0

I have the following design (in two variations):

enter image description here

It is not final yet. Ultimately I need to show that monsoon brings rain. I will add rain elements around clouds later.

My main doubt is about the clouds used for o and oo, respectively. My goal is to represent clouds without losing much readability. Personally, I really feel clouds are representing the letters well enough.

Is this good in terms of readability and representing clouds? Is there something obvious which I can improve?

  • 1
    I edited the question to focus on one aspect that was also answered. Please do not fundamentally change a critique question after an answer was given. – Wrzlprmft Jul 14 at 14:35
  • Note that the on-topicness of this question is debated in the comments on this answer. – Wrzlprmft Jul 14 at 14:43
  • Your letters are not readable, One must stop to guess. Even less they resemble something rainy. Forget that idea. As well than having clouds in text you can have text in a cloud. That cloud can be rainful. Here's one not so serious example : dropbox.com/s/3rl98au9uyydukz/2Hunt351.jpg?dl=0 – user287001 Jul 15 at 22:11
  • @user287001 this was first step. I've to add rain elements below it. It will look rainy. Secondly, you clearly said Forget that idea. Kindly look at this image.shutterstock.com/z/… How easy is this to understand? – Vikas Jul 16 at 6:01
  • Forget that idea. I have a strong feeling if a good creative mind can still fix it if letters are not visible. I don't think at all the idea of playing with clouds and O is bad. – Vikas Jul 16 at 6:03
5

Inconsistencies kill this for me.

One cloud is "overly" puffy with many "poofs". While the other.... has none. This factor is far too distracting overall. Visual consistency should be considered, in my opinion. Solid or hollow makes no difference. I can't get past this discrepancy.

  • It's easy to accept the first image as a cloud.... but then you see the second which is entirely different, not merely "doubled" for the oo.

  • Okay, so the second image is a cloud... then the first one is a meatball???

Frankly, I just thought of a flipped Adobe's Creative Cloud logo shape where the second cloud is concerned - while a "targeted" visual audience, it's not that small.

cc-flipped

In addition, the stroke weight of the s feels too thick. I realize it's not, but due to the tight curves it gives off that impression.


After edit

All the above still stands in my opinion.. and the rain adds very little other than further distraction.

  • 2
    Questions may be marked as opinion-based because they are too subjective. If one answer could be "I looks good." and another "It doesn't look good." and both are equally valid answers -- then it's all opinion and there's no way to choose a "correct" answer. If you review the critique guidelines, you'll see some examples of questions which are subjective in nature but allow for solid, quantifiable, answers. – Scott Jul 14 at 7:46
  • 1
    Many of your questions are, or at least start, similar to "do you like blue or do you like red?" -- how on Earth is there a "correct' answer to that type of question? :). – Scott Jul 14 at 7:47
  • 2
    @Vikas Not sure why tagging doesn't seem to be working for you. Hard to tell on this question since it's my answer I get notified either way. And if you are seeking a "poll" that is clear indicator that you are seeking merely opinions. "Polls" are very off-topic on stack sites. And that may be specifically why you get close vote for opinion-based questions. – Scott Jul 14 at 8:11
  • 1
    I do not feel the edit is better.. it merely asks for opinions regarding the rain as well now. – Scott Jul 14 at 8:31
  • 2
    In the future, please debate the on-topicness of a question on the question itself so potential close voters can see it. For whatever it’s worth, I think that this answer quite well demonstrates why the question is not opinion-based: You do not just answer with I don’t like it, but you give an elaborate answer illustrating the problems of the design in an objective way. This is as objective as critique questions can possibly get. (CC @Vikas) – Wrzlprmft Jul 14 at 14:41
2

In addition to what Scott noted about your clouds not matching, I think you are facing the following dilemma: A cloud shape that can be recognised as such has to have a certain complexity, while still being all round and geometric. By contrast, typefaces that are mostly round and geometric are almost inevitably not complex. So either your clouds stand out as too complex or your typeface does not match your clouds. To avoid this dilemma as far as possible, your clouds need to be as simple as possible.

Also, regarding readability, the main thing that makes letters distinct is some vertical element. Your oo cloud is lacking this.

Here is a quick attempt of mine to address this:

solution sketch

I used three circles instead of the minimal two for the cloud since the resulting shape is closer to a rotational symmetry and thus an o. Also, this allows for a clear separation in the oo cloud. Note how the top part of all letters has exactly the shapes as the regular word monsoon:

enter image description here

  • But no body will accept them as clouds. – Vikas Jul 14 at 16:09
  • 1
    @Vikas: I wouldn’t be so sure about this, in particular if you add rain. It also depends on how important it is that the clouds are identified as such. That being said, I don’t claim that my sketch solves all your problems, it just shows a direction for you to explore. – Wrzlprmft Jul 14 at 16:32
1

I think choosing a design that provides a perfect depiction can be a bit of a drag. I've taking a close look at this design and I believe the solid cloud provides a more accurate representation of "soon" in "monsoon". However, you might wanna consider adding the rain drops beneath the "oo". The overall design is pretty simple and minimal which is a good thing in my opinion.

I am still new to Logo Design so perhaps a second opinion will go a long way in reassuring you.

1

For me the inconsistency in cloud-forms is quite jarring - but far worse is the conceptual inconsistency - in the case of the O, one multiply-complex-curved agglomarative cloud represents a single, simple-formed rounded letter, whereas in the double O following, a single, far formally simpler cloud is representing two of that same letter>

That's far before the specifics of the chosen æsthetics - this is top-level-graphic-concept whoops territory - and for me, though I like the second cloud form well enough (I do work in a tech environment and so have had to reconcile myself to that particular hackneyed "cloud" iconography) and don't prefer the fussiness and busyness of that first cloud (which just doesn't say "proxy for an 'o' to me) I never even really get to those considerations - I'm blown off-course out of the gate by the conceptual mis-match.

Hope that helps.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.