digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

See the original image at vectortuts.com —

30 Brilliant Vector Logo Designs, Deconstructed

vectortuts.com — In this post we look at 30 contemporary examples of great vector logo design and find out what makes them work.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • JackBalance, on 09/16/2008, -8/+7Very inspiring works !
  • T00NY, on 09/16/2008, -4/+13Really like the firefish
  • alokrsx, on 09/16/2008, -7/+4Nice
  • PeppermintPig, on 09/16/2008, -12/+8Definitely worth a look. Mostly good design, but some were lame.
    • EagleTG, on 09/17/2008, -2/+13Definitely worth a read. Mostly good comments, but some were lame.
      • PeppermintPig, on 09/17/2008, -0/+2Oh, I must be a bad guy for being honest. Gee, what a shame.
  • upick, on 09/16/2008, -10/+6How about not using Brilliant they're just Cool, don't get me wrong I love vector logos, but these are not the all time best... Cool would be sufficient
  • SmackBuster, on 09/16/2008, -6/+4Pretty good
  • dnields, on 09/16/2008, -2/+58I am a graphic designer.
    Yes, after I have completed preliminary design work on a logo, when I translate said designs to the computer I use Illustrator, a vector drawing program to do so. Yes, logos should be created in vector so they can be easily scaled.

    However, I fail to see any relevance to the use of the word 'vector' here.
    It's akin to saying something like 'ink pen' or 'PIN number'.

    Just call them what they are, logo treatments and a creative brief on each.
    • KSUdesigner, on 09/17/2008, -9/+8Yep, anybody who does not create a logo in vector format is an idiot and should not be called a designer.
      • bugbyte, on 09/17/2008, -2/+8No, but it's a common sense practice and generally in the best interest of the designer to do so, since a logo is something that needs to be recreated at any size and the vector format is the easiest way to do that.
      • KSUdesigner, on 09/17/2008, -0/+4Exactly my point - you're an idiot if you don't create it in vector format.
      • banmeagaindigg, on 09/17/2008, -6/+2you guys are both idiots for pointing out the obvious.
      • Dracusis, on 09/18/2008, -0/+3I "create" my logos with with pencil and paper. In fact, I'd go as far to say everything that embodies the creation of a logo, the generation, evolution and deconstruction of ideas has nothing to do with vectors.

        The technology or the format is not the logo.
    • beelz, on 09/17/2008, -3/+26I make my logos in paint
    • Narcism, on 09/17/2008, -0/+4That and I don't think core's background is all that vector-y...
      • GalacticRerun, on 09/17/2008, -0/+2Core? I thought it said Cane. So much for "perfect readability".
    • digitul, on 09/17/2008, -4/+15i was wondering how long before the obligatory "i'm a graphic designer blah blah blah" comment to come up
      • banmeagaindigg, on 09/17/2008, -4/+2whats your point? how is it obligatory? how often does it happen?
  • dshPls, on 09/16/2008, -2/+21Designing logo's is so damn hard for me, so seeing a list of good ones always helps me realize how bad I am at it.
    • mediablitz, on 09/16/2008, -1/+6Logo design is a pretty cool process. People often underestimate the time and energy to get it right.

      Getting it wrong always brings logo design to the forefront ;-)
      • Narcism, on 09/17/2008, -0/+16You mean, you can't just doodle up something for me, for free, for this afternoon?
      • MiNGLED, on 09/17/2008, -1/+2You're a client aren't you? I can tell by the question.
  • iopa, on 09/16/2008, -1/+44I wish people appreciated how much time, energy, and eyesight is used in creating these logos. dugg for gfx designers everywhere who get a lack of recognition.
  • stutimandal, on 09/16/2008, -2/+7Koloroo and Firefish are awesome.

    Inkscape FTW. (And it's free).
    • geologist62, on 09/17/2008, -0/+1Firefish - Firefox? same idea, but still cool.
  • alvaris, on 09/17/2008, -5/+1Cool Designs, keep it up!
  • darkmist, on 09/17/2008, -5/+6Am I the only one that missread that as lego for some reason?
    • scarz99, on 09/17/2008, -0/+3Probably.
    • bhowell, on 09/17/2008, -0/+2I spent about half a second wondering what vector legos were before I re-read the title.

      I also misread the popp logo as poop at first.

