(239 votes, average: 2.61 out of 5)
Logo Of The Day Award Winner:

2009-01-14 | Parallax

Parallax, company importing torchlights.
Designer: Studio Cuculic, Croatia.

Related Logos:

22 Comments to “2009-01-14 | Parallax”

Jan 14, 2009 at 12:28 am

A simple concept which works. Not so great as a simple black/white version, but a nice design nonetheless.

Will McNeilly
Jan 14, 2009 at 12:36 am

Certainly Different, I agree with Paul, will not look as good in black in white or on a different coloured background. May not scale down well.
In saying this I really like the concept behind it, too many logos these days are conceived without one.

Jan 14, 2009 at 12:44 am

Well I like the green being used. Reminds me of the a comic book villain I used to love. His name was Parallax and he was the ennemy of Green Lantern to make a long story short.
I really don’t know if it was taken into consideration when designing the logo, the coincidence just made me smile.

But alas, as was stated before, prbly won’t look good in black&white or when scaled down. which is sad really.

Jan 14, 2009 at 12:51 am

this makes me dizzy to look at

Jan 14, 2009 at 1:20 am

My initial thought is why is it “advanced lightning”? Shouldn’t it be lighting?

Jan 14, 2009 at 1:26 am

Ben: Interesting observation! Very good eye, now it’s got me wondering too what it means by “advanced lightning”.

It’s a nice logo, but there’s way too much vibration going on and it makes the viewer a little nauseous just looking at it.

Jan 14, 2009 at 2:18 am

nice visual dissonance, keeps you wanting to look at it and look away at the same time!

Jan 14, 2009 at 2:56 am

Horrible logo in my opinion. The color is an unpleasant green, and besides being uncomfortable to look at, it would look absolutely horrible on any other colored background. 1/10.

Jan 14, 2009 at 4:44 am

makes me dizzy!!!! with those colors it will be hard to work it on other background.. I totally agree and because of the dizzy effect it wouldnt work so well if you scale it.. It can be good but in my opinion with other colors and other purpose not for logo ;)

Christian Tabacco
Jan 14, 2009 at 7:41 am


Jan 14, 2009 at 3:51 pm

Sometimes I am really curious on how some of these logos get the achievement of Logo of the Day… this is one of those times. I have to agree with Corey, as I think this logo is terrible and certainly not worthy of the honor of being here. The only thing interesting is the X… this advanced lighting logo makes the viewer need advanced eyes!

Jacob Cass
Jan 14, 2009 at 6:38 pm

You may be interested to know that this logo won 3rd place in the “Best Of Best 2006 Identity Awards” which is judged by 9 leading professionals in the field.


On that note, one must consider the context in which a logo is used and it’s purpose. It is quite inaccurate to rate a design properly without knowing the brief, purpose, context, etc however I can relate to your thoughts here as this information has not been provided.

Try to keep in mind the context that each logo was designed for, and also don’t forget that these logo are merely logos, not entire identities.

Taylor Blue
Jan 15, 2009 at 12:34 am

I hurts my eyes to look at it…I still haven’t decided if that’s a good thing or bad thing. On one hand it has my attention and then on the other I can’t look at it? Is that effective??

Nora Brown
Jan 15, 2009 at 2:07 am

“It is quite inaccurate to rate a design properly without knowing the brief, purpose, context, etc however I can relate to your thoughts here as this information has not been provided.”

Hmm…I agree, so if we’re supposed to be rating and commenting on these logos, why not include a summary of this info? And that would pretty much eliminate the logos-without-a-company.

Jan 15, 2009 at 4:52 am

I agree with Nora, but even spending my time researching this company and viewing the link that you provided, I still cannot comprehend why this would become an award winner unfortunately.

After gaining more knowledge behind this little number, my opinion still remains the same as before.

Jan 15, 2009 at 4:53 am

I think that the logo would turn out better if the lighter green was maybe a bit lighter?

Jacob Cass
Jan 15, 2009 at 12:08 pm

This topic of “fake” logo designs has been brought up previously and in my judgement I think it is more beneficial for all to leave them in.

But in saying this, where I can, I do provide information on the logo but in this particular case I have not been able to find any more information.

Jan 16, 2009 at 3:15 am

Quote Christian

Hard to believe it one an award, with my glasses off it becomes better. Maybe that how it was judged. Would seem a basic design practice not to melt the eyeballs of the viewer.

Jan 16, 2009 at 11:22 am

I actually find this logo interesting, it reminds me of looking at a florescent light. it does make my eyes hurt, but I can understand how it would link with a lighting company.

Chung Dha
Jan 17, 2009 at 2:11 am

Its a fun design but not for a logo use. Its much to heavy on the eyes and it give people the effect of seeing something double. It a effect that have been used by allot of tshirt designers writing hard to read text on a shirt. Also not fitting for a light company , you want use light to make it clear to see things while the logo is less than clear to see.

Manu Mohan
Feb 19, 2009 at 10:25 pm

Simple and effective.

Jul 21, 2009 at 2:22 am

Amazing how ideas play sometimes. Last year (around september) I started a videogame website in Peru called Paralax (with just one “L”). Paralax scrolling is an effect used in the 80’s and 90’s to simulate 3D backdrops (depth) in videogames. My logo had no fuzzy effect (it does hurt the eyes), but shares the same lower-case font (Helvetica) and subtitle location. Kind of simple, but it’s good to know is was effective at least.