I have no idea what it says!

Yes tough to read. Does it say "coded colors"?

Too trendy. This means nothing.

penn

my apologies -- this is for a web development company that also does some print work.

Woops

Edit: Must have pushed the wrong button... but while I am here, those are some wonderfully conceptual forms and you should explore them in your off time.

I do agree with the others, kinda tough to discern. But do not go away downtrodden : )
Michael

I didn't really have the same legibility issues the others seemed to have.. Other than the fact that I spell colors 'colours' it looks cool, if not a tad hip.

Trendy? Sure. But it's lovely. Trendy isn't always bad...especially for design firms, who tend to be trendy and change their logo routinely anyways.

Yea, it's hard to read, but seems appropriate given the name.

only nit-pick is the overlap. Fudge the height of the L so it perfectly meshes with he form above it and odesn't leave that hairline or red.

Or, possibly try it without the lower red node of the d. Instead have the l form the lower part of the d. Just an idea.

Legibility does become an issue. If the general public is supposed to sort this out you will need to hand out decoder rings with the business cards. It's an interesting start, keep working at it.

looks like a fontstruct font to me? am i right?

no but thank you for reminding me of fontstruct. perhaps i can get this sorted there.

any better?

http://www.sharieaton.com/typophile/codedcolors2.png

I like this quite a bit…a tad hard to read but fun. The way the "l" knocks out the lower-left of the "d" works better for me than the first, transparent overlay, version…but I miss the colors of the first sample…the grey feels cold next to the blue.

Everything reads good for me except the "e". It's nice visually, but without the other letters creating the word, I wouldn't be able to fill it in…adds to the "coded" angle though!

i was able to easily read it in a few seconds with no question whatsoever

thank you for your feedback!

Last version is definitely better than the first. I like it. As Gerald mentioned, it was easy to read (the second version).

Hey sea_sea,

I agree that the second one works better than the first. I was able to read it quite easily, but agree that others may not. The only "trouble" I have with it, is with the 's'. The top-right and bottom-left part seem to break your grid.