PES COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING MANDYA ESTD 1962 An Aut.. logo review
2.4 / 5
Logo score
Logo review of

Pes College Of Engineering Mandya Estd 1962 An Aut..

Review the detailed scores below to see what is working and what should be refined first.

Objective AI feedback. Your creative decision.

Emblem / Crest Detailed, Illustrative, Academic Education
3/5
Legibility
2/5
Originality
5/5
Misread
2/5
Balance
1/5
Scale
Detailed review

Logo performance breakdown

3/5

Legibility

Checkmark icon Main English text on ribbon is bold and readable.
Checkmark icon Contrast is decent in most text sections.

Warning icon Text in the red ribbon is tight and distorted by the ribbon curves.
Warning icon Different fonts, sizes, and orientations cause visual chaos.
Warning icon Text in the banner at top (regional language) and on 'An Autonomous Institution' has moderate readability issues due to color and placement.

2/5

Originality

Checkmark icon Inclusion of multiple engineering symbols specific to the college's discipline.

Warning icon Relies on generic, literal icons for each engineering stream, not a unique or synthesized symbol.
Warning icon Arrangement of elements is cluttered and lacks creative or innovative composition.
Warning icon No clever use of negative space or abstractions.

2/5

Color harmony

Checkmark icon Colors are mostly distinct.

Warning icon Over five strong, contrasting colors create an overwhelming, unharmonious palette.
Warning icon Background color feels disconnected from other design elements.
Warning icon Color transitions are abrupt with little harmony.

Sand
#E3E198

Dark Blue
#112870

Yellow
#F8FD02

Red
#E31B25

Green
#04AF2F

Black
#000000

Color may be holding this logo back. Build a stronger strategic palette before updating the logo.

Build brand colors
2/5

Balance alignment

Checkmark icon Attempts symmetry with shield and plant stalks framing the mark.

Warning icon Elements feel crowded and unbalanced inside the shield.
Warning icon Text, icons and shapes lack consistent alignment; some items feel randomly placed and out of proportion.
Warning icon Ribbon placement does not follow shield shape harmoniously.

logo 200x250 pixels scalability test alignment grid overlay
1/5

Scalability

Checkmark icon Might work on large banners and academic certificates where every detail is visible.

Warning icon Logo is extremely detailed — will lose legibility, clarity and recognizability at small sizes (e.g., website favicons, mobile app icons, business cards, or embroidery).
Warning icon Thin lines and small illustrations become illegible and messy when scaled down.
Warning icon Color gradients and complex artwork do not reproduce well in monotone applications.

logo 200x250 pixels scalability test

200x250 px

logo 100x125 pixels scalability test

100×125 px

logo 50x62 pixels scalability test

50×62 px

5/5

Misinterpretations

Checkmark icon No inappropriate imagery present.

2 / 5

Symbol & text fit

Checkmark icon Wordmark and symbolic imagery are clearly separated.

Warning icon No consistent style or integration between illustration style and wordmark ribbons.
Warning icon Disparity between modern (car, computer) and archaic (gear, dam) imagery adds to visual clash.
Warning icon Wordmark dominates by its size and color, clashing with illustrative detail.

Try your own review

Wondering how your logo performs?

Get a clear logo score, key risks, and priority fix ideas before your client or audience sees it.

Review my logo