“iCVBook is a new generation of professional network, including an innovation called iCV : a revolutionary professional identity for people and companies. It gathers together your online and professional, social and personal identities to give everyone the best image possible. the logo is for representing the brand.
We needed two different types of logo : the brand one and an icon that will be use by users for their iCVs.
So this concept allows to decline the logo.
One represents a kind of sheet of paper, a Curriculum Vitae, a file to fill in. Simple and qualitative. With the possibility to play with the color of the corner (using the colorful pantone of the website) for gif animation or declination.
The square one is a simple reduction of the big one, so easily recognizable with the same possibilities in terms of colors.”
Credits: Tom Skipp
A fine simple logo, but why is this special…someone enlighten me.
Simplicity is good, but this is too simple and overall just uninteresting.
It looks like a generic icon you’d find on your desktop… If you were going for simplicity, why not make the grey corner white?
Not exactly what I would call spectacular…
nope. sorry
It is special because straight to the point!
And it is quite universal as the aim of the website is to gather as many people as possible, hence it has to suit a lot of various profiles…..
It is becoming more and more difficult to remain simple is this complex world!
i love it !
i am an adept of minimal trend
it s look simple but it s also efficient
easy to remember
well done
I think this logo is fantastic. It’s clean, to the point and modern. Well done to iCV and Tom Skipp
Simplicity is the best policy but this one is too simple to be a Logo of the Day.
this logo is wonderful, clean and simple.
This logo is perfect.
worst “logo” i’ve seen on here. period. was this created in MS Word?
I love it! It looks very professional and you won’t forget it, which is exactly what you want.
I didn’t even understand what I was looking at, I thought the image just hadn’t loaded. Not impressed, sorry.
This logo looks like something where someone had very little time and contextualized a decent meaning out of a very pedestrian design. Simple and efficient is not an excuse for bad design – this logo is plain bad.
Generic and forgettable. There’s nothing memorable about this logo.
How is this logo of the day? It looks like a generic icon, nothing memorable about it.
owhhh…! i thought it was a broken link image or something…?
but after i see the website, well, i love it!
this is no spectacular work tho, but it works!
[...] has been a discussion over on Logo Of The Day about this logo in question, many love it, many hate it. What is your [...]
Nothing creative. Nothing memorable.
Windows 3.11?
Simple is great as long as it has style. This has no style. It’s bland, boring and easily forgetable.
Is this really a logo??? I have to agree it looks more like a desktop icon than anything else….. blegh
You need to see the bigger version with a dash of color. Cool work. Also the context of the designer’s other work gives some context – he’s no slouch!
http://www.tomskipp.com/index.php?/project/icvbook/
It is very clean, but not attractive at all.
I guess different styles appeal to different people.
I love simplicity but not simple like this one. I don’t like it!
I’m a fan of simple and straightforward logo designs. However, this one doesn’t have “it”. They’re right. It looks pretty much like a desktop icon. Next logo please!
after reading their explanation, it fits however why didn’t the designer make it more individual and less like clipart? he could have kept the concept but make it look like it was somewhat styled.
I think that “simplicity” is not the problem. This logo have an aesthetically problem. I find the typography very tight and the “i” doesn’t fit like the “c” with the “v”.. and the other problem is that it looks like a clipart! and that to me is a very serious problem, that make it looks like a very poor logo. The last thing is the logo isn’t strong enough. Is a good idea but i think that could be better…
—
sorry if you find mistakes… my english is very rusty.
way overly simple, I will never understand why some use letters? do your research, letters don;t work as a brand name. OK, GM you say, well there branding pool was the size of a teaspoon of water, compared to the ocean we swim in now. basically is sucks, it that OK to say.
To the point simple messaging!
Utterly memorable and fits in with the iCV site perfectly.
Memorable? Do you not know how the mind works? The mind is a phonics interpreter, a phonics machine, it needs syllables for it work properly.
When using a sequence of letters to abbreviate you are forcing the brain to do what it is not naturally designed to do. Again I say, Words, make the best Brand Names, hence the words, Brand Name.
When you google icv you get a mere, 2,340,000 hits with innumerable combinations.
A very important thing to take into account is that 15% to 20% of the population is dyslexic, this means, that when naming, branding, or marking anything, it is the words that are most important.
If a designer gets an assignment and it is to brand a sequence of letters, an abbreviation, it is very important to take this into account.
What I would do is to start a Name development and design process with the intent to offer my client an alliterative to strictly using an abbreviation.
If they are to attached to their abbreviation, then I would start a phrase design process, to try and create something that describes and identifies the abbreviation.
Try learning this in college, it is like asking your professor to explain the difference between a line-extension and a sibling brand.
Anyone really interested in what a Brand Name really is check out: The Reis Report on YouTube.
Really interesting topic and discussion. Makes me think how [logo] design is seen by many as an aesthetic process/product only. Is a logo a failure if it’s “unattractive” or “not stylish?” Examples certainly abound of stylish “designed” logos that don’t necessarily hit the mark.
I don’t really have an opinion [yet] as I don’t know enough about the mission, the inherent problem(s) and details of the solution. I’d really like to hear much more from Mr. Skipp about this particular assignment. Controversy makes for great PR and a chance to uncover what logo design really is versus what we all might think it is.
Meanwhile I’ll dig a little deeper on my own.
I agree with the more of an icon rather than a logo arguments.
too forgettable to be considered a logo.
Sorry,this is dull and uninspiring. The only thing that could save this is some clever branding.
This mark is uninspired. Looks that way at least. Logos can be simple, as long as they still embody some striking quality that excites the observer. Or leaves a visceral impression on them. This is not exciting. Nor memorable. The mark accomplishes little, if anything.
If this logo was designed in illustrator, Adobe should sue the designer…
Maybe this is kinda new style of today logo, but still need a few minutes to understand and get impressed..
I thought that this logo need a lil more touch to show the memorable part..
This logo completely got me off-guard. I thought it a hyperlink (with a generic icon) to some utility called iCV. The design is misleading…probably because of the page design which looks like an ms-word clipart.
However…
This logo works great on its website…branded that way.
Rgds
who said it’s perfect doesn’t know that perfect things can not be discussed.. all will agree it’s grear
I DO NOT LIKE IT
Theo.
You must be one of those typical designers with an ‘everyone else is rubbish’ slant to them…….without ever giving a valid constructive piece of criticism or even elaborating on your rash views. Your comment adds absolutely nothing to this discussion.
It’s people like you that really make me sick.
I like this logo’s simplicity. It does the basics in logo design brilliantly. Well Done!
I’m with Alex on this, looks a bit too much like a desktop icon for my liking.
The first time I saw this logo, honesty I didn’t like it, but after I saw the context in which it’s used, I changed my mind. Looks great on its website.
[...] has been a discussion over on Logo Of The Day about this logo in question, many love it, many hate it. What is your [...]
The most forgettable logo yet.
I would never recognize this logo. way too plain. black and white makes it almost invisible.
It may be simple bit it still needs to be a design.