Critique of Enlightened Logo a Coaching Org

Enlightened, is a coaching company based in Canada that helps individual and professionals, navigate life challenges with clarity, confidence and resilience through guidance and personalized support . Their services includes a one on one coaching, group workshop and online resources.

During our discovery section the company wanted a visually appealing and professional identity that resonates with target audience, and reflect business commitment to personal growth, empowerment and holistic well-being.

They wanted an identity that is modern, friendly, sophisticated and approachable.

When I asked them, if there’s one thing they would love to be known for, they responded with " empowering transformation" this I thought would make a great tagline, and I wanted this to reflect in the logo.

After so many research and sketches, I thought about how transformation can reflect in the logo and I thought of the idea of metamorphosis then came butterfly.

But I also wanted the logo to reflect light from the world enlightened. Then came the idea of the bug firefly which also undergoes metamorphosis. After deeper research I found that firefly symbolizes guide and transformation which was the core idea of my clients company and that formed the basis of the icon mark.

The word mark however, I wanted something modern with a professional and welcoming look. Hence I use this Word mark and added a bit of rounded corners to look approachable.

It’s a full brand work and I just finished the icon mark and logo mark. I wanted a plain and critical critique of the work before I proceed to fix in other plugging.

Please I need your critique on this.

1 Like

In general, I like what you’ve done. It seems to be an improvement over some of the work you’ve posted in the past.

There are two things I don’t care for with this.

The first is the lower case “g.” I’d look at modifying into a more traditional single-story or double-story shape.

The other thing is that the wings have a different shape. Granted, I’m not an expert in fireflies, but I doubt they are like this in real life. Even if they are, it looks awkward in the logo.

Okay, one more thing, the reverse applications need work.


Your concept is solid, but your execution of the firefly isn’t very convincing.


It’s a firefly? More like a folding knife to me.

Or a Star Wars jet.


As others have said, the firefly needs looking at. The thinking is good. The execution isn’t. Also, watch the negative spaces. At small sizes, the elements merge into one – and that’s just digitally. Wait until you put ink on paper.

I am assuming the font is a freebie? If not, it should be. There are some horrible curves on it; particularly the n and h. Optical compensation has not been aching priority for whoever threw it together either.

Overall, nice thinking, you just need to spend more time in refining the execution. Always consider the negative spaces as much as the elements. You need to create a relationship between the word mark and the icon to avoid it looking like an afterthought. Study the best examples.

Keep pushing. It’ll get there.

1 Like

thank you so much sir Steve, I really appreciate your time in not only critiquing this but noticing that there has been an improvement on my part. About the g, I don’t know I just love the way the G looks for no reason.

Well, since you and others mentioned that it looks awkward I will definitely change the font and send it here.

And about the wings of the bug, the lower one is the real wing while the other one above is the wing covering.

I really apologize for my late response I was busy with work throughout yesterday. Check out the image I sent above.

You also mentioned reverse application needing work, I’m sorry but I don’t understand what do you mean by that?

Thank you so much sir Just B, the problem is I don’t know what else to do about the execution of the firefly, I aslo bad my doubts wasn’t sure if others would recognize that as a firefly.

After so many iterations I came up with that. What do you suggest I do to execute it better please.

Hahahaha, I also thought about that Sir Eriskay, what do you suggest I do. I drew lots of bugs to finally come up with that, searched for tons of bugs images online. Honestly I’m out of idea, what else can I do please.

Thank you sir Sprout, I will definitely fix the font. However I don’t get some of your point sir.

[quote=“sprout, post:5, topic:29560”]
At small sizes, the elements merge into one
[/quote] you mentioned this sir, and I’m wondering is that a good thing or is it bad???

You also mentioned creating a relationship with both marks , please can you explain more on that sir. And you mentioned studying examples, where can I find good examples sir.

Overall, thank you for taking your time to critique this I really appreciate sir.

