it more like a stylized violet (viola odorata)? I don't know if that would be appropriate (I don't even know what the company is besides "a young") but given the vague connotations of stylized flowers, I doubt it would be inappropriate.

breakandassemble's picture

I agree. It is disappointing to change it. But its a must for legibility, still using the same style/idea.

The company is a sound production company, i forgot to complete explanation above.
They record dialogue for gaming companies. They are a young group coming to work together from other companies.
There are 3 of them (hence the liquid violet 3 pronged mark).

I like the comments of joining O and L on top, i'll take that on.

Randy's picture

An interesting concept, but is too literal in its geometry. This happens all the time with this kind of lettering: lines on a grid in illustrator plus a fat round stroke. In order to work well, they require all manner of subtle trickery to keep from clogging. Specifically, the horizontal strokes should be thinner than the vertical, and you need to thin out the joints. Lastly the spacing needs work. Notice the counter space and width of the round letters is much larger than the counter and space between ui etc. Try and harmonize these a bit better.

I've attached two typefaces I've designed that may help you attack the problem of Heavy+Geometric. It's a tricky beast. Good luck!

breakandassemble's picture

I thought I would upload final designs. If anyones interested we produced all stationery too, being printed with two colour spot gradient and a third spot - can upload these on request.

AlexanderKatt's picture

My comment is probably too late, but you can make it more legible if you use the contour lines to separate the individual characters. For example, the end of "t" is cut, so are the tho "i"-s in "liquid". Also, there is no separation between "l" and "i"..

Syndicate content Syndicate content