I honestly have a hard time selecting which particular symbol would have significant associated feelings and connotations. All I can say is I “like” D the best of the four options to this point.
My responses are within the quoted text:
All this being said, I’m a philosopher – not a rhetorician!
Same as before. Here’s the problem. Currently you’re trying to communicate a complex extended metaphor with a symbolic representation of two letters forming an acronym with which people aren’t familiar.
Obviously your text will help explicate the metaphor, but there’s no clear connection between the way you’ve chosen to symbolically represent the two letters, and the meaning of the text itself.
There’s nothing in the symbols you’ve chosen which obviously represents “peaceful” or “science”. A dove would readily represent “peaceful”, and a DNA double helix would readily represent “science”, and this would then be readily associated with the text “Peaceful Science”. On the other hand, if you already have text saying “Peaceful Science”, then what function is being served by adding a symbolic representation of the P and the S? They’re not communicating anything the viewer hasn’t already understood via a much more direct method of communication.
When I first looked at C, the “P” and the “S” stood out. But when I took a second look, I couldn’t work out where I had seen the “P”. Of the two, I prefer D.
On your checklist, I think C does better for a conversation of 2 people.
While C is less simple than D, it is still fairly simple.
I think the P and S are cleverly represented in C.
I don’t know how to answerr 4.
5 seems more scientific than any of them.
Anything can go in that tree: apples, figs, angels, God, a tree house!
“C” is by far the best!
To be honest, I’m not sure that trying to combine a “P” and an “S” in this way is going to work. All the different options are either too abstract, or too visually jarring to convey any sense of “peace.”
The image that comes to mind with a name like “Peaceful Science” is first and foremost a dove, because doves have traditionally represented peace. Unfortunately that option is a bit clichéd, and besides it’s already been taken by Todd Wood’s Core Academy of Sciences (which itself looks almost identical to Benny Hinn’s logo). Having said that, if you somehow managed to combine an image of a dove with a DNA double helix, that might convey both the Peaceful and the Science aspect quite effectively.
Combining the P and the S like this not only is too abstract, as others have commented, but I think it tries to do too much. We read from left to right - we read “Peaceful” and then if only a split second later, “Science.” We also tend to look up to down. So a logo should have visual clues that lead the viewer to first “read” the P and then the S. I think this is a visual puzzle where someone could read it as “PS” but, because it lacks a direction or flow or other visual clues, someone could just as easily see it as “SP” or maybe just “P” or “S”.
C but not by much
In my opinion, the chief problem with the designs is that the S sits atop the P, thus making the site “Science Peaceful.” On the other hand, I am intrigued by the concept of combining the two letters into a single logo. I would like to see some options with the P on top of the S.
C is my preference, but it doesn’t make me think “discourse” or “science” or “positivity”. Very few logos do that for me, it’s a very abstract and lofty goal.
If I had to pick I’d go with D, but non of them really do anything for me. I find them to complex, and the P and S don’t really stand out.
I’m not a marketing guy, but I’ve spent a chunk of my career working with start ups and marketing people. To summarize their thoughts on logo’s. Keep them extremely simple, use a “tag line” under the logo to convey meaning. Personally I’d look to overlay a clear P & S and a well understood scientific representation (like the double helix suggested above). I’d then always include a tag line along the lines of “A place for peaceful conversation” underneath it.
I think they are too abstract. I think differentiating (by shade or by color) between the P and the S in these two would help de-abstract them a bit.
I still can’t see a P or an S. Maybe go for what you think is WAYYY too simple and then see if we push you to go more abstract.
I don’t see any of the options doing what you want. Peaceful is a key message and it gets lost in all 4 options.
An olive tree in the shape of a P… with Adam & Eve sliding down an “S” shaped slid from the tree down to the ground?
@David_MacMillan I like that.
Huh. When I look at the logos of major brands–Apple, Google, Facebook, Twitter, Target, Starbucks, FedEx, etc.–I don’t get much of a sense of what they offer or what their values. I see fairly simple graphical designs that are highly recognizable. Most are abstract, and the ones that are representational (like Apple and Starbucks) don’t represent the product or service. But maybe I’m just missing the symbolism.
I thought the purpose of a logo was to be abstract, so that the audience can project onto it whatever emotions they associate with the brand the logo represents. If you go for something more representational or symbolic, then the audience potentially brings with them whatever connotations they associate with that image or symbol rather than with your brand. Sure, doves are associated with peace, but for me they are also associated with a particular sort of evangelical subculture for which I have more complex feelings. Lots of folks will have a negative emotional reaction to a snake before they think about the Genesis 1 connection.
For me, the abstractness of these logo options serves the purpose well. I do agree that the ‘P’ is harder to discern in some of them than others, and all of them read as ‘SP’ to me rather than ‘PS’.