Personal Logo

Leonel's picture

I'm a recent graphic design graduate, and I've been working on a personal logo for sometime now. I must of changed it at least 100 times, but I think I'm finally getting somewhere. I like how its looking as of now, but I wanted to see what you guys thought.

what do you all think?

Picture 11.png16.61 KB
Queneau's picture

First thoughts: I really like it, especially the face! The type is tasteful as well.
You could easily use it like this, but if you would ask me how you could improve it I would look at the following: It's a bit too perfect and neat now, the logo is all boxed up and the type is centered under it. I think it would do the face more justice if you tried to find a more exciting combination with the type and the colours. It could be a bank logo now, make it a bit more into a designer logo (whatever that may be), experiment a bit more, do some weird stuff. So I think the elements are all good, but play around a bit more and don't go for the classical solution neccesarily. And try to find a typeface that is a match for your lion logo ;)

Keep us posted!

greetings Jeffrey

nina's picture

This is great! I actually really like the restraint in it – I think it can makes the "huh?" effect (once one discovers the ambiguity of the face) more powerful than if everything was "playful". And the "designer" aspect, hey, it's in the glasses ;-)

That said, it does look subdued, even potentially depressed, especially with the lowish-contrast blue color scheme. But I know lions don't smile. :-) Maybe try a *slightly* stronger contrast?

Oh, and I'd try removing the sideways (left/right) boundaries of the nose.

Ratbaggy's picture

I'm digging it too!

Really nice work. Agree about the less 'classical' approach.

Design Studio Melbourne

Queneau's picture


You are right about the restraint being a good thing. A little bit more danger and frivolity won't hurt though, even if it's restrained, it's still a lion! :)

I'm thinking along the lines of JAWS; Nothing seems wrong yet, but you know someone's gonna get eaten...

greetings Jeffrey

peter_b's picture

I think I agree with Queneau, it's perhaps a little too perfect, or neat.

If I were you, I'd try a version where the face doesn't sit in a box. And maybe make your illustration a little more natural, so that perhaps the face isn't perfectly symmetrical or the lines aren't so straight, if that makes sense.

But I do think this has promise and could be a strong approach to a personal identity.

nina's picture

But do any of you know Leonel's work? I don't, but maybe his style is generally rather restrained, clean, and cool, in which case this would be a perfect fit.
I think the "voice" in which his logo should speak really needs to be his decision.

Queneau's picture

Another good point, Nina

I'm just looking at it from my perspective of course. So I can only say what I would do. In the end it's up to Leonel to find the logo that is fitting his work the best.

greetings Jeffrey

Leonel's picture

Thank you for the comments guys! It's really refreshing to hear different points of view. This is the color scheme I plan on using for my identity, but I'm not sure which to use for the actual logo yet, or if it could be interchangeable depending on the medium. As far as the type goes, I agree that I should experiment with the placement, and I'm not to sure about the weight either. I do like the typeface itself though.

@ Peter_vii, I tried having the lion face without the box, but it creates a sort of "reversed" look (preview bellow). The way it is illustrated, I feel it needs to be housed in something darker then itself.

@ Nina, thank you for bringing that up. I do believe my style is clean and rather restrained compared to most. I should have mentioned that earlier, because I do want the logo to be a reflection of my work.

nina's picture

Wow, that must be the calmest lion I've ever met. :-)

What's the font you're using? Looks like a rougher sibling to Gotham. It's curious that the "O"s don't appear to have any overshoot… Especially in the heavier weights that seems unexpectedly quirky, and potentially distracting. And the lower bowl of the "B" might also need some work.
In terms of font weight, I wouldn't go *too* light – that *is* a lion after all, not a nightingale. ;-)

scannerlicker's picture

Doesn't the square make it too stable?

Alaskan's picture

After you work out all the kinks that altaira mentions, I'd like to see the name stacked under (or next to) the mark. The two names look about the same length and they might form a nice rectangle that relates better to the square of the lion.

The top two lions are the best colors, IMO, but frankly they're all nice. The weight of the middle typeface (3rd) feels about right.

covertjapan's picture

Im against making designer logos in the first place. as a rule of thumb you will hate it the second you finish it no matter what it is (because you are a designer). that said, i think the lion needs a little more stylistic umpff. Pretty good but a little too boring, maybe a bit more abstract, and it would be nice to see some of the shapes get a bit more organic to contrast with the geometric. but, good job generally speaking.

mcarignan's picture

Re: Keep or lose the box...

Keep the box. It provides the mane of the lion. Makes it read clearer as a lion.

Re: Alaskan

I agree. The type should appear either under the logo or to the right of the logo. There should be some relationship between the width or height of type to the logo. If the type is placed underneath, then justify the type to the width of the logo. If the type is placed to the right, justify the size of logo between the the baseline and cap-height of the type. Of course this will give more prominence to the logo to the type. Say either your mark is more important or your name is.

Another thought regarding typography selection. If stay with a geometric font I would justify the size as described above. However, if you are looking for contrast, you might go with a script or some other "less blocky" font to contrast with the logo's blockiness. However, that depends on the personal aesthetic you are trying to convey to a would-be client or employer. Are you projecting: "I am good at maintaining continuity and relationships in my design." or, "I am good at conveying tension, conversation, or counterpoints, in my design." I am echoing "altaira", above.

Either way, the logo is aesthetically pleasing and feels like a mark.


Ratbaggy's picture

I vote for circle

Design Studio Melbourne

pablocheco's picture

I was wondering.
The Lion is for Lionel of course, but what about the bull for Toribio (Toribio comes from spanish word "toro" = bull)... just wondering... keep the great work!!!

dirtcastle's picture

Technically, it is well executed.

But something about it just doesn't feel right. It's creepy.

Chris Dean's picture

I might have missed it somewhere in the thread but…

1. What type of work do you do?
2. Who are your clients (current/future)?
3. What are your goals?

Without a clear definition of context we're simply taking aesthetic shots across the bow until someone gets lucky. Clear definition of context lets you base decisions on fitness for purpose. As this removes guesswork, it is often significantly more efficient and provides you (and your clients) a greater return on investment. However, I'm a hardcore functionalist.

Regarding the type, I think the type face is fine, but it could use some kerning. Additionally, typographic convention considers letter-spacing (tracking) capital letters to be more "sophisticated." Additionally, it is believed that it assists in individual character recognition but I have yet to read a study that supports this claim (thesis topic).

Chris Dean's picture

Additional tips on a purely syntactic level:

1. Do a black and white version. Do this for black on white and white on black. This will raise the "should I put a box around it?" issue. If you don't go with a "box" for dropouts, then you'll need to think consistent safezone.

2. Do the same for greyscale. When you reduce your colour palette to greyscale it will surface colours with different hues but similar saturation and brightness.

3. Reduce the size of your icon to 32 x 32 pixels to see how it fairs as an icon.

4. What's the smallest size possible it will ever appear? Screen and print. Chances are the type won't be any smaller than eight points. Is the icon still legible at this size?

Syndicate content Syndicate content