Just launched a recent brand identity project that I successfully completed for CTRL+SHIFT.

Ctrl+Shift is a brand identity project crafted for a forward-thinking platform operating at the intersection of creative technology, culture, and media. Through events, talks, content, and community, the brand brings together artists, builders, and technologists to explore creative intelligence, generative storytelling, and coding as cultural expression.

Editorial and confident, the identity is unapologetically creative-first—slightly irreverent, opinionated, and culture-forward. Designed to feel like a living platform rather than a campaign, the visual language leverages glyph dithering, color halftones, 3D ASCII graphics, and surreal soft sci-fi imagery. Anchored by a pitch-black foundation with vibrant color tints as accents, the system creates a bold yet sophisticated presence for a community built around curiosity, craft, and future-facing creativity.

You can see full project presentation here.

Feel free to like, comment and follow, kindly appreciated.

This identity for CTRL+SHIFT is a masterclass in high-end positioning. Using 3D ASCII and glyph dithering creates that "editorial and confident" feel that moves far beyond basic decoration.

It’s a perfect example of using strategic clarity to build a living platform rather than...

Taste test 🎨

Same 2D scene. Different color direction.

One feels softer, more subtle. The other is bolder, more contrasty.

At first, the stronger palette felt like the obvious choice… now I’m not sure if it’s just too much.

Which one would you keep - and why?

It depends on what the use case is, both of these options have legit arguments going for them

A for thinking/loading state

B for celebratory state