Inspire Yourself: 58 Creative Logos

Advertisement

Logotypes stand for Corporate Identity. The better a logo is designed, the greater is the probability that your potential clients will remember your CI and get back to you once your service is needed. Consequence: designers have to be creative and put many efforts in designing beautiful, unique and catchy logos. And the results they come out with are sometimes stunning1 and spectacular2. Both in graphic design and web design.

This isn’t just another collection of logotypes. These are 58 creative logos you can inspire yourself from. Nevermind how different the logos are – they show the current trend in modern logo design. The logos we’ve selected below have been created and optimized for Web. Links checked: August/19 2008 – meanwhile some sites are dead, their logos are not linked.

Logo Screenshot3

Logo Screenshot4

Logo Screenshot5

Logo Screenshot6

Logo Screenshot

Logo Screenshot7

Logo Screenshot8

Logo Screenshot9

Logo Screenshot10

Logo Screenshot11

Logo Screenshot12

Logo Screenshot13

Logo Screenshot14

Logo Screenshot15

Logo Screenshot16

Logo Screenshot17

Logo Screenshot

Logo Screenshot

Logo Screenshot

Logo Screenshot18

Logo Screenshot19

Logo Screenshot20

Logo Screenshot21

Logo Screenshot22

Logo Screenshot23

Logo Screenshot24

Logo Screenshot25

Logo Screenshot26

Logo Screenshot27

Logo Screenshot28

Logo Screenshot29

Logo Screenshot30

Logo Screenshot31

Logo Screenshot32

Logo Screenshot33

Logo Screenshot34

Logo Screenshot35

Logo Screenshot36

Logo Screenshot37

Logo Screenshot38

Logo Screenshot39

Logo Screenshot40

Logo Screenshot41

Logo Screenshot

Logo Screenshot42

Logo Screenshot

Logo Screenshot43

Logo Screenshot

Logo Screenshot44

Logo Screenshot45

Logo Screenshot46

Logo Screenshot47

Logo Screenshot

Logo Screenshot

Footnotes

  1. 1 http://logopond.com/
  2. 2 http://www.logosauce.com/
  3. 3 http://aurea.es/
  4. 4 http://arc90.com/
  5. 5 http://www.fabre.co.uk/
  6. 6 https://www.vivapop.com/
  7. 7 http://www.phpzen.com/
  8. 8 http://www.pathfinder.gr/
  9. 9 http://www.zillow.com/
  10. 10 http://9cays.com/
  11. 11 http://www.diigo.com/
  12. 12 http://eyespot.com/
  13. 13 http://www.dropsend.com
  14. 14 http://www.favoor.com/
  15. 15 http://www.revolutionhealth.com/
  16. 16 http://www.searchles.com/
  17. 17 http://www.iloggo.pl/
  18. 18 http://www.netstudio.gr
  19. 19 http://www.posizionamento-nei-motori.com/
  20. 20 http://www.listible.com/
  21. 21 http://www.divshare.com/
  22. 22 http://www.opmom.com/
  23. 23 http://podchains.net/
  24. 24 http://www.kqed.org/quest/
  25. 25 http://www.webshots.com/
  26. 26 http://www.knexusgroup.com/
  27. 27 http://www.adesus.pt/
  28. 28 http://www.dotoni.com
  29. 29 http://www.logosauce.com/logos/86
  30. 30 http://www.alltunes.com
  31. 31 http://www.tickspot.com/
  32. 32 http://www.crashplan.com/
  33. 33 http://www.myintervals.com/
  34. 34 http://www.xing.com
  35. 35 http://www.bottletalk.com/
  36. 36 http://www.jaman.com/
  37. 37 http://www.motiveinteractive.com/
  38. 38 http://www.jott.com/
  39. 39 http://www.jamglue.com/
  40. 40 http://www.vision-media.ca/
  41. 41 http://www.bigcontacts.com
  42. 42 http://www.askerus.de/travel/welcome.do
  43. 43 http://www.buddystumbler.com/
  44. 44 https://www.pairup.com/
  45. 45 http://www.widgipedia.com/
  46. 46 http://www.acopic.co.uk/
  47. 47 http://www.techdirt.com/

↑ Back to top Tweet itShare on Facebook

Co-Founder and former CEO of Smashing Magazine. Sven is now writing Science Fiction Stories and looking for a publisher ...

Advertising
  1. 1

    Some of these are really bad and yes, they all look too alike. Some of the fonts on these logos look like low quality free fonts. Too many betas as well – it’s almost as if they’ve built the ‘beta’ right into their logo.. like they’re never going to actually finish their product.

    Awful…

    3
  2. 2

    some pieces at the top is just mediocre. yet, another stunning post from you guys. thanks.

    0
  3. 3

    I agree … they look much alike.

