Oct 14
Corporate identity is important, it sets the style of the entire design
2004 at 03.49 am posted by Veerle Pieters
Creating a new logo is always a challenge. So how about improving a logo and give it a serious update? That is something different, sometimes leaving some of the old design in the new design is advisable. In other circumstances it’s better to give the housestyle a 180 degrees turn around. It’s my experience that making a design work with an ugly logo can be very hard and a serious restrain on the inspiration. It’s not the first time that a feeling hit me that it doesn’t fit anywhere. Something to that extent can be a deal-breaker.
Recently a client asked us to create a brochure (and I’m not referring to the example picture below btw), update their website and some stationary etc. First thing I always “inspect” is the logo and housestyle. Not that I immediately think about some extra cash, but it’s simply my “duty” to advice if an update is needed yes or no. Even after all those years I’m still amazed of some of the material that I receive! Remember that a housestyle is your window to the world, it defines half of your total design and it’s always present in every commutation. With this project I suggested my client a small update, because it had something unprofessional looking so only changing some minor details and leaving the good parts in tact proved to be the best solution.
Advising an update can be hard, it’s not always easy to convince your client that he really should give it some thought. There are a lot of factors that are important to consider. Your client might give his first argument not the go ahead: there is simply no budget and the logo is too well-known and integrated. This is the answer you’ll get most of the time. If budget is the mayor reason, not only for the creation but especially the production of it (changing the logo on everything), then convincing might prove very difficult. Suggesting to work in stages might be an answer. By spreading the production over a certain period there is less pressure on the the budget.
Occasionally you bump into a sentimental reason, your client is too attached to it, there is entire history behind it.... and often it has nothing to do with the company itself. In this case you should definitely convince the client that there is no reason at all to keep a logo that doesn’t look professional and that a logo is all about image and not just sentiment, it is about being professional and giving a professional impression to potential new clients.
You might consider to give the client some graphical hints (sketches) on how you visualize the update. Make him compare the 2 designs (the old and the updated version) and tell him why you think updating is really necessary. Act as if you were a new client and tell him how you would react when seeing a brochure designed with the new identity and compare that with a brochure designed with the old identity.
Of course all of this is worthwhile if you are convinced that the company really needs another logo, that there is no other option. It’s not that whenever you need to design something and the logo and housestyle of the company doesn’t suit your style that you need to suggest a re-branding, that would be rather absurd. It is a matter of experience, graphical insight and expertise that tells you whether this needs to be suggested or not. The more experienced you get the better this will go, the more people will see you as an expert and take your advice seriously.
In an upcoming post I’ll take this theory into practice and share my experience with a real business case. We’ll talk about why I’ve changed the look and how I did it.
16served
1
It can be hugely frustrating and a real bind on your creativity if you’re forced to work with a badly designed or out of date logo. No matter how well executed and on target the piece is, slap an ugly and inappropriate logo on it and the whole things comes falling down.
Lots of cliché’s come to mind about only being as strong as the weakest link and trying to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.
2
Thanks for the very useful article.
My company is about to be ‘rebranded’ over the next few months and it can be difficult (being a client of a design company) to stay focused on what is getting changed and why. It is all too easy to forget that the brand is the ‘bit’ of the company that external people see first and that sometimes personal feelings of the current look can be irrelevant. First impressions do count. :)
3
Maybe you should consider posting a liquid style logo tutorial some day. Love those logos. ;)
4
I hate to be the naysaying jerk of the bunch, but I really feel that I must say this…
But first, let me say that I am neither a graphic designer, nor any sort of professional designer. I have taken marketing and branding classes, and studied user experience, but that is the extent of my ‘expertise’. I guess the rest is just what I would call reasoned opinion.
One more thing - I really like your design most of the time. I thoroughly enjoy every visit I have to your site. It’s appealing and pleasant - a nice place to be.
So, here we go…
I really don’t think you presented any real reasons to change the logo (although you very well may have them, I don’t feel they were adequately presented). IMO, “unprofessional looking” needs to be quantified. If I was the client in this case, I would have said, “What, precisely, makes this logo look ‘unprofessional’?”
