Comments on: Sensata logo – good or bad?

By: J. Vega

J. Vega — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 20:19:01 +0000

I think is looks very nice, it is clean and engaing. It does not however satisfy my criteria for what a good logo is. It is not particularly memorable, the Grotesque San-serif, I’m assuming Helvet’ or Swiss, used makes it underwhelming and seems to be an unispired solution–when it doubt play it safe, right? Don’t think it works here. and the brail is not appropriate and dose not clarify but distracts from the fact that this “Logo” has no soul what so ever, but looks nice.

By: Fivers

Fivers — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 16:30:34 +0000

This is a large company that simply paid someone who knew little about it to design for them and it shows. After you give reasons for the design it makes sense but not until then. But plain and simple, if you need to explain the thoughts behind a logo and what you were trying to make people think of, they are way off mark. To much money thrown around and not enough thought to it by those in the company. No offense to the designer, I am sure he worked hard with what they were given but that is what it portrays to me, spend money and pay little attention to what it has accomplished.

By: Chris Grayson

Chris Grayson — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 06:25:04 +0000

I like it a lot.

By: David Airey

David Airey — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 10:10:25 +0000

I agree, Vanessa. It may be aesthetically pleasing, nice colours and all, but it’s not memorable enough to work.

By: Vanessa Colina

Vanessa Colina — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 03:38:58 +0000

I thinks it’s all over the place.. the type and dots should be integrated, at least. To the naked eye it’s just a serial of colorful dots with subtitles.. It’s pretty yes, but i think that’s just about it.

By: Dinner

Dinner — Sun, 11 Mar 2007 20:16:30 +0000

It’s…all right I guess. I’m sure they could’ve done better. A logo does have to be different though, so in that sense they succeeded. As far as something that would make want to look at it, no.

Why Braille? Blind people wont be able to see it, and most people don’t know that it is braille unless they’ve been told.

By: lee newham

lee newham — Tue, 20 Feb 2007 13:26:08 +0000

2/10
I would never have understood that it was braille.
I cant describe it.
A 3 year old cant draw it.
The logotype itself is a boring, not distinctive and doesn’t sit well with the dots.

It wont last. I give it 2 years at best before its totally redesigned.

Ming, you are right.

By: rachel

rachel — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 13:17:25 +0000

Ah, very nice. I like both the look and meaning of the logo, though I’m not sure how much it conveys to someone who doesn’t know it’s Braille. And I agree with Ed that it would be cool if the printed logo were embossed.

By: Bart O'Dell

Bart O'Dell — Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:40:53 +0000

This is one of the most brilliantly design marks of recent history. Totally original. If it was not this way people like you and I would not be arguing over if it is good or not.

Tony Spaeth did a amazing review of this mark.
http://www.identityworks.com/reviews/2006/sensata.htm

By: David Airey

David Airey — Thu, 01 Feb 2007 23:06:16 +0000

Hey Jim,

It’s never too late to join in. Thanks for your contribution. Your last sentence in particular rings true with me.

It can look nice but miss the mark.