I dig the name! Also think the use of brackets is appropriate however the script font and typewriter fonts are not working together. This becomes very apparent when the script bracket wraps "coded", its just not jelling
Hmmm... I like the idea - it's been done before but this is a little different... The hand-drawn writing and brackets don't look that great - why not use the same font as you used for "coded", keep the same layout and see what it looks like?
my hope was to have the handdrawn element add a sense of style, not just coding ability... it appears that did not work ;) i took a new angle on the logo and am interested what you have to say.
I agree with the previous comments on the hand-written font, it's not that great, and not too "coding related".
Also, switch position in the second variant, with "something" on the main line, and "coded" as superscipt ("power"), not subscript ("base").
my intention is to sell myself as a coder as well as a designer so I don't really want it to be all coding related, but what i had wasn't really working. i gave it another shot, check it out.
I think you need to go with something that's not like every other coding site out there or you won't stand out. Personally I prefer a cleaner looking site over a grey and dull look. But that's just me.
I also love clean white space sites, but I just finished one and was wanting to shift gears for this project. Plus I always code on a dark theme, so it seems appropriate for this, but maybe that doesn't really matter to the end user, just seems more significant to me.
The third logo is my favorite. I like the font that coded is in, I like the bracket placement with something written smaller and above coded. The blue shows up better on the top two fonts because the font is bolder. Start with trying the handwritten font on the third concept. But, handwritten fonts can look childish and fun. I think your idea of creative and edgy would better convey your seriousness of a designer.
I agree too with the latest comments, I like more the third logo because of the fonts. I don't know about the left bracket bigger than the other.. But really like the name and the fonts.
I didn't even notice the different sized brackets. I like the larger one encompassing the word something so you should probably make the right one the same size.
I would make the left bracket the same size as the right one. But I really like the idea and the name
I'd make the parentheses thinner.
I would use the placement of the words from the last design on the bottom and use the font from the two above.
I like the name dude...its young, hip, and well representitive of what you do.
I love where you are going with the logo, but understand your frustration. Just some ideas that hopefully will get you closer to where you want to be.
My first thought was that I really like the first & second "coded" font. It is clearly a system/courier-style font, yet it has slightly casual features and looks great large.
The handwriting font and the other fonts used just seemed out of place.
My idea is to try using one font (the first 'coded' font) for the whole thing and drop the last bracket. It would look something like this:
something { coded
(of course, it looks horrible in the font and spacing of this text box I'm typing in).
I played around with the size and spacing and liked how it looked when you made the bracket a bit larger than the rest of the text. You could even hand-draw the bracket, since you want something hand drawn.
The 'code' font communicates the technical side and the simple design and use of the large, single bracket communicates the stylish side.
My $0.02... good luck! Hope this helps.
Noah, thanks for the in-depth advice. I have now uploaded a revision with only the monospace font. the programmer in me couldn't stomach the missing closing bracket ;D
Of the 1st two and last two. The 1 between those I say work.
If I feel as a designer that the 1st two give me a headache just by looking at them I'm sure the target audience will feel the same.
The squiggly lines just scream out nnnoooooo!!!
look to coding type...courier, ms sans, etc... then, consider writing as follows:
some.thing {coded};
This would show your knowledge of CSS/html/flash etc. I think your first image is on the right track, just without the handwritten type - you are a "tech" company first and foremost.
thanks, ben for the ideas, i will try that out, never considered using a OOP format.
although i think i would need to use parenthesis instead of braces. Do you think that the "." in between might confuse people into typing my url as "some.thingcoded.com" ?
hmmm...valid and great point. That will have to be your call. But, you don't have a ".com" in the logo as is. So, when you give the website, you can just make it a tagline included with the logo showing the address as you have it. But, again, it's your project, idea, and call.
I oike the concept on the last example. However, I might try a heavier weight on the "coded" to add a little punch to the right side, i dont know. It is clean and readable which I think is important.
thanks for the review, i think i am also leaning towards the last example, however, it is still missing something to make it pop. ill keep playing with it.
I personally don't like any of them. In my opinion, the best one is #3 but again, don't like any of them. Don't try the hand-drawn style. Try to incorporate HTML elemenets like <>.
Hi I like the third down coded font.
Yet, an idea popped into my mind: Why not use the last font all one solid color and size across for both words. Then use Illustrator to Highlight with a bright color the lines that repeat themselves throughout the words. Such as the nice line that comes down from all the d's "h's" and the first line of the m. That shape is interesting in that last font. Just those four lines of interest, of identical shapes, builds an internal "code" within your logo.
If not maybe one type style all the way across using maybe a line of dots with a pattern of highlighted dots to represent coded?
Looks like a fun logo to work with.
Thanks for the input. I have posted a new revision and would appreciate another glance ;)