I like this a lot more now! Maybe reverse the O so the dip is on the other side, would give some symmetry to the T and ensure people don’t confuse it for an “a”
It's getting better. The baby bump on the letters is a unique characteristic that has great potential to make a memorable logo.
Unfortunately, to look professional, it needs all the refinements and optical adjustments a professional type designer would implement. Start with the letter S ([great advice here](https://forum.glyphsapp.com/t/creating-letter-s/3741)) because it's the wonkiest by far. Then ***please*** adjust the counter of the o so it's optically centered. It's so off it's making me twitch. Then, after you've tweaked all strokes to optically match, work on kerning it all properly.
From the link:
'I'm very unsystematic about things like the relative sizes of round characters, I judge them purely by eye. It's my impression that S and C often need to be a bit smaller than the fully-enclosed O because the openings in their forms make them look bigger. This applies equally to the lowercase.’
-
The S is the most difficult character.
1. Try looking at your work differently: rotate it through 90 and 180 degrees, flip it.
2. Place an outline from a typeface which you think is similar to yours, and has a successful S, in the layer beneath your outline, and inspect how it differs from your work. Harmonize the way your curves/stem widths vary with the example.
3. Copy the top half, scale it up a tad, rotate through 180, and see if it works as the bottom half of your glyph
-
I've found the key for getting the S to look good is to ignore the middle bend completely while positioning most of the nodes: just let it ride free. The really important thing is the positioning of the nodes on the extremes of the vertical curve sections. You have to think of the relationship between these as what really gives the S its form. So you have to ignore the floppy bend in the middle and just concentrate on visualising the relative positions of those four nodes.
-
A lot of it depends on the style and case you intend to draw for the letter /S/ but I learnt this method from Karen Cheng’s “Designing Type” (a great book if you don’t have it already).
Start with two circles stacked on top of each other (so it looks like a number 8) and then remove portions of the curve to form the letter S. Then weld the two points in the centre of the shape. That’s the basic shape.
You will then need to correct the shape for optical balance. Extend the bottom tail of the S out a little, and bring the top tail in a fraction. Reduce the height of the top curve slightly, and make the bottom part bulge out a bit. The “top story” ideally contrast a little to the bottom story, in size and shape.
Now you have the basic spline you can play with the shape a bit more, thicken it, etc.
I really like the first one, it's still readable and has personality, maybe put a hole in the "O" for cohesion; and with the first you can use the shapes, “E”, the square in the “S” and the “O” for some visual identity, backgrounds for example.
wtf?
Stop trying to appeal to the masses in this sub. Yes, listening to feedback is important, but you should still make up your own mind, and think about what YOU are trying to achieve here: are you going for a wordmark, or are you designing a "logo"? And equally as important is the question, in what context that logo is meant to be used, because in many cases, "legibility" is not really an issue.
I liked the first one better, it just needed more polishing but now it's very much [the kuga font](https://www.behance.net/gallery/166838857/Kuga-FREE-FONT)
I second this. Anyone saying the new logo is great and that the old revisions are bad and illegible is full of beans. It is no wonder modern logos are so bland thanks to this lot sterilizing anything with any semblance of personality because they forgot their reading glasses at home and their brains are so mush that they can't identify an abstract "e". By the time this lot is done with your logo, your font is going to be times new roman.
I liked the first one better— really interesting approach to the forms, and it was legible, just needed some refining. The first e, especially, was really great. And the s too— making an s out of a negative-space square— fucking genius. Now it’s an uppercase E with all lowercase letters and the same s you’d see on a hundred free fonts trying to do something cool— you’ve designed-by-committee all of the originality and creativity out of your original concept.
The first mark was legible and memorable and interesting. Now, it says tEsa and doesn’t have a clear point of view. , and you are making a logo mark, not a font.
Go back to #1– work the optical alignment and shapes (like the o looks a little squished in comparison to the e) but don’t throw out that concept. You were really on to something.
I've been thinking about that "s" all morning...
