(270 votes, average: 2.11 out of 5)
Logo Of The Day Award Winner:

2009-10-27 | F1


Tags: , ,

Bookmark and Share


“The logo is created for the network of shops of computer technique with service centers. The name “F1” unites in itself a few appearances: F1 – the first, F1 – the fly, F1 – technical help. Appearance of fly was chosen as inalienable part of network: a spider need flies as energy source. Spider – each of us, who uses a computer technique.” Student work.

Credits: Tanya Kozlova


Related Logos:

28 Comments to “2009-10-27 | F1”

zuluglobe
Oct 28, 2009 at 12:44 am

absolutely nonsense.


 
Helen
Oct 28, 2009 at 12:51 am

It’s a bit ……….. fussy.

To much going on for my liking, but each to their own :)


 
EJSchultz
Oct 28, 2009 at 1:04 am

I think the context as Zulu said is nonsense. The image itself is a bit much – why the shutter eye? Why the different wings? Just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should and just because something may look “cool”, doesn’t make it a good logo.


 
arshia
Oct 28, 2009 at 1:11 am

way tooo many elements. i feel it is mostly because the concept itself has about 4 conflicting elements as part of it. try narrowing down on ur keywords… it could give a clearer picture. but as of now.. definitely not working for me.


 
campuscodi
Oct 28, 2009 at 1:45 am

I’ll go with zuluglobe


 
Corey
Oct 28, 2009 at 1:57 am

Yes, yet again garbage logo.


 
Antoni Luchniak
Oct 28, 2009 at 2:01 am

I’m affraid I must join others and say this is not a good logo. And the text message makes no sense. There are a lot of better logos on this site.


 
TK
Oct 28, 2009 at 2:07 am

Oh…
Thank you all for the comments. But let me to explain why I did just like this: logotype for the network of shops, where much different technique. Therefore different types of electronic paths (wings and paws). One eye shows a photographic technique. I did not know where to put a yellow square (pixel) with f1, possibly without it a logotype would be a bit better.
I am a student yet. Your comments good lesson for me. Thank you!


 
Rachel
Oct 28, 2009 at 2:36 am

Oh, it is absolutely beautiful as a design. It needs simplified a lot to be a useful logo. But you obviously have artistic talent. You just need to drop it way down. The customer should be able to recreate the logo in their imagination, to easily recall the brand. Keep working!


 
Deanaux
Oct 28, 2009 at 3:19 am

It has a lot of tension & chaos. Interesting. Fun student project, I remember those days. It’s not a mark that would survive in the world for long. I think some editing is needed. It’ seems like there are two or three logos merged together. But as a student project, have fun and don’t worry too much about criticism. It’s clear you have talent.


 
Ira
Oct 28, 2009 at 3:28 am

Logo is great and creative! Don’t listen these NONSENSE comments. continue in the same way.


 
Stella Mayfair
Oct 28, 2009 at 3:41 am

I guess this can be a better logo if you edit it. With some elements less,like the difference between wings and eyes, this can work.


 
SimplyForDesign
Oct 28, 2009 at 5:02 am

It’s way to complicated. Looks looks luk? designer want to apply to mamy philosophy to her Design… It also doesn’t look like a spider. You have to watch logo very carefully to se the brand name… I don’t like idea of different eyes and wings… By the way it’s quite ugly…


 
Brad
Oct 28, 2009 at 5:42 am

That is ugly. I don’t know where to look first. If that is a school project, I am afraid it is a fail.


 
Mitch
Oct 28, 2009 at 6:32 am

What… The… Hell?


 
pk
Oct 28, 2009 at 6:45 am

utter crap!!!


 
Joey
Oct 28, 2009 at 7:25 am

Come on now. I’ve been a student for 1 month and even I know this is far too busy. I did not understand the logo, and the explanation just confused me further. It’s far too complicated, and just seems completely arbitrary.


 
KDzyne
Oct 28, 2009 at 11:00 am

Um………….


 
Bryan
Oct 28, 2009 at 2:49 pm

Er…….


 
Matt
Oct 28, 2009 at 9:12 pm

I think the design is interesting and I like that it is different. Thank you for sharing the artwork.


 
SimplyForDesign
Oct 29, 2009 at 6:58 am

Btw Once upon a time one said that the logo should identify… This one is trying to describe…


 
javier
Oct 29, 2009 at 7:43 am

I think this logo was created for the people that understand the language used in the stationery, russia?… maybe??
but at this part of the world this logo doesn’t work pretty good


 
EJSchultz
Oct 30, 2009 at 2:38 am

TK – as a design instructor, am not in the habit of telling students that they have done good work when they haven’t. Hopefully you will learn from this, but it seems that you are trying way too hard to be impressive. Over designing is a habit I see in all young designers. Some grow out of it, some do not.

One other thing – do not try to cover your butt with the “I’m a student” excuse – because that is just what it is, an excuse to do poor work. You interview for a job with that kind of attitude and you will be unemployed for quite some time.


 
TK
Oct 30, 2009 at 4:21 am

I did not try to cover my butt with the “I’m a student” excuse (just a little bit). I just wanted to say while we are students we can do a lot of strange projects like this F1. After university we will do that will want client.
Nobody loves flies. A fly in any way does not suit for the sign of computer and other technique. But it was interestingly to think of this project. I worked together with other student, which designed an interior. We used the eggs of fly as seats of sofa and lamps. This logotype needs revision, but I like idea.
Thanks to all for comments!


 
mikeW
Oct 30, 2009 at 7:44 am

Nice illustration but a logo? Simplify simplify simplify. I am a student too and this is junk of an excuse, you wouldn’t use that excuse against your teacher so why here? Haha.


 
Antoni Luchniak
Oct 30, 2009 at 7:55 pm

Unfortunatelly its just NOT A LOGO. It may be an illustration, but definitely not a logo. Just read any book about this.

Or even wikipedia: “A logo is a graphical element (ideogram, symbol, emblem, icon, sign) that, together with its logotype (a uniquely set and arranged typeface) form a trademark or commercial brand. Typically, a logo’s design is for immediate recognition”

I’m very surprised this showed up here.


 
jason liggitt
Oct 30, 2009 at 8:36 pm

When you decide to rationalise a brand or a logo that should be the time for complete clarity, if after seeing the logo then reading the rationale you are still left saying ‘Eh, what!’ the answer to whether it looks becomes clear. Sorry, Tanya but this really isnt good. Check out a logo that I have on this site called ‘Finnish’ you will see what I mean about clarity, simplicity and engaging design.


 
Mark
Jan 1, 2010 at 6:00 am

not even a logo, more of an illustration. there’s no unifying idea. what is this company? this logo tells me nothing. i see a shutter, a bug, some circuitry, goggles, a clothing tag…

???????????????


 

Reply