My only thought is to make the type on the rotating divisions the same size. By making them different sizes it (one) looks like a mistake or (two) you are making some more important than others.

Here's a new version with some slight changes. Tried to balance out the box size/font size.
I've tried making the same "box size" and also having the same font size, but both look weird once you rotate, either the surrounding " invisible circle" feels weird or (as was the case in the version i first posted) the text looks too different from each other.

Here's the new, updated version! We're trying to reinforce the "getting out" idea, and thought that to communicate it we had to show that things were getting out FROM somewhere. The great thing about this is that it's still a two-color job, but feels like there's more.


(the orange doesn't look so nice in RGB...)

Any suggestions, critique, ideas, anyone? Thanks in advance

the legibility on the angled words is lost now.

the black outlines on all the orange words are making it look like desktop publishing. not very professional.

can the VIII look a bit more like roman numerals. (ie - add horizontal bars?) it gets lost for me, blending in with sul.

the box isn't really needed. the older version was better. maybe try making a "box" out of the other elements?

Unfortunately (and I REALLY think it's unfortunate) we can't go back to that older version. It looks way too much like the logo a previous version of the same event.
I'm gonna try and post some new versions soon. Thanks for the comments loren.

Continuity is not a bad thing. I think evolving a logo by making it more illustrative and less legible are the wrong directions.
Maybe try rearranging all of the same elements as the year before, stacking, turning, scaling, until it's similar but unique.

aaron

How about constucting the I's of VIII out of the "Compartilhando Saberes"... phrases?

Normally, I don't think continuity is a bad thing either. However, according to the people who are organizing this event, this one is a turning point in terms of content - it's a new direction. So they don't want it to look like it's a sequel of last year. Also, there was no previous continuity, every year it's hosted by a different university and a whole different groups works on it.

Steve: that's an interesting idea, maybe it would have problems when reduced, but I'll try it anyway. Thanks
(I should be posting something here, but there hasn't been much improvement...)