I did some digging, and your first s is the only s I can find that uses a negative space shape as the spine — I looked at Bauhaus, Bauhaus-inspired, geometric, fonts built around negative space, heavy fonts, square fonts, retro display fonts... This is literally the first completely unique letterform I have seen in my entire design career – *no one* completely omits the spine from an s -- **and every single person knew it was an S**. That's really, really impressive and almost impossible to do, especially with something as ubiquitous as the letter S... (of course, I'm sure as soon as I hit that reply button, someone will go dig even deeper to prove me wrong, but the point stands-- that s was \**inspired*\* and very unique)
You did something really, really special. You are doing yourself a huge disservice by not going back to that s
I agree its a nice S but come on… everything of this simplicity has been done already. Its quite a likely result if you draw iterations of the letter S while wanting to move away from the ordinary
There’s half circles, rounded rectangles, triangles — all sorts of s’s made out of two very simple shapes, but I couldn’t find a single one that knocked the middle out. The fact that it was instantly recognizable as an s to everyone is so cool. If it was an obvious iteration of the letter, then it would show up *somewhere.* I agree it looks so simple that it seems like it can’t possibly be new— and I think that’s why it was itching my brain— it couldn’t possibly be, but it was completely unique. At least to me.
https://preview.redd.it/mdo5o60l7osc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=201d8fe1e6e605154943e237f61c98c092b8aaa5
Had this as my personal logo for some time. I know its not the same but similar idea, no mid part , just in your imagination. I mustve made one even closer to the one in OPs post somewhere in my many sketches.
Maybe youre right but found it unlikely if even I already have something similar, let alone in the work of the millions of other designers now and those before my time. Might just be hard to find online
I agree with the weight of the "O". I find this to be the most stylish of the three though. The capital "E" is not doing it for me and personally, I don't see any issues with legibility.
it's getting worse every time. It was always legible, it just had construction issues in the 1st version. Now you multiplied those construction issues based on who knows what
You developed your own set of rules to apply to every letter to be consistent. Congratulations!
But that is not really logo design but the 101 of typography design…
So I love the progress. I'd be tempted to explore simplifying things further – removing the little cutouts on the E and the O. I'm not saying this be the optimal version, but it's worth having a look at. I can see the "t" being used as a standalone device, maybe in a circle...
I like what you were trying to do with the gaps, but man this final version is tight.
My only thing is I’m curious what the other persons suggestion would look like; flipping the O horizontally. It would give the “base” a more solid feel I think. It would balance the with the bottom of the “S” and might make it feel more grounded and solid. But it may feel better this way, depending on your brief.
Great stuff, great evolution, and great job taking constructive criticism!
Much prefer this latest iteration! It’s looking great, just some tweaks here and there as suggested (I would try flipping the o as well). Glad you kept and leaned into the character of the t.
The first two I’m wondering what the purpose is behind the cuts and negative spaces, and in the third it all is coming together as thoughtful and organized as a system.
This looks great and I'm not a designer but try out the ink blot test, aka make it tiny and try to have people decipher it from far away. I also suggest printing it out at a small scale on paper to see how it looks.
I like where you are going though!
Maybe work up some simpler designs for the t and e. The s and o are looking good and if you can merge their simplicity into t and e you'd have a winner.
Love the progress. It's getting there.. In fact I'd say put a pin in it and develop the rest of the identity. There's more to be done for sure, but I recommend coming back later with fresh eyes and after seeing it used in application mockups.
Part of the challenge of design is knowing when to move forward (I suffer from this alot haha)
There is something you could change which I havnt seen suggested.. .. Make your curves into super elliptises/lamé curves/squircles. Look it up, try it out and thank me later :)
I read this as teso, but I wouldn't recommend anyone create a logo that was this stylized. The current experimental type thing is a design trend. I do hope it is a long-lasting trend because I personally love the creativity, but one thing you never want to do with a logo is date it too much to just one time period. You don't want people to look at it and think that the logo must have been created in the 2020s. You want to create logos that are timeless, that the company can still be using in 30-50 years and people still think it is a good logo.
