99designs rebranding...thoughts?

looks clean but it looks like it doesn't really serve a purpose.

>>260404

where's the logo? I just see a font

Not everything needs a logo, Google, Pintrest are examples. It is clean, good spacing. I dont know what it looked like previously so cant really comment on how well it works as a rebrand, that aside its decent. I'd make the purpose of the site more apparent at a glance probably. Also, is it too clean?... maybe.

>>260432
nigga google and pinterest both have logos

That are rarely used , also, 99 designs has one, its like.. 99D, which again is type, but lots of brands have letters for logos.. so, Logo can be type, logos dont need to be everywhere.

>>260445
>brands don't need identities

think about that for a minute faggot

File: screen1.jpg (162KB, 849x860px) Image search: [Google] [Yandex] [Bing]

162KB, 849x860px

the whole wordmark is only used on client interface...for the designer interface they use pic related

>>260469
it wouldn't really work on the mobile site.

>>260507
same principle on the mobile site...full wordmark for clients, small wordmark for designers

File: image.png (800KB, 640x1136px) Image search: [Google] [Yandex] [Bing]

800KB, 640x1136px

Wow talk about looking more like a goldmine of spec work. Take half decent ideas and combine them yourself in to your very own unique logo original please don't steal, on the backs of tens of submissions.

>>260420
yeah, because every logo has to be a fancy
ambiguous logo thingy.
>FexEx
>Google
>facebook