@sprout and @Steve_O

Have made another tweaking to the font, thus time I only kerned the font I didn’t round thr edges. Please tell me what you think sirs.


Thanks for the explanation on the wings. I was reading it like one of the wings was the left wing and one was the right wing. That’s why I thought they should match. For the record, I was not opposed to the entire font used for the first iteration, I just didn’t care for the lower case “g” and was suggesting just the “g” be redrawn. As far as the reverse image goes, what you just posted demonstrates the problem. The light / bug’s tail gets lost. What if the word “Enlightened” and the bug body was a light gray, maybe 20% or 30% black, and the light was white?

I actually liked the truncated “g” simply to remove the awkwardness of a single letter with a descender in a long word. Thought it was a slick fix. (I’m a sign guy, where alignment and spacing on a sign blank is all about finding that visual ‘center’)

Don’t use gray in your BW version. Light him up!

I got the hard wing soft wing thing, but it does look more bird than bug. You can stylize it a bit more rather than being quite so literal.

To me, it looks like the bottom of the “g” was cropped off — like an error.

This might not work, but what if the firefly’s light was reversed out sort of like this lightbulb image.


I’m not saying the rays need to be treated the same stylistically, but I think that at the moment the fact that there is no “glow” or light coming from the firefly makes it fall flat.

Honestly, firefly is not a remarkable insect in looks and shapes, unlike a butterfly, bee or spider. My suggestion will be to try other stylized options.

You don’t want people other than entomologists to think it’s a cricket with its butt on fire.

The typography is fine. If I were you I would outline the body of the firefly and make your gray area a solid white. Try going from there.

Consider a change to the type by enhancing the word “light” right in the middle of the word “Enlightened.” I think this is where the emphasis should be placed. Also, with that change in mind, it would be natural to place the firefly image above the word “light” and I believe it would make the logo more cohesive.

1 Like

@Eriskay @sprout @Just-B @Steve_O @CraigB @PopsD
After so many tweaks trials and errors I’m stuck with two options.

Either making the icon instantly recognizable as a firefly Hence I added a light ray to the butt not sure if it works though.

But the con of this is, the icon gets more complicated.

Or leaving the viewers wondering what the icon is. Hence removing the light ray.

But the pro of this is the logo is more simplified.

Would have love to stylize the logo more like y’all suggested but I have no idea how to.

And I’m keeping the former font because It’s aesthetically pleasing and suits the brand style.
I look forward to your feedback

Of the two, the second two are better (without the glow lines), but I still think there are a lot of things in there to trip you up. The yellow, for one is weak. Yellow is always. touch one to get right.

Some of the negative spaces between the three parts of the icon and two thin and will visually blend together when small (and actually in print). The nick in the wing is redundant and again, when small could look like a mistake.

I think a bit more refining to make it more robust and you could have something workable.

But… that font! As it is a logo, why not spend the time fixing them. It doesn’t have to slavishly be the point from whence it originated, In fact, far better not to be. The curves on that n really make my toes curl – I’m a sensitive soul!! Look at the e small. The tail is almost connecting to the crossbar. There is tension where the ascender of the d meets the bottom curve. The bottom curve of the t is uneven. Mostly though, it is the lack of optical compensation on the verticals vs horizontals that stuffs it up. At least they have allowed some compensation for the o / e / d against the glyphs that sit on the baseline, like E n h, etc.

I think the feel of that font, generally, is OK for what you are trying to achieve, but it really needs refining. Too many bits of it jar.

That n is going have me awake at 3am in a cold sweat!

OCD? who? moi?

There are more options than that. You seem to have unnecessarily trapped yourself in a mental box.

Most people don’t know what fireflies look like up close since they only see them glowing at night. I’ve never seen a firefly since I live in a drier part of the world.

Visit the link below to see other people’s interpretations of fireflies — almost none of them make an attempt at realism. Instead, they draw a stylized fly with a glowing yellow abdomen.