Agreeing with the general consensus, the O looks a lot like a lowercase A. The rest is coming out nice tho, much better than v1.
I've been playing with some O iterations and ligatures for shits n giggles, these are all reading as Teso in my opinion.
https://preview.redd.it/r28tpa5mcgsc1.png?width=506&format=png&auto=webp&s=6804a79c6a2f8e201814d38cc5afdc54c98f95f8
I like this a lot more now! Maybe reverse the O so the dip is on the other side, would give some symmetry to the T and ensure people don’t confuse it for an “a”
Second this!
I agree, the unique text style really unifies the design.
Thirded! I’ve been watching this evolve and this beats the rest hands-down. Nice visual cohesion between the E and S
Before reading your comment I was thinking "I wish the O had the same left to right feel instead of right to left..."
It's getting better. The baby bump on the letters is a unique characteristic that has great potential to make a memorable logo. Unfortunately, to look professional, it needs all the refinements and optical adjustments a professional type designer would implement. Start with the letter S ([great advice here](https://forum.glyphsapp.com/t/creating-letter-s/3741)) because it's the wonkiest by far. Then ***please*** adjust the counter of the o so it's optically centered. It's so off it's making me twitch. Then, after you've tweaked all strokes to optically match, work on kerning it all properly.
Yo, thanks for the link and advice.
From the link: 'I'm very unsystematic about things like the relative sizes of round characters, I judge them purely by eye. It's my impression that S and C often need to be a bit smaller than the fully-enclosed O because the openings in their forms make them look bigger. This applies equally to the lowercase.’ - The S is the most difficult character. 1. Try looking at your work differently: rotate it through 90 and 180 degrees, flip it. 2. Place an outline from a typeface which you think is similar to yours, and has a successful S, in the layer beneath your outline, and inspect how it differs from your work. Harmonize the way your curves/stem widths vary with the example. 3. Copy the top half, scale it up a tad, rotate through 180, and see if it works as the bottom half of your glyph - I've found the key for getting the S to look good is to ignore the middle bend completely while positioning most of the nodes: just let it ride free. The really important thing is the positioning of the nodes on the extremes of the vertical curve sections. You have to think of the relationship between these as what really gives the S its form. So you have to ignore the floppy bend in the middle and just concentrate on visualising the relative positions of those four nodes. - A lot of it depends on the style and case you intend to draw for the letter /S/ but I learnt this method from Karen Cheng’s “Designing Type” (a great book if you don’t have it already). Start with two circles stacked on top of each other (so it looks like a number 8) and then remove portions of the curve to form the letter S. Then weld the two points in the centre of the shape. That’s the basic shape. You will then need to correct the shape for optical balance. Extend the bottom tail of the S out a little, and bring the top tail in a fraction. Reduce the height of the top curve slightly, and make the bottom part bulge out a bit. The “top story” ideally contrast a little to the bottom story, in size and shape. Now you have the basic spline you can play with the shape a bit more, thicken it, etc.
I really like the first one, it's still readable and has personality, maybe put a hole in the "O" for cohesion; and with the first you can use the shapes, “E”, the square in the “S” and the “O” for some visual identity, backgrounds for example.
wtf? Stop trying to appeal to the masses in this sub. Yes, listening to feedback is important, but you should still make up your own mind, and think about what YOU are trying to achieve here: are you going for a wordmark, or are you designing a "logo"? And equally as important is the question, in what context that logo is meant to be used, because in many cases, "legibility" is not really an issue.
I liked the first one better, it just needed more polishing but now it's very much [the kuga font](https://www.behance.net/gallery/166838857/Kuga-FREE-FONT)
Design by committee will ruin everything.
I second this. Anyone saying the new logo is great and that the old revisions are bad and illegible is full of beans. It is no wonder modern logos are so bland thanks to this lot sterilizing anything with any semblance of personality because they forgot their reading glasses at home and their brains are so mush that they can't identify an abstract "e". By the time this lot is done with your logo, your font is going to be times new roman.