    Now, if the title was “58 logos that say ‘I’m a Web 2.0 Company and I fit in’ …

    2
  4. 4

    Most of these logos are neither creative nor do they show a current trend in logo design. I would rather call them desperate attempts to paint me-too-logo-bullshit for web 2.0 companies. Anyway, it doesn’t really matter—the majority of them will disappear as fast as they popped up.

    1
  5. 5

    Some nice.. some poor – Skyblog=awful!

    As always… very inspirational post!

    1
  6. 6

    paaaathetic.

    0
  7. 7

    seriously?
    please retitle this post to ’58 things to avoid in logo design’

    to be fair, some are good, but the majority are plain nasty.

    2
  8. 8

    With the exception of a few, these logos are horrid and very cliched.

    0
  9. 9

    Thank’s A lot , keep insipiring us :)

    great work .

    0
  10. 10

    some of them are good. stop bitching!!!

    3
  11. 11

    some of them are good, STOP b’itchin

    0
  12. 12

    Dropsend’s is the best by far

    0
  13. 13

    A couple things:

    1) I enjoyed alltunes a lot; ideabox, dropsend, quest, and netvibes only some. All others were pretty bad.

    2) Logo critiquers need to remember sometimes that a logo for a website (where the business is nothing but a web site) can be different than normal identity. They aren’t going to have delivery trucks, lots of letterheads, etc. most of the time. They can be fun and not have to conform to normal identity standards.

    With that said, all of these were pretty big copycat logos. And they have the same tactics:
    – Ariel Rounded MT
    – awkward colors
    – signal lines (RSS style)
    – some sort of flowery thing
    – reflections

    3) The one to me that truly just doesn’t get it is “Texticate”. Hahaha.

    4) This post sucked, but I thoroughly enjoy all your other posts. One of the few aggregate sites I check regularly.

    1
  14. 14

    It is simply a collection with a very ephemere feeling. Only created for work a few years on the Internet, on the “web 2.0″.

    Not really nice collection. Sorry.

    0
  15. 15

    worst… logos… evar

    -2
  16. 16

    you guys are doing a really nice job but i’d rather you put 8 truely great logos rather than 58 arguably-creative-and-certainly-web-2.0 ones. quality over quantity, what do you think? :)

    still, i appreciate your work and effort!

    0
  17. 17

    I think these icons are good examples to use on Internet… Offline, in some cases, they have to be modified.

    0
  18. 18

    Sorry, no dice.

    Many of these logos aren’t even logos–they’re basic type treatments.

    Bottletalk has a strong idea, lacking execution.

    DropSend is great.

    ALL THE OTHERS are crap. The only message they convey is “I’m Web 2.0. Give me VC money!”

    0
  19. 19

    Yeah, what they said…

    On the other hand, your scrolling list of Web 2.0 blah-ness helped me finally to name my feelings regarding this pervasive styling: “mushy”. They are all rounded edges and blue-plus-a-bright-accent and… mushy. I didn’t bother following any of the links, because frankly, I’ve seen enough Web 2.0 to know that Web 2.0 is to the Internet as Oakland was to Miss Stein: there’s no THERE there.

    0
  20. 20

    Gods. Grow up. If you’re going to criticize, why not offer a positive counter-example?

    Why can’t any of you turn snark mode off for five minutes and say “I don’t agree, but here are some I think are creative” instead of turning into a bunch of YouTube-surfing middle schoolers?

    “worst…logo…ever!!! ur log0Rehz hax0rs eth sux0Rz!111111!!!”

    1
  21. 21

    Some of these are nice but they all have that web 2.blow look. “I’m a wicked cool Graphic Designer, watch me design…”

    0
  22. 22

    My Punch Bowl, Quest, and Bottletalk are notable for being clever and communicating clearly, the rest are simply somwhere lower down on the cleverness and clearness scale. The most important consideration with a new website identity though, is if the clients were happy and they fit the mental identity of the site(business). I’ll grant you, if they are just pretty font treatments they don’t belong in a list of traditional logo design “Best Of…” but these weren’t created to win awards, these were probably just created to win contracts and get payed.

    0
  23. 23

    Got to say, what a weak selection. Conspicuous only by the abscence of real quality. Works brilliantly as a way of highlighting how hard it is to come up with a really nice logo.

    0
  24. 24

    sry for off topic but old design of this site was better then now :(

    0
  25. 25

    Whaaat? These are some of the /least/ creative logos I’ve ever seen. I can’t even tell most of them apart.

    7
  26. 26

    Christian Watson

    March 14, 2007 6:01 am

    I have to agree with the critics, I’m afraid. Most of these logos are completely uninspiring. They follow the ‘web 2.0′ trend and are average at best.

    None of them will stand the test of time – where’s the Cingular, the Fedex, the Apple, the Coke in this bunch?