      .. sigh.
  • teddarling, on 09/17/2008, -2/+4There are some nice looking designs there. But I would have to agree with upick that cool is better than brilliant, though I do see a few that I would consider brilliant.
  • frigginchris, on 09/17/2008, -5/+2was i the only one who red that as lego designs?
    • KSUdesigner, on 09/17/2008, -0/+3Learn to speak English properly and you might not have that problem. Red? Seriously?
  • scarz99, on 09/17/2008, -5/+3RASTER FTL!
  • gossumx, on 09/17/2008, -3/+4"...fine logo design for talkmore uses symbology in the form of quotation..."

    "Symbology?...Now that Duffy has relinquished his king bonehead crown, I see we have an heir to the throne. I'm sure the word you were looking for was symbolism. What is the sssssymbolism there?"
  • ruddy, on 09/17/2008, -2/+2I think a common theme is simplicity.. not all of them, but most
  • Twinfire0, on 09/17/2008, -5/+2In before 69 Monos comment.
  • pixelguru, on 09/17/2008, -4/+2When you get to create an identity for a company called "FireFish" how can you *not* create something awesome! Where do I find clients with cool names like that???
    • Narcism, on 09/17/2008, -0/+2FireFish vs LastName Buzzword Company
  • Puffles, on 09/17/2008, -3/+4Wow, these designs are so sexy.
  • Nanica, on 09/17/2008, -3/+1Very nice, there are many logos that I liked there, simple and nice.
  • bugbyte, on 09/17/2008, -3/+1Really nice selections. It's hard to notice how good some logos are sometimes until they're pointed out this way, just because they are that good. Yay for awesome design. :)
    • GalacticRerun, on 09/17/2008, -0/+2Some say brilliant logos don't need to be explained.
      • bugbyte, on 09/17/2008, -0/+2I'm not saying they need explanation, just that you might not notice how brilliant something can be until you actually really pause to look at it.
  • liquisoft, on 09/17/2008, -4/+2Not all were Brilliant, but the article was still worth reading.
  • cartisdm, on 09/17/2008, -5/+3that 69 one made me laugh
  • aditya2071990, on 09/17/2008, -3/+3The logo for CORE was not very obvious, I thought it was ccre or something, I wonder why the author used the phrase "very readable" for that logo...
  • jaems, on 09/17/2008, -4/+13I'm a designer, and I'm a little disappointed in this list.

    For the most part, many of these logos are trendy and lack any sort of timelessness. More importantly, most of these clients are fairly unknown.

    It would've been more relevant to show 10 awesome logos of the last 5 or so years made for well known corporate brands and underline some of the design challenges they faced.

    I'm not trying to demean any of these logos or their respective designers, but there is a dramatic difference in difficulty between designing a logo for a startup (where you have almost unprecedented creative freedom), and designing for a well-known brand or massive corporation (where you have to conduct deep research on the brand and appease dozens of stakeholders and millions of customers).

  • redhotkurt, on 09/17/2008, -4/+5A lot of these are pretty poorly executed. Look at the kerning (or lack thereof) in #4 (Greener). the spacing is inconsistent, and it's not intentional. Any real graphic designer who knows his/her craft would never have released that to a client. I can't believe the praise you guys are heaping on these logo.

    They may be modern and slick and shiny, but bad design is still bad design.
    • HillBully, on 09/17/2008, -3/+6you forgot the obligatory "I am a graphic designer" before your blah blah..

      ...and I believe you may have poor taste in design

      • redhotkurt, on 09/17/2008, -5/+3You completely misunderstood me. This has nothing to do with taste and everything to do with competency.

        Graphic design requires a certain level of knowledge and skill, just as teaching, plumbing, playing an instrument, or practicing law do. Some of these designers don't know what they are doing.. They never learned, or maybe they just didn't stay awake in school.

        But whatever the reason, these logos are badly designed...and nothing (short of redesigns) will change that.
    • MrMayBeBanned, on 09/17/2008, -0/+3The firefish one sucks. I don't get why people are raving about it. Probably the guy's friends.
  • thedez, on 09/17/2008, -5/+3I ain't heard of any of these companies.
    • wallclimber, on 09/17/2008, -1/+2...and, conversely, they've probably never heard of you.
  • swaters210, on 09/17/2008, -5/+2I've always designed crappy logos (hold that remark you) because I worry too much about how they will look in black and white on paper. Now i know i can get away with just about anything , especially the last one with the gradient background.
  • psykiv, on 09/17/2008, -3/+5No mention of Fedex. Buried as inaccurate.
    • banmeagaindigg, on 09/17/2008, -4/+1A classic without any doubt, but ***** there's so much more out there that's good.

