Logo for Intelligent Remove

smylek's picture


I am working on my first serious project. This is the logo proposal for the antipiracy company iTR - Intelligent Remove. Their target group are companies like Adobe, Microsoft or Song Music.


What do you guys think?

JuliusFernie's picture

Nice work smylek; great logo mark.

Not sure about the lowercase 'i's tho, makes the type hard to read. And I think you could use a little more black space on the left hand side of the block to balance it a bit.

liking it

eliason's picture

The (meaningless) T in the counterspace is more prominent than the (meaningful) i.

apankrat's picture

Yeah, I also read ITR or I see a kind of industry marker for Infrared-capable devices. IR is Infrared, especially if it is in a form of an emblem.

smylek's picture

it should be ITR so you read correctly

eliason's picture

In that case the logo matches the intention, but the viewer is left wandering where the T comes from. Is it the first T in "intelligent"? Should the treatment of the words single out the T somehow too, if that's part of the identity?

(Also, the logo needs to be moved right if it is intended to be optically centered in the box. Or the left placement should be more emphatic if it's not.)

jonathanhughes's picture

I'm curious -- why is the logo ITR is the company is named Intelligent Remove?

apankrat's picture

I'm guessing because T was removed.

Alaskan's picture

The name itself makes little sense. It sounds as if it was translated poorly. 'Remove' is a verb, and it can't be modified by an adjective (intelligent.) The parts of speech just don't fit; and this flagrant ignorance instantly reduces trust in the brand.

To make sense in English, it needs to be "Intelligently Remove" (adverb, verb) or "Intelligent Removal" (adjective, noun.)

If this was my client, this would be the first conversation I'd have with them before any logo development. Chances are, this company will eventually be forced to undergo a name change; better sooner than later.

Oh, and I'm sure they'll have "reasons" for twisting English, but no reason is a valid argument for choosing to introduce oneself so poorly.

apankrat's picture

Alaskan, the name is OK. It's an established computer lingo. "Fast copy", "quick format" (referring to the action of format-ing), "one-click paste", etc.

Alaskan's picture

"Copy" and "format" are both nouns, therefore make sense even to those who don't get the jargon. "Remove" isn't a noun. I know you're saying that it's IT jargon (and I did know that) but the whole reason for creating a logo and a name is to reach the most number of clients. Using jargon isn't a good way to do that.

I used to work in a university library managing a three-floor computer lab. I can only imagine the nightmare meeting I'd have trying to convince the board of directors that we needed to buy a product from "Intelligent Remove" aka "iTR."

I stand by my opinion that the bad English in the name immediately reduces trust in the brand. Not all the people writing checks understand IT jargon.

apankrat's picture

"Quick format" with "format" being noun does not make any technical sense, I assume you know that. I don't think that twisting the name into correct English only to loose all technical sense is a good idea. If I am looking at three IT products - "Intelligent Removal", "Intelligently Remove" or "Intelligent Remove" - and I am choosing strictly based on name, third is the only choice. I am saying this as a professional software developer and former sysadmin, which is as IT as it gets. It is an OK brand as it is along the lines of what an average IT person expects from the product name.

Having said that I agree that overall this is not a great name for the product, and it can be improved. But not because it is not grammatically correct, but because it is based on a jargon.

Alaskan's picture

Sorry, but "quick format" makes perfect sense if the format is a time frame. It's a noun, so it can ALWAYS be modified by an adjective. If you pick an absurd adjective/noun combination, like "smelly noise," it doesn't make it grammatically incorrect; it just makes it absurd. Or, perhaps, it proves you have a mental illness or a brain tumor.

tmac's picture

The bounding box for the logo mark has far less black on the left than on the right (because of the straight I and cruving R). It's not optically balanced. Plus it feels a little tight in there. As well, the corners of the bounding box seem default. I don't know why those curves are so fast, or even why they are curved at all. I think there is a better logo for the name -- it's kind of fascinating that these types of word combinations actually refer to something.

apankrat's picture

@alaskan - The "quick format" refers to the process of quickly formatting the disk, i.e. placing special markers on the disk that make it suitable for writing/reading files to/from it. I am not sure what you mean by "a time frame".

Alaskan's picture

No kidding. Are you being intentionally obtuse?

The word itself can be used as a noun. This is a simple, boring fact.

Grammatically, "format" can be defined by any adjective - including "quick." You were arguing that it made no sense to say "quick format" and I replied by pointing out that it can make perfect sense, and therefore, it would not create a grammatically incorrect phrase like "intelligent remove" that would most likely raise eyebrows of non-nerds. The format, in the case of "quick format" is a noun. The "format" is a process made up of steps, and it's quick.

But you know what? Neither of us have a dog in this fight. This argument is a total waste of time. I'm out.


tmac's picture

Quick format means a shorter amount of time formatting a disk, no?

Now talk about the logo.

CGI's picture

On purely aesthetic grounds, I agree with the nudging proposal mentioned above
( more than just visually centering the mark inside the containing box, it may be good to allow the eye to 'fill in' the left part of that 'T' ).

You may also want to align the top of the line of type to the top of 'ITR' ( and probably do the same with the bottom, by moving the second line up, so that the bottom is again aligned ). Then perhaps leave as much 'apparent' negative space between the left edge of the type and the right edge of the containing box as there is space between the right edge of the ITR mark and that same right edge of the box.

All of this should tighten things up nicely enough, and, along with making the second 'i' in 'intelligent' uppercase, produce an acceptable proposal. But I would then propose you then put this design aside as a backup option and start fresh. Not to disparage your solution - but hey, it was your gut that's been bugging you about this logo : )

A company name that includes the words 'intelligent' and 'remove' is too exciting a challenge to address by using illustrator's pre-made rounded rectangle, for one. I do like the idea of using negative space to suggest removal, but the idea needs to sell itself and not have any confusing T's in it. ( BTW, if your client is insisting to acronym the company ITR, tell them I said they're idiots. )

But I digress—Try looking at the iconography of removed or absent content ( in websites, corrupted software - or even the physical world ) Speaking of, perhaps incorporating the iconography of security or safeguarding is another avenue. Don't want to say more here.. Good luck, and don't give up. Hope this was helpful and/or timely..

Martin Silvertant's picture

I would leave as much space at the sides of ITR as the line weight of the T. Furthermore, the ITR part looks good to me. I have my doubts behind the name and I have no idea where the T comes from, but that has to do with conceptualization, which is not what you're asking feedback on as the project name is already fixed.

As for "Intelligent Remove", it might sound harsh but I would scrap this typeface all together. The i's are a major issue in my opinion, but besides that I really don't think this typeface works. It looks quite cheap somehow. I would probably try Din, Futura and Neutraface.

Syndicate content Syndicate content