Proposal for a Refreshed Hydra Logo

Proposal for the refresh/modernization of the Hydra logo

Background: Since its inception, Hydra managed to acquire a strong and engaged community while achieving brand recognition among even wider audiences. Over this time, the Hydra name has proven to be quite catchy and the active use of its heads in both the logo and UI interfaces complemented this nicely.

Roughly two months ago, a Hydra DAO participant made a proposal via the forum to reconsider and redesign the visual aspects of the chain. Some comments were made by other community members, which will be broken down below.

Takeaways: The feedback from the DAO participants in the comment section was that they liked the existing branding along with the logo of Hydra and therefore did not consider it sufficiently important for action to be taken.

One comment goes even further and mentions a strong feeling of opposition regarding a potential change of the logo.

Window of Opportunity: As the community is already aware, we are currently in the process of developing a completely new website, which will replace the outdated one we currently have, with a strong focus on the HydraGon features and benefits.

This means that we already have a design and graphics process in action, which creates an optional window of opportunity for updating the Hydra logo as part of the process. The move to HydraGon also strengthens this: what would be a better time to revamp the logo than during a major upgrade?

Compromise Solution: Nevertheless, since there doesn’t appear to be an overwhelming support for the change of the logo, we would like to propose a compromise solution with three light versions to choose from. Given the strong support for the existing logo, all options retain the DNA and feel of it. They should therefore be considered a refresh towards a more modern look, as opposed to a replacement.

The Proposed Choices:

Option #1: The existing logo as it is — no changes.

Option #2: A simplified version of the existing logo that removes some of the finer details and focuses on the main visual aspects.

Option #3: A redrawn version of the existing logo, based on its general appearance and main characteristics.

Please note that the black and white appearance is on purpose, to allow for an easier comparison. A color variation could be adopted, which would depend on the final version of the website design as well as other branding considerations.

Summary of Proposal:

  • Refreshing the Hydra logo for a more modern look
  • Option to keep the existing logo if the community prefers to

The redrawn logo #3 is visually more appealing and versatile. Eager to see various color choices. Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication. :slight_smile:


All 3 are good :thinking:
The simplicity of the Redrawn one it has something really appealing and i like the font

1 Like

Can we put own logo proposals too in the commend section?


No. 1 is the best, no need to change


Could we get a version where it is the third picture but the 1st writing style?

1 Like

The community can make suggestions too, yes. Under the assumption that:

  1. The design is of high quality
  2. There is some form of support for the design by the community
  3. It is submitted by Nov 20th latest

The goal should be to keep the number of options managable, so that participation does not suffer due to too many choices :slight_smile: Maybe we can limit to 1 suggestion per community member.


I came here to keep the logo the same, but i really like #3.
#3 has my vote now.

1 Like

Keep it the same, number 3 is too wiggly for me.


Adding eyes to #3 Redwarn would really be an option for me

2 and 3 looks tempting but I got used to old one so 1 for me


1 or 3 are both fine options to me, 2 looks less attractive in my personal opinion. However in general I like the current logo so 1 would have my vote. However if the community decides for one of the others I can live with that ofcourse :ok_hand:


I like the original logo far better than the two others. Looks good on print, looks good on a coin, slick lines, unique, and not super simple and clip art looking. These two new options have so much empty space. As a graphic designer myself I think it’s a downgrade personally that could actually deter future adopters.The original two tone shade has more depth and is actually more diverse as far as color options go if it was needed to be colorized for any reason.


Ok I finally made it over here to look at this. I see the reasoning in Flo’s proposal. Thank you. But I still do not see the purpose in changing the logo, especially considering the similarity of the ones proposed. They are barely different.

1 Like

I would vote for no 1 , the old version

version 3 give me association to the old nazi symbol, so I really think it is a - NO GO


It does not give me that association, even with trying since I read your comment. I prefer 3 but with the writing style of 1.

I am good to leave it as is, but if we’re redoing it, I’m in favour of version 3. It looks simpler/cleaner. But do keep in mind it’s still to detailed to display in a small size. For instance as a favicon in a browser tab or in a crypto portfolio app. If I was asked to redo it, I would go for a single head for reasons described above. And yes, I do know the multi headed philosophy wouldn’t be displayed then. But I don’t think that’s a problem. A logo should look cool, fit the brand/project and should also be interpretable when displayed in a small size.

By the way, please keep the letters capitalised. So don’t write ‘Hydra’ but ‘HYDRA’. It looks more balanced that way. The font that’s used doesn’t fit our project if you’d ask me. I would go for a font that looks more modern. This one is so close to good old ‘Arial’, that it appears a bit dated instantly.

And a little example to illustrate what I mean. I just ripped some snake heads off the web. Shapes, icons, colours aside, it’s just to show you what a simplified logo would look like in a browser tab or table. It might even be an idea to use a separate derivative for those purposes.

I posted this on telegram but I realized it’s better to post the discussion here:
The problem is branding. It would be like Ferrari changing their logo. Bad idea. Maybe it’s good every 100 years or so but you don’t change a logo like underwear. When you change your logo you change your soul. Just because you’re updating a website, which incidentally should be updated multiple times a year, doesn’t mean you should update your logo. And you certainly shouldn’t wait to update your website until it’s time to update your logo.


Maybe try some stykes like these.

1 Like