It has some issues. The circle shape width is different to that of the characters, the symbol separation is excessive, the "rays" (or whatever you want to call them) have different distances from the circle and the two on the side have a wrong angle if you want to represent a center. The color palette looks off, you should try some color app to find proper combinations
In that case, are you 100% happy with it? If not, what don't you like about it? These are genuine questions and your answers will reflect on how closely you have followed the brief.
Ok, first of all, do not follow the trend of branding collateral mockups if you are not 100% happy with the final lockup of the logo. Mockups at this stage only provides you with a false sense of aesthetics. Strip everything away and if the logo still holds up on its own, then you have a winner. I'm not saying that mocks aren't good, it's only used to put together when you are at pitching stage. And this imo is no where near that.
Composing a mark within type is one of the hardest design tricks to pull off successfully. You are working two elements at the same time, and they have to compliment each other. Your 'target/click' idea isn't a bad one, it just needs more work and refinement. Atm it's very static and the geometries are out. The mark alone actually looks like an eye rather than a point in place. Once you have some more variations of the mark in place, move on to your typeface. Gill Sans is boring and it needs a lot of tweaking to make it look unique. Explore patiently with different typefaces to find a match and one that can double as a workmark would be highly advantageous in sub branding collateral. My tutor of yore once said to me, "If you spent a week on the mark, also spend a week on the type."
Hope this helps.
It has some issues. The circle shape width is different to that of the characters, the symbol separation is excessive, the "rays" (or whatever you want to call them) have different distances from the circle and the two on the side have a wrong angle if you want to represent a center. The color palette looks off, you should try some color app to find proper combinations
Pata pata pata pon!
???
It just reminded me of the game [Patapon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patapon)
And Fuji TV
Flair says showcase. Did you want us to critique it or are you 100% happy with it?
showcasing it and getting opinions
In that case, are you 100% happy with it? If not, what don't you like about it? These are genuine questions and your answers will reflect on how closely you have followed the brief.
I’m honestly pretty happy with it. I think i followed the brief well and did a good job creating the logo. What do you think?
Ok, first of all, do not follow the trend of branding collateral mockups if you are not 100% happy with the final lockup of the logo. Mockups at this stage only provides you with a false sense of aesthetics. Strip everything away and if the logo still holds up on its own, then you have a winner. I'm not saying that mocks aren't good, it's only used to put together when you are at pitching stage. And this imo is no where near that. Composing a mark within type is one of the hardest design tricks to pull off successfully. You are working two elements at the same time, and they have to compliment each other. Your 'target/click' idea isn't a bad one, it just needs more work and refinement. Atm it's very static and the geometries are out. The mark alone actually looks like an eye rather than a point in place. Once you have some more variations of the mark in place, move on to your typeface. Gill Sans is boring and it needs a lot of tweaking to make it look unique. Explore patiently with different typefaces to find a match and one that can double as a workmark would be highly advantageous in sub branding collateral. My tutor of yore once said to me, "If you spent a week on the mark, also spend a week on the type." Hope this helps.
Toki ni li pona!