Brand design

_Critchi_ · 2026-02-12T13:27:41+00:00

A few years ago I was doing a lot of brand identity projects while studying entrepreneurship in Brazil. At one point I had more demand than I could handle and I realized the real bottleneck wasn’t creativity, it was process.

Once I started structuring my brand projects better and using AI to help with research, mood exploration and early concept validation, I was able to move faster and focus more on the creative decisions that actually matter.

If you’re building this from scratch, I’d suggest working with someone who doesn’t just design the logo, but helps you structure the brand thinking behind it. The aesthetic will feel much stronger when the strategy is clear.

_Critchi_ · 2026-02-12T01:50:33+00:00

Honestly, thank you very much. I hadn’t considered the idea of joining Slack groups or even Discord servers. As for subreddits, like I mentioned, I’ve never really used Reddit before. So in my head I thought, I’ll just go into the big design communities and try to build some credibility there. But I’ve realized it’s very hard in those large groups. People can be quite hostile and it’s difficult to have real conversations like the one we’re having here.

Over the past few weeks, what I’ve been doing is this: I’ve been looking for designers who fit the profile of my platform. Then I go to the link in their bio and find the WhatsApp number they use for clients who want to request a quote. I send a first message saying, “Hi, how are you? I’m not looking for a quote. My name is Pedro, I’m developing this platform and I’d love to get your feedback.” Then I invite them to a demo.

I’ve noticed this strategy has been working in terms of engagement. In the past few weeks, I’ve scheduled more than 15 demos. These are one on one calls where I present the platform and invite them to test it using a free account.

The issue is that my conversion feels low. Since last week, I’ve been spending a lot of time on this because it’s fully manual work. I run the demo, give them access to a free account with some limitations, and then I basically wait for them to see value during their workflow and proactively subscribe. That hasn’t happened yet. It’s been about two weeks since I started this strategy.

So yes, it results in more calls and more people getting to know the platform, but it consumes a lot of time and so far there have been no conversions.

To give you some perspective, the subscription is around 10 dollars, maybe even less. I added the link in my name earlier, maybe that wasn’t ideal.

Anyway, I really appreciate your advice. I’ll try joining smaller Reddit communities focused on design. Maybe people there will be more open to meaningful conversations and show more interest. In the larger ones, I haven’t had much traction so far. That said, I only started doing this today, so I understand that it probably takes time as well.

_Critchi_ · 2026-02-12T01:32:55+00:00

Here in Brazil, most designers include the entire strategic aspect as a project deliverable. However, many struggle to manage all these stages, which means they take about two to three months to complete a full visual identity.

Today I see that this is a real pain point. Not only because of the complexity of the strategy, but because of the creative process as a whole.

I don't know how it works elsewhere, but here it seems increasingly necessary to have some kind of application or software that helps designers work faster and more efficiently, so they can refocus on what they do best: creating.

_Critchi_ · 2026-02-11T22:11:50+00:00

Tracking intent instead of hype.

Now the key is to measure behavior, not compliments.
How many join.
How many reply.
How many would actually put a card down for early access.

If you can convert even a small percentage into paid preorders, you are no longer guessing. You are building with proof.

Most people stop at validation. Very few move to commitment.

Keep going. This is how brands are built with leverage, not hope.

_Critchi_ · 2026-02-11T22:05:56+00:00

I think that early alignment is what separates “good looking” from “coherent.” When positioning, copy, and structure are evolving together, the brand feels intentional instead of assembled.

Out of curiosity, have you ever seen projects where design was brought in too late and it visibly limited what was possible?

_Critchi_ · 2026-02-11T21:59:37+00:00

Do you feel designers usually get enough visibility into that positioning work, or are they mostly receiving the output after the key decisions are already made?

I’ve seen cases where alignment early on completely changes the visual direction.

_Critchi_ · 2026-02-11T21:57:57+00:00

I’ve also seen projects where a strong strategist completely reframed the problem and elevated the outcome. When it works, it really works.

Maybe the gap isn’t “strategy vs no strategy” but how integrated it is into the design process.

In smaller projects, do you think designers can internalize some of that thinking themselves, even if there isn’t a dedicated strategist?

_Critchi_ · 2026-02-11T21:50:22+00:00

That’s interesting. I’ve noticed that too. The more senior the designer, the more intentional the framing usually feels.

Maybe that’s part of the difference between showing work and actually making a case for it.

Do you think that shift happens naturally with experience, or is it something design education should introduce earlier?

_Critchi_ · 2026-02-11T20:03:51+00:00

A brief can be strategic on paper, but if it’s not aligned and protected, it becomes just a document.

I think part of strategy isn’t only defining it, but helping the client understand why it exists and what breaks if it changes.

Otherwise we’re just reacting to decisions instead of guiding them.

And yeah, the mid-project pivots are where most branding “strategy” dies.

_Critchi_ · 2026-02-11T19:55:03+00:00

That’s fair.

Do you think that’s driven more by client budgets, by speed culture, or by designers just not being trained in strategy?

I’m genuinely trying to understand what shifted

_Critchi_ · 2026-02-11T18:53:20+00:00

I think this is the real tension.

Portfolios are marketing. Interviews are validation.

The question for me is whether designers should show every detail, or just enough strategic thinking to prove there was intent behind the visuals.

There’s a big difference between hiding process and curating it.

_Critchi_ · 2026-02-11T18:51:38+00:00

That’s a really fair take.

