[DATAGOV Core] DATAGOV Visual Identity

[Giulia Campaioli]

Hi everyone,

and thank you Meg.

I have the impression that the two options propose different objects, 
like in the first one there are more options for logos, in the second 
there is a style for potential visualizations? The two proposals do not 
look "symmetrical".

I really appreciate the designer's conceptual starting point (from 
pixelled to rounded) and I like the arrows thingy in logo Option 2.

Some critical comments, but of course this is just my opinion. I did not 
find the palettes convincing; if I had to chose one I'd go for Palette 
number 4 in Option 1, because I think it brings together some "earthy" 
colours with some "cyberpunk" colours, which is a bit what I envisioned. 
In logo number 1, the O of DATAGOV looks like a bit like a U.

Anyway, I am happy to participate to the meeting with the designer to 
discuss these and more ideas together :)

Thanks again,

Best,
Giulia


On 27/1/26 10:28, Jonas Breuer via Core wrote:
> Hi team,
>
> Thanks, Meg.
>
> I like both, but I have *a preference for Option 2* after a first look
>
>  *
>     I like the colours more, especially the orange (I don’t like the
>     pink in Option 1)
>  *
>     I like the style of the “potential visualisations” a lot
>  *
>     However, I am not 100% convinced of the logo itself, not exactly
>     sure why but I think it’s the strong contrast between the black
>     and the orange inside the letters
>
>
> Cheers
>
>
> *From: *Core <core-bounces at lists.datagovlab.net> on behalf of Meg 
> Kitamura via Core <core at lists.datagovlab.net>
> *Date: *Tuesday, 27 January 2026 at 08:01
> *To: *core at lists.datagovlab.net <core at lists.datagovlab.net>
> *Subject: *[DATAGOV Core] DATAGOV Visual Identity
>
> Dear DATAGOV team,
>
> Ray has sent us a few options for our visual identity. Please have a 
> look and share your thoughts if you have any! We can discuss during 
> our in-person meeting on the 3rd, perhaps.
>
> We will be meeting with Ray on February 4th (time TBD). It would be 
> good to have a general consensus on design by then so Ray can update 
> the design according to our preferences!
>
> Best,
>
> Meg
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ghserv.net/pipermail/core/attachments/20260127/c0d35a74/attachment.htm>