Now the designer of today may say, “Well, it lacks a softening, beveling, and drop shadow...” After all, that seems to be the cry of EVERY DESIGN OUT THERE.
Frankly, I’m tired of it.
This is just reminiscent of the UPS logo redesign. Ugh. Michelle makes an insightful comment regarding that issue in saying, “The new UPS logo looks like the new Burger King logo. Slap a gradient and a swoosh in there and it’s instantly modern! In a few years we will laugh at these logos the same way we laugh at drop shadows today.”
So true.
Personally, I like the old ESDNOW.com logo better! I think it ‘pops’ way better, can be incorporated across any company propaganda much easier, and just sticks in my head better. I can envision it and associate it with the brand without trying to remember drop shadows, gradients, etc. I could draw it on a napkin.
The best quality of the ‘old’ logo, however, is that it looks to be fairly timeless. It seems to, like many of Paul Rand’s logos, withstand design trends and what equate to Photoshop droplets. A good logo, IMO, will do that. This new logo will have to be redesigned again in 5 or 10 years.
But that’s just my opinion. Please keep up the excellent work and don’t take this as an attack on that. This decision, however, IMO, was not a good one. Then again, you just got the brunt of my frustration at the design community as a whole for following trends like sheep. Sorry for that.
=)
5
I’d have to say I agree with Rohit on this one… at least according to the blog that was just posted…
Speaking of Paul Rand’s UPS Logo, I found this quote from Renner that describes how I feel on this subject:
“To design is much more than simply to assemble, to order, or even to edit; it is to add value and meaning, to illuminate, to simplify, to clarify, to modify, to dignify, to dramatize, to persuade, and perhaps even to amuse.”
And my addition to Rohit’s comment would be… what is the concept you are trying to convey with this new logo? Besides the formally “trendy” design preference...?
6
I just reread what I wrote…
Renner should be Rand, not Renner
7
I actually like the new logo better. It could use a little more crispyness, but that’s probably just the qualityloss of the webimage.
And about timelessness: It doesn’t matter if it’s timeless or not, it matter if the people today who are going to be judging the companies professionalism think the logo looks/feels professional or not. Most of the time they won’t even have to think it, just sub-consciously feel it.
Also, I can’t wait for an article on how to make Liquid balls like the ones seen at the top of http://www.duoh.com/varia/img/project.jpg those are just mouth-watering design touches.
PS. Ben, you mean Nathan, not Rohit. Rohit posted the little comment above the big critique.
8
@Nathan Logan, no offense but please next time read my article carefully I especially mentioned that this article is NOT about the logo I present in the image. The case of the logo in the image my client particular asked me to do an update. Also, I have made a “flat” version and a version with more effect (3D, glassy etc.) which my client preferred over the flat version since his business is an online business and this logo is more a product logo, not a company logo.
I didn’t use the logo of the case I’m referring to at the end of my post, I didn’t want to spoil that yet. Maybe this example isn’t a good one, but in my article I’m talking about an update or 180° re-design, this example is a simple update, an update that I did not have to convince my client of. And yes the old one is already professional, it is just an update.
Another thing I want to set straight here is that I’m not like the designers you’re referring to that follow a trend ‘beveling, glassy...” I like some effects to an extent but I hate overkill. Sure, I’m influenced by some trends, like subtle drop shadow etc. Design evolves and isn’t always timeless. Please check out my logos and you’ll notice that they all lack effects ;-)
9
@Ben Lumpkin, you’ll get an answer to this in an upcoming article where I’ll talk about “how and why etc.” So to make things extra clear it wasn’t about the logo used in the image of this post. Sorry for my confusion… I’ve set the sentence bold now. It’s just I don’t save any ugly logos that I’ve re-designed (good riddens ! :-D), couldn’t find any without spoiling the logo for my upcoming post ;-)
@AkaXakA and others, yes I’m planning on doing a tutorial on that please bare with me for a moment, thanks. But it’s a promise that I intend to keep.
10
Veerle,
Pardon me for misinterpreting what you were saying in your post. I actually did read the entire thing. Among others commenting, I guess I was confused about the point you were trying to make (especially after I went to ESDNOW.com and saw the ‘new logo’ used there).