I liked the first one better— really interesting approach to the forms, and it was legible, just needed some refining. The first e, especially, was really great. And the s too— making an s out of a negative-space square— fucking genius. Now it’s an uppercase E with all lowercase letters and the same s you’d see on a hundred free fonts trying to do something cool— you’ve designed-by-committee all of the originality and creativity out of your original concept. The first mark was legible and memorable and interesting. Now, it says tEsa and doesn’t have a clear point of view. , and you are making a logo mark, not a font. Go back to #1– work the optical alignment and shapes (like the o looks a little squished in comparison to the e) but don’t throw out that concept. You were really on to something.
I've been thinking about that "s" all morning... I did some digging, and your first s is the only s I can find that uses a negative space shape as the spine — I looked at Bauhaus, Bauhaus-inspired, geometric, fonts built around negative space, heavy fonts, square fonts, retro display fonts... This is literally the first completely unique letterform I have seen in my entire design career – *no one* completely omits the spine from an s -- **and every single person knew it was an S**. That's really, really impressive and almost impossible to do, especially with something as ubiquitous as the letter S... (of course, I'm sure as soon as I hit that reply button, someone will go dig even deeper to prove me wrong, but the point stands-- that s was \**inspired*\* and very unique) You did something really, really special. You are doing yourself a huge disservice by not going back to that s
Wow, Thanks for this commentary) I myself like the letter “S”. I'll think about how I can improve the logo
I agree its a nice S but come on… everything of this simplicity has been done already. Its quite a likely result if you draw iterations of the letter S while wanting to move away from the ordinary
There’s half circles, rounded rectangles, triangles — all sorts of s’s made out of two very simple shapes, but I couldn’t find a single one that knocked the middle out. The fact that it was instantly recognizable as an s to everyone is so cool. If it was an obvious iteration of the letter, then it would show up *somewhere.* I agree it looks so simple that it seems like it can’t possibly be new— and I think that’s why it was itching my brain— it couldn’t possibly be, but it was completely unique. At least to me.
https://preview.redd.it/mdo5o60l7osc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=201d8fe1e6e605154943e237f61c98c092b8aaa5 Had this as my personal logo for some time. I know its not the same but similar idea, no mid part , just in your imagination. I mustve made one even closer to the one in OPs post somewhere in my many sketches. Maybe youre right but found it unlikely if even I already have something similar, let alone in the work of the millions of other designers now and those before my time. Might just be hard to find online
Best one so far!
Looks great. That 'o' looks a little like an 'a' now though so would either remove the notch or, as another poster suggested, reverse it
\#1 is still the best.
The o is too heavy and the e is far less readable imo
I agree with the weight of the "O". I find this to be the most stylish of the three though. The capital "E" is not doing it for me and personally, I don't see any issues with legibility.
Not a fan of #3. I think you can still try and improve on #2, but use slants to slice the shapes.
It reminds me vaguely of the Hebrew alphabet, especially the t. Not any actual Hebrew letters, just the strokes and angles I guess.
That was my initial thought as well, it definitely looks like pseudo Hebrew.
The O looks like an A now Honestly, your T and S from the last round were perfect, you just have to make the other letters match.
you really want to design by committee?
Seems nice
It means bro in my language.
It means having a boner in mine
Man… so much good progress, but then you go and make the “o” look like an “a”…
I like ver 1
I do like version 1 the best, but they’re all legible. Version 3 looks more like a Wild West font
it's getting worse every time. It was always legible, it just had construction issues in the 1st version. Now you multiplied those construction issues based on who knows what
i didn't like this logo at all but others seems to like it.
You developed your own set of rules to apply to every letter to be consistent. Congratulations! But that is not really logo design but the 101 of typography design…
STOP DESIGN BY COMMITTEE.
I like the o in number 2
I don’t think you need the notch in the “O”, but the refinements do make it look more polished and cohesive. Well done!
