: Critique: logo and web site layout have a look at www.uglyapp.com for my latest creation(under construction). Home page 1 Round logo Logo 2 Rectangular logo. http://www.uglyapp.com/test/uglyAppSquareLogo5.png

@RJPawlick971

Does the logo work from an aesthetic point of view.


It's...kinda ugly...which...yea, I suppose it does work. And I don't mean that in an insulting way. If the intent was to make a rather haphazard logo to go off of the 'ugly' aspect, I think it works.

If that wasn't the goal, then I'd suggest rethinking the layout a bit. It's hard to read at first glance. The decorations on the U tend to hide the fact that it's suppose to be a U. You then have 'gly' stacked, with 'app.com' horizontally underneath. As such, the eye has to go in all sorts of directions to piece the name of the product together, which isn't all that intuitive.

To remedy that, I'd suggest reducing the size of the U-face a bit so you can have 'U gly' horizontal above the 'app.com'. That might tie things together a bit better.

(Note that it's hard to fully critique a logo without understanding the purpose and intent of the product it's being used for. If you can offer more background on the product, namely its functionality, business objectives, target audience, etc, that can help considerably in formulating a critique. )

Vote Up Vote Down

@Hamaas979

For the logo at least:

Some of the logo has gradient effects and some doesn't, eyeballs and teeth do, but the rest doesn't... this doesn't make the logo look cohesive.

Next, parts have drop shadows, others don't ('Ugly' does, 'app.com' doesn't), and the drop shadows are different colors... again doesn't look cohesive.

I would make the whole thing 'shiny' ie. with gradient effects, or flat (without gradients). Use a similar colored, angled, opacity and sized drop-shadow effect or none at all.

I also think the stroke on the lettering doesn't serve any purpose and therefore is not needed.

Vote Up Vote Down