Your logos are very nice, btw.
=)
11
I have to agree with nathan on some of his points. There _is_ a trend in modern logo design to use a lot of “standard/common “ design language which tends to blur many of new logos all together.
In the case of the new ESDNow logo, i think the update to the Font is very nice and somewhat less better in the case of the design element. But that is a matter of taste, and I do like the design on the company’s web page.
In the case of the UPS logo: the new version stinks! big time. The original Rand one is a classic! Of course even a clasicc logo might be able to be improved upon, or updated… but the new one fails this test.
It is so hard to design great memorable logos using only lines. ie flat black on white. but i notice that most of the great ones are those that are simply that lines. and rand was a master at it..... c i a o
PS i, like AkaXakA, also enjoy Veerle’s fine design sense. I look forward to learning more on how to do from her!
12
@all, the main focus of my article is about certain situations where you need to work with an ugly housestyle and as a consequence it has a negative effect on the creativity of the project. So it was not about updating a logo for the sake of updating or design trends. I’ll try to prove a point in an upcoming post of an old logo that has been updated since it was a bit old-fashioned.
To refer to the fact that people suggest here that you see a lot of logos with the same styles (glassy, transparency etc.), if you look around in the real world, magazines, ... (not the blogosphere) you’ll have a hard time finding such logos. One trend that I do notice is that certain fontfaces can be more popular then others. At least that’s what it feels like to me.
13
Ah, thanks for clearing some things up. My favorite thing about design blogs is getting to see other designers’ processes and how they came to their conclusion. So sorry if I was expecting too much initially…
I do enjoy your design, and that is what keeps me coming back, keep up the good work.
14
Interesting discussion. I’ve worked with some logos I dislike, like everyone else, and I find that a good solution is to reverse out the flat logo to white wherever possible. That doesn’t work as well with the new crop of 3d logos, but does work pretty well if the logo is flat or has a flat version.
I do see more and more 3d logos as I look around, with the UPS logo a good example. My guess is this is due to the rising importance of the web and the falling cost of 4-color printing for business cards, etc. over the internet.
I’ve also experienced a new tendency: for clients to ask for their stationery items to be produced in Word, sometimes even to the exclusion of layouts in a design program.
I’ve also been asked to reformat a visual identity manual for internal staff, to be placed on their corporate intranet. I had originally prepared it for other designers and printers, using traditional specifications that were deemed too technical by my client. It was a 180° change that I had never before encountered.
I don’t think enough analysis of these changes has been undertaken by designers—at least I haven’t read anything on the subject.
I wonder what is being taught about logo design these days… We learned to create logos that could be reduced to black and white, with no screens, but that’s no longer really necessary, unless your client specifies they are concerned with photocopying of their logos. I do have clients with that concern.
What’s your experience?
15
@Marilyn, a lot of my clients prefer to have a logo that is flat because it is easier to use for different purposes. I have created some logos in both flat and 3D version (a bit like Apple does). The flat version is used for printed matter or other ‘off-line’ purposes, the 3D is for presentations, websites… in other words for screen media. I think it all depends a bit on the company’s activity. Most of the designs I create start from a flat version and if a version with 3D glassy effect is suitable for the logo and the company, I will suggest it to my client. So far I have only created 2 logos this way (and that’s nothing compared to the list of logos I’ve designed so far over the years). Not sure whether this is a tendency, but I’m sure you’re right about the fact that we are less limited then years ago because of the evolution in printing techniques, and techniques for other purposes. Like you, my clients also often request to design templates for Word, PowerPoint etc. and give them some kind of PDF styleguide on how to use the logo and corporate identity and this only since the last 3 years. One reason could be the fact that a lot can be done “in-house” since there are good color printers these days that aren’t that expensive.
BTW, thank you for the great tip about using rather difficult and less attractive logos.
16
Veerle, seems like our experiences are pretty similar, except that many of the clients I’ve worked with recently aren’t interested in logo redesigns (UN organizations). You’re very welcome for the tip. I hope it comes in handy!