hi everyone. i'm pretty much nonexistent here these couple days (weeks? months? years??) but upon seeing the new logo i feel compelled to write something about it.
since i hardly visit this site again, i discovered the new logo through a post on my facebook newsfeed with spyed
linked there (i forgot who posted though, sorry). my first thought when i saw the new logo was i had a hard time associating it with deviantart because to me it lacks the visual cue to form the letter 'd' and 'A'. honestly it looks like a 'z' to me and i don't get why dA chose a 'z' to represent 'dA'.
upon further reading of the journal i then discovered how it's meant to be interpreted. while the idea is noble and the narrative eloquent, i still can't shake the feeling how it seems unbecoming. a quick search of "dA new logo" brought me to Nsio
's thoughtful elaboration
about amodal completion and that pretty much explains why i feel what i feel about the new logo.
if you ask me whether i like the new logo or not and insist me to be honest, i would have to say no. and if the question is whether i think it's a good logo redesign or not, i unfortunately would have to say no too.
while i applaud the reason behind the redesign, i personally feel it's not represented or reflected in the logo itself. i feel the narrative is more of a by-product derived and later appended to the logo rather than the core insight that set the redesign in motion.
i'm not saying i can make or know how to make a better one. what i'm trying to say is the redesign could have benefit more from a much thorough research and consideration.
in closing, let me just share with you one of my most favourite case study of branding and logo redesign: google squared redesign
by jack morgan. do take a look because to me that is how a logo redesign should be done.
just my own 2 cents.