Hey, it reads OK!
I might try making the "D" and "G" interlock back-to-back.

Color: maybe a brownish-burgundy.

hhp

I think this has some pontential. I would try joining the D and G. This could help with the "still the same person" part of your description.

[edited: I would maybe explore a version with vertical stress (or even monoline), so the mirrored D (that forms the G) and e wouldn't have reversed stress, make sense?]

MAy need to reweight due to stroke modulation, as Mitchell commented.

Those thorns on the inside of the E's I could live without.

I have more of a problem with concept than aesthetics.

Why do you have a problem with the concept?

I will concur with Hrant and Mitchell regarding the joining of the "G"s (and I don't mean "G" in the street slang sense). Right now it looks divided, which kind of contributes to your statement, but I think the joining of the "G"s is a stronger statement in relation to your "still the same person", as Mitchell identified. Also, I wonder what small cap "E"s would look like (about 70% of the vertical height of the "G"s). It might create a nice implied frame for the word, not to mention an interestingly strong shape.

Aloha, or shall I say "shaka" in this critique

Criminal/professional

This isn't conveyed in the logo(don't know whether it should be.)

But what about 2 sides to a person? positive/ negative? I dont see it in the image.

It mirrors itself.

Matthew - Welcome to Typophile.
You're off to a great start.

If the duality of the mark is going to be part of the
marketing, then Andrew makes a good point.
But if it's just an unspoken thing, then the mirrored approach will work very well, imo.

What if you tried it with some other widths, or even a
monoline, for comparison sake?

The forms seem relatively frail, especially the crossbars of your 'e'.

Also, you might be able to get away with lowering the vertical
stems on the G and D, just a bit, giving the G more legibility.

bj

Sorry, I don't have time today to clean this up or explore alternatives, but maybe it will help illustrate the main idea of what I was describing. The "E"s might actually work better if they were flipped the opposite directions, from what I've shown. This direction obviously needs more attention that what I've given it, but I do like the general shape.



Aloha!
Scott

The Ds make me think of breasts. Do I just have a dirty mind?

Now you went and did it. (They have wings!)

(sigh)

John has a Super Bowl hangover (Janet? huh)

Hi Matthew,

For what it's worth, the cleavage issue is only happening in Scott's sample (because they're touching). Your idea is a good one. I'd either go for a full overlap, or leave a space.

BTW today I'm working on a project that requires I be drawing with a pencil, hence the sketching. These may be less edgy and more classy, but do with them what you will. (Also note your D and G shouldn't be actual mirrors of each other. It will be more like the modulation of a rotated D with the structure of a mirrored D. Make sense?)

R

ironic, I was typing this as Randy's post came in ....


Changing the subject momentarily ...

Matthew, or anyone else who posts their work for critique ...

It is certainly OK to ask others not to post their takes on your logo.

It happened a little bit in the past ... Stephen Coles and
Joe weighed in against it ... it stopped ... now it is
quite frequent.

bj

no disrespect to Randy, Scott or anyone else.

We've all done it.

I just had a sense that it wasn't what Matthew came here for.

ooops, tried to cancel that.

We haven't ALL done it.

this was a fussy typophile moment and
sorry to interrupt this thread.

bj

I agree with bj its one thing to suggest through words, but unless they ask

Point taken and agreed.
I will ask before sketching.
Welcome to typophile.

R

PS. I wish I had more clients with names like EDGE. My client would go down swinging with the name Jimmy's Edgy Garments, LLC. Enjoy.

I never said not to post anything. This is my thread, I make the rules here.

Anyway - someone on another forum suggested this:


I think you all may be missing the point of why the D & the G are reflected. The "EDGE" is supposed to be in the middle of those two letters. When you combine those two letters first of all, it looks too much like the gucci logo - but more importantly, it looses the whole concept behind it. But I think this one addresses the issue of it being very similar but still different to the point where its not just a mirrored image.

just a slight modification to the "e"s

> The "EDGE" is supposed to be in the middle of those two letters.

Oh, then I think you need to mark it somehow, like maybe shear the curves of each bowl to create an explicit vertical boundary.

BTW, the stress distribution in your curves is still funny.

hhp

I am sorry if I've overstepped some kind of critiquing boundaries. Sometimes, I have difficulty finding the right words to describe what I mean (C'mon, we've all done on napkins during dinner conversations), so I try to illustrate an idea, albeit, with the limited time I have to do it, my renderings usually don't look too impressive. Is there really a difference between saying it and illustrating it?

Actually, I guess BJ didn't say anything about illustrating ideas. He just said "takes". Hmmm

It seems EDGE isn't the only brand seeing the need. Apparently *Bling Bling* has left the bulding.

R

I don't see the "edge" in all those beautiful curves. How about type with no curves, thin, extended.

>>>Apparently *Bling Bling* has left the bulding.

Thank God.

If the middle od the "D" and "G" is to be the "edge," why not try a faux-3d treatment. Like, a partial cube with an edge there? I don't know if I can even do this myself, but it came to mind...I'll go give it a quick shot...



Well, you get the idea...you probably wouldn't want to be so explicit with it, but mayb e sort of imply that kind of 3D?

I really like the concept of the clothing line. It certainly needs a strong brand identity, and I think you're on the right track...

I think this is a great idea - but without the cube. The implied 3D orientation of the two pairs of letters would be plenty.

Or maybe it could just be a chevron, with no perspective play.

hhp

I agree with Hrant in making clothing simplier is better for a mark.

Hrant-

I was also thinking without the cube...I'm just not talented enough to actually DO it. But yeah, an implied cubical effect is what I had in mind...

Jeff

Something about the exaggerated x-height makes me think this
is really old school (1920s?) and therefore feels like it should
appeal to an older crowd? (Maybe a more sophisticated crowd is
what you're aiming for?)

Does over-emphasizing the DG like that too closely reflect
DOLCE&GABBANA? Just my first reaction, not necessarily a
concept killer.

(Gucci doesn't have overlapping Cs, you're thinking of Chanel.)