1

have a look at www.uglyapp.com for my latest creation(under construction).

Home page (large version link)

[1]

Round logo

Round logo

Rectangular logo (large version link)

Rectangular logo

I am happy with the overall 'look and feel' colour scheme and have done a lot of work on getting the site to work on all platforms. I wanted the logo to be 'not scary' but 'humorous' and the colours to follow through the site.

The eyes were available on the web so I used them as the starting point of the logo. I replicated the gradient onto the teeth and picked a green for the 'app.com'.

The reason for the 2 logos is I wanted to produce one (rectangular ) for the main one then an alternative (circular) I could then use as an icon within a mobile environment. But I think the site needs some 'green' on the right hand side.

So to the question.

Does the logo work from an aesthetic point of view.

I welcome any criticisms - hints - ideas that might improve the site / logos .

Hope this edit complies with the terms for critique.

  • 1
    re-opened after edit but please take all discussions to chat. – Mᴏɴᴋᴇʏ Jul 7 '14 at 16:33
  • I like: the teeth on the "U" and the arrangement of the letters "gly." The eyes almost work, they just need a minor adjustment to look more "natural." The teeth wrap around the "U" nicely, I wish the eyes did something similar to be more part of the "U." I dislike: the simplicity and awkwardness of the letters "app.com," the simplicity and light-to-dark range of your gradients, and the simplistic dark green background of the page. You can do a lot more with your gradients to make the design more interesting. – user13497 Jul 8 '14 at 7:14
2

For the logo at least:

Some of the logo has gradient effects and some doesn't, eyeballs and teeth do, but the rest doesn't... this doesn't make the logo look cohesive.

Next, parts have drop shadows, others don't ('Ugly' does, 'app.com' doesn't), and the drop shadows are different colors... again doesn't look cohesive.

I would make the whole thing 'shiny' ie. with gradient effects, or flat (without gradients). Use a similar colored, angled, opacity and sized drop-shadow effect or none at all.

I also think the stroke on the lettering doesn't serve any purpose and therefore is not needed.

2

Does the logo work from an aesthetic point of view.

It's...kinda ugly...which...yea, I suppose it does work. And I don't mean that in an insulting way. If the intent was to make a rather haphazard logo to go off of the 'ugly' aspect, I think it works.

If that wasn't the goal, then I'd suggest rethinking the layout a bit. It's hard to read at first glance. The decorations on the U tend to hide the fact that it's suppose to be a U. You then have 'gly' stacked, with 'app.com' horizontally underneath. As such, the eye has to go in all sorts of directions to piece the name of the product together, which isn't all that intuitive.

To remedy that, I'd suggest reducing the size of the U-face a bit so you can have 'U gly' horizontal above the 'app.com'. That might tie things together a bit better.

(Note that it's hard to fully critique a logo without understanding the purpose and intent of the product it's being used for. If you can offer more background on the product, namely its functionality, business objectives, target audience, etc, that can help considerably in formulating a critique. )

  • Hi @DA01 thanks for the input. The uglyapp website is our web site to show what we do. Which is baically web site - apps 3D & 2D animation & presentations. The ugly app idea is to offer a 'friendly' front end and a play on the fact that although the site is called ugly app our site are beautiful. So hopefully the brand will be remembered ....... – user3193843 Jul 14 '14 at 9:49

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.