      I love how people cream their pants over that logo just because they think they've found Jesus hidden in the 'oh-so-clever' negative space.

      Broaden your horizons a little.
  • rheaume, on 09/17/2008, -3/+2annnnnd its down
  • davemerican, on 09/17/2008, -2/+7Most of these would cost a ***** to print.
  • ethernet76, on 09/17/2008, -1/+4There is only one large problem with most of these logos. They're period pieces done in what is fashionable by today's standard. The fonts of this decade aren't the fonts or the 90's. The font's of the 90's weren't the font's of the 80's, etc.

    There are plenty of cool designs all over the place. However the best designs aren't the ones that subscribe to design trends. Playboy, FedEx, both awesome logos that won't need updates every 5 years.
  • Skewt, on 09/17/2008, -1/+2Finally an interesting article on Digg today. I'm going to OD on politics pretty soon here.
  • rama101, on 09/17/2008, -2/+1Since the level of competence and expertise put into this seems to be a matter of opinion already, think these logos can find a home in some high-end graphic arts guide ;-) Can anyone help me find the article on 'top 20 (or so) best bookmark icons'? I recall seeing it on the Web some months ago.
  • drgmdp, on 09/17/2008, -0/+3i wonder if they checked what deconstruction actually is before using the word because it sounds cool.....
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deconstruction
    • Skewt, on 09/17/2008, -2/+2I find it hilarious that you're using Wikipedia for a definition citing rather than something like Dictionary.com.
    • bobloblawsblog, on 09/25/2008, -0/+1yep, critique would be more apropo...

      IMO, the only good ones are 'ryan biggs' and ''talkmore' , because they are innovative , and they do what a logo is supposed to do, which is to become a memorable icon for anyone - even someone who cant read would be able to identify the brand / company.

      now look at "About Thyme" - all they can say is 'cool icons'.
      http://vectortuts.s3.amazonaws.com/articles/linkb_ ...

      how does that make a cool logo? it has nothing to do with the company, aside from the fact that it vaguely conjures up images of food / eating. Seriously, ive seen better from fellow art students when i was in college.
  • bays, on 09/17/2008, -1/+3Raja Sandhu has got a good eye for logo
  • samo4prez, on 09/17/2008, -1/+1pretty plain design--i thought on wine and spiffy sparrow and anti particle had the best conception-- the rest were quite run of the mill--
  • patzz, on 09/17/2008, -1/+2That's what I have searched since long time thanks mate
    Check this out too.. beauty of designing http://digg.com/design/Amazing_Feed_Icons_Great_Co ...
  • undershirt, on 09/17/2008, -1/+2Haha, I'm digging the USA's "manifest destiny" arrow in the Friends in Places logo.
    http://logopond.com/gallery/detail/4726
  • dariyam, on 09/19/2008, -1/+1Wow those gameboy ads are something...
  • dainix, on 09/20/2008, -1/+2Just one great article, actually interesting to look how logos are retouched and modernized.
  • jamesgoss, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2it seems to me as if every single one of these logos are for "web" or a trendy cafe signfront. very few of these would be successful in black and white, or in small scale. for the most part, i'm not impressed. the forms are good, sure.

    the backgrounds for these marks are distracting at best. The logos should stand on their own without a need for a trendy gradient background, or a fancy border.

  • cutiewithbooty, on 09/22/2008, -0/+1I'm jealous. I wish I could create simple but MEANINGFUL logos like look this nice.
  • xtraa, on 09/26/2008, -0/+1The Ryan-Biggs is just genious.
  • beegle, on 10/02/2008, -0/+0Awesome designs.. so simple and inspiring
  • tutorialwow, on 10/03/2008, -0/+0Wow, I really love simplistic vector logo design! It's amazing how many different kinds of unique logos can be created.
  • AdLover, on 11/22/2008, -0/+0only Excellent logo design - http://www.lemonflip.sk/archnv/logos-all/
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.