Nudge logo critique/opinions

carrawaydesign's picture

Hello everyone, I am new member here (as of today) and have been browsing Typophile for some time now. I wanted to step foot into the forums and start getting some feedback and/or critique on some of my projects that I am working on. I am currently a senior Graphic Design student at Auburn University and have been working on personal, freelance, and studio related projects for the past couple of years.

This specific project is a personal project that I am working on under direction by one of my professors. While I can not go into much specifics about it, I can give a general description of the project.

I am currently developing a new method for students to learn/practice how to correctly track/kern, and space typography. With this product, I am encouraging the student to step back from the computer screen and its default metric units, and focus on what is optically(visually) correct using a more "hands-on" approach. The product prototype is finished and I have just established a name for it. I have decided on NUDGE after much research and discussion.

When researching what tracking/kering letterforms is really about, I landed on a few short descriptive words.... "consistent, uniform, gray, rhythmic, alternation of solid and void space". My conceptual vision for the mark was to create a logomark/logotype that was designed around these words. A mark that was very uniform, perfectly spaced, and had a great sense of rhythm and alternation.

I wanted to get some opinions on the spacing, concept and overall appearance of the logomark.

Nick Job's picture

Love the engineering style drawings but a couple of early observations on the logo:

The lack of overshoots make the n look too low and the u too high. The answer may be to round the terminals. Otherwise you will need to cut the straights off higher and lower on the n and u respectively.

I like the thickness of the space between the letters to be (or at least look) the same as the counters but I may be in the minority. Then we are talking fifth down out of the six you have provided (or is it fourth down?)

The reality is that the engineering approach may not be helping you get something that actually looks right.

carrawaydesign's picture

Thanks Nick for your feeedback. I would definitely agree with your observations in regards to the overshoots of the n and u. I of course noticed it while engineering the mark and its grid, but did not know how noticeable it was. I think shortening the straights at the bottom of the n and the top of the u will help or fix this. I will try that out next.

carrawaydesign's picture

Here is a version that has shortened vertical straights of both the n and u letters. I think it definitely helps the overshoot issue.

Nick Job's picture

In my opinion, some overshoots are overplayed by some designers (just like some fonts are overkerned). It depends on the curvature of the curve for one thing. Your curves are quite tight so you might be looking at a little more than the 2.5 - 3% of x-height which seems fairly typical. It's gotta look right. You may not have gone far enough.

apankrat's picture

Just a thought, playing along with geometrical construction approach -

1996type's picture

Wow! I love apankrat's idea, but it might add a bit to much playfulness to it.

Ratbaggy's picture

I actually think it detracts from the playfulness...taking it too far.

Frode Bo Helland's picture

It's nice -- but an engineered logo when your topic is spacing and kerning? Optically balancing white and black is a whole different beast.

Syndicate content Syndicate content