We are in the process of creating a brand identity for PS, which will shape our whole web presence and more. Consider these two options, A and B.
Below, I added C and D too:
Which one more strongly visualizes a conversation or exchange of ideas?
Which one appears more visually simple?
Are the letters P and S visible in one more than the other?
Does either symbol more strongly convey a sense of optimism or positivity?
Does either symbol feel more scientific than the other?
I’m struggling to see the P in both, the S is more prominent to me, especially in B
To me, they seem too abstract. Do you really want conversations on “What are those symbols about?”
The second one is slightly clearer. If I did not know of “PS” I probably would not see it in the logo. I think there is too much of a broken pattern in both logos.
Answers to questions in order.
Neither.
Neither.
No. It’s not clear to me that either of them represent any letters.
They are very abstract; I don’t see any connection with any particular emotional sentiment.
They don’t make me think of science at all. They do remind me of barcodes.
I agree that both seem too abstract.
My answers are typed in above in the question line
I have to say that neither of these symbols do what you want it to do.
A symbol can LOOK like something relevant…
A symbol can LOOK appealing…
But a symbol that doesn’t look apealling OR relevant, well…
If I may be so bold … I would think any of the following themes would be helpful. By themes, I don’t mean a logo, but ideas about which the Logo might “bounce” against?
A) “Tranquility under an Apple or Fig Tree”
B) A Zoom on a DNA molecule, where the spiral element is a snake/serpent…
C) A rendering of Eden (with or without A+E), the footsteps of God walking from a river population of Pre-Adamite humans?
But all of this is rather beside the point… the Logo is what you want… I’m still thinking.
As everyone else already said: too abstract.
S is easy to see, but it doesn’t look like P at all.
Honestly both options look confusing to me. Reminds me a little bit of the PlayStation logo, but less clearly:
see here,
(Rather than scientific, I do think it comes off a bit like a gaming company logo.)
As people have commented, the logo doesn’t make it clear what kind of work we are doing. Without an accompanying text, people might not even realize it’s a logo, as opposed to some blob.
Those two are slightly better, because they look like comic book text bubbles, symbolizing conversation, but again, there’s only one of them, so the idea of a two-way exchange is not conveyed. (I think I like D the best, or rather, I dislike it the least.)
I still don’t get a feeling of optimism or positivity at all. The logo is visually compact, but it’s too compact for me. It is basically an optical illusion (the P and S), and that makes it hard to comprehend. You’re left figuring out what it is. For example, C looks like a maze.
Personally, I would favor going away from this optical illusion design and start anew. But that’s just me.
Is the logo not going to be accompanied with any text?
Looking back at the thread that you made, almost all of them have some text of some sort that makes it clear that it’s a logo, as opposed to a cryptic symbol.
Thanks for the thoughts, @Jordan, @nwrickert, @Djordje, @dga471, @gbrooks9, @davecarlson, @Intjer, @cwhenderson, @Jonathan_Burke, @AJRoberts.
What do you think of these next two?
Yes, we will also have text aded. That isn’t the focus yet. We are figuring out the mark first.
D looks much better than A & B. C is a little too much like a maze or optic illusion 
Logo C could be mistaken for “CP” and to me logo D looks like a stylized “S” and the letter “P” isn’t immediately evident.
