These are a bit hard to read.
The second avails this slightly with the url type but this further sublimates the calligraphic type into more of a symbol than text. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but if it's your aim, then I might suggest making the url type a bit more prominent.
If your goal was to hearken back to tradition with the calligraphic font (like the New York Times logo, etc) then it falls a bit short. As David pointed out, it appears a bit Germanic and even contemporary (for a font in this family). I've seen this type used in various "urban" (I shudder at the word) centric design, utilizing other elements such as graffiti (hence the association in my mind with the contemporary).
The color is a bit muted and monochromatic. Again, not necessarily a bad thing... but consider its usage. Should it draw attention to itself? The answer is likely yes and if so, I'd experiment with complimentary color schemes here.
A note on the "reflection" effect. Watch out for this to appear dated sooner than you'd think. This is merely an opinion on my part but I expect we'll eventually associate this with the "new boom" or "web 2.0" as it's certainly cropping up in a lot of logos these days. I happen to like the aesthetic but that's irrelevant. :-)
Something key in logo design is its "portability." It's always good (on or offline) to design logos with print in mind. Can it be degraded to a two color scheme? A one color scheme? and still hold up? This is a goal and not a requirement but you never know how your work will need to transfer.
If you decide to make adjustments, post the results, I'd like to see them. Thanks for sharing!
|
Linear Mode