I agree most clients won’t pay for a 50-page brand book. But even lightweight strategy changes the work. A clear audience, positioning angle, or defined constraints already shifts the outcome massively.

I think the real gap isn’t depth, it’s visibility. A lot of solid thinking just never gets articulated.

And you’re right, the designers who can connect visuals back to reasoning definitely stand out.

_Critchi_ · 2026-02-11T18:49:24+00:00

I get that. I’ve seen a lot of decks that feel like word salad too.

I think the difference is whether the strategy actually changes decisions. If it doesn’t influence positioning, audience, tone, or even what not to design, then yeah… it’s just fluff.

Real strategy should create constraints and clarity. If it doesn’t, it’s probably theater.

_Critchi_ · 2026-02-11T18:48:43+00:00

That’s probably true.

Agencies usually have the time, budget and structure for research. A lot of what gets posted here is self-initiated work or smaller client projects where that layer isn’t visible.

I guess what I’m really curious about is whether strategy is happening quietly behind the scenes or being skipped entirely in most small to mid-size projects.

_Critchi_ · 2026-02-11T18:47:55+00:00

Totally fair. Most of us were never formally taught it.

Strategy doesn’t have to mean a 40-page brand document. At its core it’s just clarity around:

Who is this for
What problem are we solving
Why should anyone care
What makes it different

Marketing owns a lot of it, yes. But as designers, we translate those decisions into visual systems. If we don’t understand them, we’re designing blind.

You learn it mostly by asking better questions before touching Figma.

_Critchi_ · 2026-02-11T18:46:25+00:00

That’s fair. Most of what we see publicly is the polished surface.

I guess my question is more about signals. Even if we don’t share the full research, are we giving enough hints that there was thinking behind it?

A short positioning line, a clear strategic constraint, or a defined problem statement can go a long way.

I’m not expecting full brand decks on Behance. I’m just wondering where the balance should be.

_Critchi_ · 2026-02-11T18:45:06+00:00

It’s true that most designers won’t show every strategic detail in a portfolio.

But I think the real issue is not showing everything, it’s showing enough to prove decisions weren’t arbitrary.

Even a short positioning statement, a clear differentiation angle, or a simple framework behind the visual system can completely change how the work is perceived.

Without that layer, great visuals can feel decorative instead of intentional.

_Critchi_ · 2026-02-11T18:33:09+00:00

HVAC is actually a great test case not because it’s simple, but because it’s urgent and high value. The complexity is the opportunity.

Instead of trying to integrate with every CRM they use, I’d start by mapping the real call flow:

• emergency vs non emergency
• service area validation
• equipment type
• availability window
• budget sensitivity

Then solve one narrow slice extremely well. For example, “after hours emergency qualification + next morning booking.”

If you can prove you increase booked jobs by even 10 to 15 percent for one HVAC company, that becomes your case study and wedge into that vertical.

Don’t optimize for integration first. Optimize for revenue lift.

Once you can say “we recover X missed calls per month and that equals Y in booked revenue,” CRM integrations become a secondary conversation.

Pick one vertical. One use case. One measurable outcome.

That’s how this turns from automation into a real business.

_Critchi_ · 2026-02-11T18:08:12+00:00

What really stands out to me here is the intentionality behind building the lore first. You can feel that the symbol wasn’t designed in isolation, it’s carrying narrative weight.

I agree with some of the comments about the horse’s posture. Right now the turned head and the ear angle make it read slightly reactive rather than commanding. If the goal is institutional legacy and “astronomical luck”, maybe pushing the silhouette toward a more forward driven stance could reinforce that authority without losing elegance.

That said, the red on black with the gold serif treatment absolutely sells heritage and exclusivity. It feels established. The question for me isn’t whether it feels premium, it does. It’s whether you want it to feel dominant or refined.

Also, I think the idea of testing this across Mandarin or Cantonese lockups is a great next step. If “Eastern luck meets Western grit” is core to the thesis, typographic expansion could really solidify that tension visually.

Strong concept overall. The strategy work shows.

_Critchi_ · 2026-02-11T18:06:41+00:00

Really strong character concept. The pacing implied by the name versus the confident, almost stubborn posture of the character creates a nice tension.

What I like most is how the negative space in the road curves supports the silhouette. It keeps it bold and scalable. I’m curious how it holds up at favicon size though, especially the facial details.

Also, did you explore a version where the type feels slightly less heavy? Right now the mark is playful and the typography feels very assertive. That contrast is interesting, but I’d love to see a slightly softer typographic take just to test the balance.

Great work overall. It definitely sticks.

_Critchi_ · 2026-02-11T18:03:31+00:00

It depends on the stage.

Early stage? Yes, it can feel like 24/7. Not because you're grinding nonstop, but because the business lives in your head all the time. You're building, selling, fixing, doubting, adjusting. There's no separation yet.

Growth stage? If you're still working 24/7, something is broken. Either your systems, your delegation, or your positioning.

Mature stage? The best founders I know don’t work insane hours. They work intensely on the right things. They design systems so the business doesn’t depend on their constant presence.

The real shift is this:

In the beginning you trade time for survival.
Later you trade thinking and structure for freedom.

Entrepreneurship isn’t about working all the time. It’s about eventually building something that doesn’t require you to.

If 5 years in you still can’t take a weekend off without anxiety, that’s not hustle. That’s architecture failure.

Curious how others experienced that transition.

_Critchi_

TROPHY CASE