thanks for the input, stephen

That darn S is too flashy, i agree, but cool too. makes me wish the name was "monolineas".

Mu idea with the flourishes was to tweak them so they can connect to lines on both ends, but i've only gotten so far.

My main concern with the letterforms for now is the r-a union i've tried several option, and while this was the best in my opinion, i'm not really convinced...

It's fun, but I'm not sure if it's a good idea to use that font beyond "monolinea". It's very busy, and difficult to read all of it together. I'd consider either dropping the second line completely (as part of the logo anyway), or using a more simple face.

Aloha!
Scott

'Monolinea' means more 'single line' than 'one line' to me.
I line up with Scott Keawekane about using Alusine only in
the top line. I also would consider redesign Alusine lc 'a'
comb and get rid of / change the two side curly strokes.

Monochao !
AS

how about these:
a)


b)

any better?

btw, alessandro, what would the difference between "one line" and "single line" be?

Hey kemie,
I like the lettering for monolinea, however my advice is to use a plain font for "diseno interactivo".

Using the same typeface for all words lessens the impact of the name (monolinea).

You can try some sans serif in all capitals for example.

anastas, i like that! i'll try some options like that

'Mono' gives the idea of a closd set, like an oval.
The oval is not one oval, but several shapes of ovals.
If you say 'mono-oval' can be that you use _only_ that
kind of oval -- jus tlike typography means that you write
with types of letters. One font is not a mono-font.
Monospaced font are not called onespaced font.

'Egg' in Finnish is 'muna' but if you start counting them
it is 'munaa' the word. Not sure about this neuron.

Mono- is the first element of composed Greek root words,
or modern genesis ones, from Greek 'monos,' 'single - made
by only one.' 'One' remains more abstract, just like you
can write 'one' or '1' and in the font, numbers are called 'figures'.

AS

Kemie, altough I�m not very fond of the style of this logo it seems very consistent with the identity of your work and think it could work well if it was less busy and complicated.

I think that trying other options or simplifying this one would be better.

How does this one look?

It's nice, but isn't this going to suffer when reproduced at a smaller size on-screen? The thin strokes won't hold up very well.

holds up surprisingly well at small sizes, but i'm still not convinced :S

Hi Kemie,

Two thoughts:
1. The e/a combination is awkward. Considere drawing a single storey a and connecting the e to it like the m/o combination. I think it will match the feel of the other letters better. You might also consider a small cap E form. The overbite might be less awkward.
2. The off-center diseno interactivo seems odd because of the symmetry of the end swashes (which I like alot!) I'd get rid of these words all together if it was me.
3. What other monolinea ideas have you explored? How about a connecting script or brush script. How about connections more like Process Lingua? Or a rounded version of lingua if that suits your style better. What about a sharpie drawn Bickham? Monoline has so many possibilites!

Also, be sure to do a pixel-perfect (hand hinted) version at the small size you will use it online. In other words, make the thins exactly 1 pixel, the white space 1 pixel, and the stems 7 pixels (or whatever makes sense). This could look very cool methinks.

Randy

randy, thanks for yor input. Let me show you the 2 other concepts i've explored (the first one is the current logo, the second one my first attempt at a more literal interpretation of monolinea):









I don't know. the more i look at my latest attempt, the less it seems to work

At the small size, the difference in spacing between the letters in "mono" and "linea" becomes more obvious. This looks really cool though, and I love the flourishes.

"holds up surprisingly well at small sizes, but i'm still not convinced"

Yea, I'd say that the last small sample didn't hold up at all...at least in terms of the line. The wordmark is still quite readable, though, so maybe that's OK.

I like your "latest attempt". To Darrel's point, the continuous line within the word disappears some, but I think the flourishes look even better. At a smaller size they take on more of an organic feel�like a vine�and I believe the word is even more legible as a result of the disappearing lines.