    0
  27. 27

    Some of these are interesting but the point that most commenters are making is quite valid. Most of these logos follow a particular aesthetic and well…they kinda have the dull sameness to them especially when viewed together. And that doesn’t even begin to address that many of these tell the reader squat about the benefit or even function of the company they are supposed to be branding.

    0
  28. 28

    This link is typical of the same-old same-old “inspiration” thrown up by delicious. Web design is eating itself :(

    0
  29. 29

    Awful, no originality….they all look like they were created by a logo template with all of that glossiness and odd(but not interesting) shapes/icons that do nothing to suggest what the company does…The one I thought was decent was “Pathfinder” near the top. At least they took time to incorporate a “path” between the words ‘path’ and ‘finder’.

    Nothing personal, I love your articles. Everyone has their own style, but I just don’t see these lasting more than 6 months before the trend fades.

    0
  30. 30

    these could all be sketches for one logo. you need to work on the concept of the mark and look at type as a part of the mark. having two colors in your type only works in a few cases. You have the ability to draw and put together a concept, you just need to take a few more risks and push the envelope. many small companies would probably love to get these for free. But in all they are not thought out or pushed and refined. hey at least you had the guts to put your work out there, now take the next step, take the feedback and head back to the drawing board. The closest to becoming something but still far from being finished is the bottletalk. you have yet to incorporate anything about talking/speaking/communicating. pick up a copy of communication arts magazine and look at some of the logos presented there. you’ll find that they all work in black and white and each mark is there for a reason.

    0
  31. 31

    Wow, all of these seemed to be designed by non designers with zero education/background in real design, yet somehow downloaded photoshop.

    0
  32. 32

    One man’s ceiling is another man’s floor.

    0
  33. 33

    really worst i’ve read seeen here… bad & sad :(

    0
  34. 34

    Imagine if this article had been written 10 years ago. There would be nothing but swooshes!

    The logos are nice, but … well, just that. Maybe they seem monotonous because they’re all from generic Web 2.0 startups. It would be interesting to see new, innovative logos from non-tech or non-Web 2.0 companies.

    0
  35. 35

    They are nice but corporate identity means so much more than a logo. You’re only about 5% done with the logo.

    0
  36. 36

    How critical you all are. Quickly labelling everything web 2.0 just by looking at the logo is plain dumb. If you took the time to visit some of the sites you’ll see they aren’t web 2.0 at all. Granted – some are, but some aren’t. Nobody has really offered any good alternatives – apart from the highly original Coke, so get of your high horses and be constructive. Or are you all a bit jealous because your work ain’t up here?

    1
  37. 37

    Nice collection. Its pretty easy to see that lots of these logos are for companies with primarily online products and an online presence.

    80% of those wouldn’t work outside of the web (ie on a letterhead). The difference between logos for web and print is huge :P. Just my thoughts.

    1
  38. 38

    wow :)

    0
  39. 39

    So many f****ng ‘beta’s…….argh!

    0
  40. 40

    Terinea Tech Tips

    March 14, 2007 8:57 pm

    Fantastic resource, I feel inspired to just to start up a Web 2.0 for no reason, hang on a minute most of them have no reason for there existence!

    0
  41. 41

    They are a bit samey…

    however, to the bashers, who are numerous in number, how about you post a link to something you do like instead…

    0
  42. 42

    great stuff, thanks.

    — Phil

    0
  43. 43

    Absolutely average!

    0
  44. 44

    just because they are web 2.0, does not make them good.

    the only ones i liked were: bottletalk, mypunchbowl, and quest.

    0
  45. 45

    I agree with most people here, that these are … just polished fonts. In fact most are just logotypes with a trendy fontface. The added icon doesn’t communicate much (even the praised dropsend thing). But they do communicate: I belong to the web 2.0. That may be enough!

    I hope you smashingmagazine makers don’t expect some sort of this for your website.

    0
  46. 46

    I am a designer. I charge 2500$ for identity design, including a style guide.

    0
  47. 47

    typography certainly takes a leap on most of these logos. what ever happened to making sure the viewer could tell what letters they were looking at? diigo, digo, dngo… what the heck does it say? jarnon, jamon, jaman? podchairs? rqnkqo? rqnxqb? are these code or something?

    0
  48. 48

    Wow. That’s pretty bleak. Another list of trendy crap.

    A “great” logo:

    1: Needs to have no name next to it
    2: Can be recognized on something as small as a shoelace
    3: Does not just come from good design, but great branding, advertising and consumer involvement
    4: Should say something about the brand
    5: Should have life past design trends 2.0

    http://apple.com
    http://nike.com
    http://bahamas.com
    http://www.laist.com/images/glaser.jpg

    0
  49. 49

    primitive logos which have nothing close to Design, besides bright children colorish.

    0
  50. 50

    Michael Müller

    March 15, 2007 2:15 am

    Indeed inspiring. Bottletalk, awesome!

    0

↑ Back to top