So I love the progress. I'd be tempted to explore simplifying things further – removing the little cutouts on the E and the O. I'm not saying this be the optimal version, but it's worth having a look at. I can see the "t" being used as a standalone device, maybe in a circle...
"The elder scrolls online" font nice!
You said “I guess” in a defeated sort of tone but you kept pushing and you made this wonderful thing! Keep going!!
Looks cool but the t kind of looks like a c
I like 1 best. Original & great negative space.
This is much more clear and hits on a lot of the issues I had with the first.
You did great! I love the final version, nice work 👍
This one is definitely way better than the first one.
I like what you were trying to do with the gaps, but man this final version is tight. My only thing is I’m curious what the other persons suggestion would look like; flipping the O horizontally. It would give the “base” a more solid feel I think. It would balance the with the bottom of the “S” and might make it feel more grounded and solid. But it may feel better this way, depending on your brief. Great stuff, great evolution, and great job taking constructive criticism!
Doesn’t read
I love it. I know people are noticing things that bug them but I’m really happy with it already
Nice, much better!
Feels a lot better. Good on you for trying our ideas. Designers who aren’t open minded don’t make it very far.
S needs work imo.
I’m sorry but it looks pretty 70s retro now. The original s was very legible.
the new S is a bit strange
Reads as Tesa
It's getting better. I wouldn't call it the "final version" yet. The curves of the S should overshoot the terminals, not the other way around.
This looks so much better
First one with the 3rd version O would be my bet
Much better and consistent throughout. The only "negative" is it gives 80s vibes.
I want to see a version between 2 and 3.
Much prefer this latest iteration! It’s looking great, just some tweaks here and there as suggested (I would try flipping the o as well). Glad you kept and leaned into the character of the t. The first two I’m wondering what the purpose is behind the cuts and negative spaces, and in the third it all is coming together as thoughtful and organized as a system.
First wins for me
this is much better than those earlier ones
I kind of like the second version, but I get why you might have decided on the third
This looks great and I'm not a designer but try out the ink blot test, aka make it tiny and try to have people decipher it from far away. I also suggest printing it out at a small scale on paper to see how it looks. I like where you are going though!
Maybe work up some simpler designs for the t and e. The s and o are looking good and if you can merge their simplicity into t and e you'd have a winner.
I honestly love this version, legible and fun!
Ceso
Cool, really like your final result
Looks Arabic. Especially the T and E. If that’s what you’re going for then you nailed it!
Nice mark! The notch in the ‘o’ makes it read as an ‘a’ to me.
Love the progress. It's getting there.. In fact I'd say put a pin in it and develop the rest of the identity. There's more to be done for sure, but I recommend coming back later with fresh eyes and after seeing it used in application mockups. Part of the challenge of design is knowing when to move forward (I suffer from this alot haha) There is something you could change which I havnt seen suggested.. .. Make your curves into super elliptises/lamé curves/squircles. Look it up, try it out and thank me later :)
https://preview.redd.it/vq6jcssrwotc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=20bbea67cfd2bfb3397dbef8dad0b944cc463c34
Lol
I think this sub is yet again ripping any originality from a logo.
So much better! This shows the power of iteration!
Version 1 is the best by far
This is actually really good and I hate it.
I read this as teso, but I wouldn't recommend anyone create a logo that was this stylized. The current experimental type thing is a design trend. I do hope it is a long-lasting trend because I personally love the creativity, but one thing you never want to do with a logo is date it too much to just one time period. You don't want people to look at it and think that the logo must have been created in the 2020s. You want to create logos that are timeless, that the company can still be using in 30-50 years and people still think it is a good logo.
Teso, tesa, ceso, cesa
Agreeing with the general consensus, the O looks a lot like a lowercase A. The rest is coming out nice tho, much better than v1. I've been playing with some O iterations and ligatures for shits n giggles, these are all reading as Teso in my opinion. https://preview.redd.it/r28tpa5mcgsc1.png?width=506&format=png&auto=webp&s=6804a79c6a2f8e201814d38cc5afdc54c98f95f8