Breadline Design

Hey troops, been insanely busy last month so blogging’s taken a back seat. I’ve got a fresh design for Breadline ready though so looking forward to getting that up and posting more regularly. In the mean time here’s a piece I’m still working on, keeping with the same style as my earlier illustration.  I’ll post up the finished thing when its done. Cheers!

Brand agency SomeOne have recently created a new logo and visual idenitiy for highstreet retailer New Look. According to their spokesperson the new identity will give “a mature direction to the brand positioning”. Not a bad move, as what they have currently is pretty young and feminine in a crowded teen market. What is surprising though is the timing.

With the price of living in the UK soaring, house prices falling and inflation rising perceived middle and high end brands have seen faltering sales. The masterful M&S rebrand was perfect for the economic climate of the time, but as shoppers lock down spending its the perceived budget brands such as Netto and Comet that are reaping the benefits. Suddenly looking cheap and cheerfull isn’t such a bad way to be.

Somehow “This isn’t just a recession, this is an M&S recession.” Isn’t gonna cut it.

Whether other major brands reposition themselves in the face of the brewing economic storm remains to be seen, but New Look’s brave rebrand will make an interesting study. Will a fresh face reinvogorate and inspire tired shoppers and sales? or serve to push New Look away from its target market when it needs it most? 

Procrastinating at work I came across Apples original logo, a bizarre and intricate illustration of Isaac Newton sat under a tree with the famous granny smith poised for a fall. It was great to see the where the Iconic mark came from, and nice to be reminded that even billion dollar tech companies once had impractical and over the top logos.

Ok I did this awhile back, but fancied putting it up anyway. Was a personal piece inspired by some great illustration I’d seen online.

Last week I defended the Tunbridge Wells Council’s decision to rebrand from a another knee-jerk media reaction, the majority of criticism seemingly leveled at the £18,500 price tag. The quality was also attacked, with the local paper pointing out that the new logo was by most standards a bit rubbish. They were right, but they failed to mention it was modern, the logos one saving grace. In contrast the previous logo belonged in an museum. The region needed a fresh face, and although the results were far from perfect, the time was right for a change.

Everyone has an opinion on the region they live in and the other regions of the country. On a local level we never really see the regions brand at work. We may occasionally see the logo in the local paper or the councils website, but it has very little effect on our day to day lives. Nationally however the picture is very different, and its on this stage that a modern identity starts to pay its dues.

Scotland is known for its countryside, Cambridgeshire its university and Manchester its football. Country, region and city, all with their own identities. They work hard to promote themselves nationally, though the locals rarely see it. You have to be in Glasgow to see a One North East advert,  just as you need to watching the TV in England to see a Visit Scotland advert.

And Tunbridge Wells? It be foolish to think an area that small can do without a modern logo. With local I.T firms struggling to tempt talent away from London, and local initiatives such as Kent TV allowing new platforms for area promotion, now is the time for a new face. And as for the £18,500 price tag? This is logo for a region where a pint costs £3.70 and a house over £300,000. For the same price as a new ford focus the town can present a logo that although not award winning, at least won’t be receiving a telegram from the Queen any time soon.   

Why is it always bad logo design that makes the news? Tunbridge Wells Borough Council’s new logo is the latest logo to get publicly slammed, appearing on the front page of their local paper in what must have been a really slow news day in Kent.

Costing £18,500 the local paper is not happy, and as the logo is pretty rubbish, its understandable, but is it really becoming acceptable to blast design work this publicly? The new logo is bad, but it is at least newer than the one it replaced, which had past its sell-by-date a decade ago. It seems since the Olympic logo was so brutally mauled the media has had free reign to decide what is good and bad value.

The situation isn’t helped by biased coverage. Headlines always make the price out to be for the logo alone, disregarding the consultancy, research and multiple concepts that come hand in hand with rebrands. Councils are big organizations, and getting buy-in from all parties on a new design would be a stressfully slow process. The paper decided to add a cutting insult to mild injury, stating “They would have been better off asking residents to submit their own ideas”.

Nice. Maybe next time there’s a power cut they should ask residents to submit their own batteries. 

This media attitude sets a bad precedent for freelance logo designers. If the public (aided by the media) believe their design skills rival established professionals, then the perceived value of design drops, and when that happens the lower end of the logo market suffers. Big brands understand the need for professional branding, but does the local plumber and the high street nail salon?  It’s clients like these that keep freelancers and small design business’s alive, and if their local paper is trivializing brand design then its people like them who suffer.

Public awareness of the true cost of branding needs to be raised if the tide of negative publicity is to be turned. Logo design is one of the smallest parts of a brand, but if the media continue to make out to be the biggest then the logo design industry will face a turbulent future.

Using the word Solution in a brand name has long been a pet hate of mine, annoying me to the point that in the past I used to post up the Private Eye’s weekly absurd solutions list on Breadline in an attempt to highlight the vulgar practice. Sadly it continues so I’ve felt the need to reiterate why using the term is as disgracefull as OAP tipping and global warming. 

I first clocked the term ”solution” at the tail end of my uni years, and yeah I’ll admit, back then it was a useful word for fleshing out terrible proposals. My final project was titled ”An Integrated Dynamic Block Stacking Solution”, which I felt had a far better ring to it than “Tetris Reskin”

These days business’s both big and small use the term to over-describe whatever product or service their trying to push. This can be forgiven, but putting Solution in the actual business name is truly a crime, as not only does it tell us nothing about the product/service, but will consign the name to the ranks of the hundred thousand other small business’s that couldn’t be arsed to come up with an original name. My favourite example is Pasta Solutions “The Ultimate Solution To Your Pasta Needs!” What was wrong with simply ”Perfect Pasta” ?

Using “Solution” might sound vaguely professional, but have you ever actually thought, ”I have a cooking problem, I need a Cooking Solution” Of course not.  We don’t think in management speak, so why name business’s this way?

If a client comes to you for an identity and they propose a name that includes the S word, it’s worth going out of your way to turn them round. Explain to them that thousands of business’s use the same word in their title, tell them that the word doesn’t actually mean anything, that they’ll have a search engine nightmare, and that it saps personality from a potentially vibrant brand.  If they still insist use Helvetica for the typeface, add a corporate swoosh graphic and the strap-line “Thinking Outside the Box”.  Then double your fee. They’ll love you for it.    

A logo for an online resource focussing on all things apple related.   

Those in the know will already have seen the OGC rebrand debacle. After splashing out a cool £14,000 on a fresh identity the suave government department have ended up with some serious egg on their face. The logo, when spun 180 degrees, reveals a comically explicit image of a man indulgeing in a five knuckle shuffle. In light of the embarrassing revelations an OGC spokesman said:

 ”It is true that it caused a few titters among some staff when viewed on its side, but on consideration we concluded that the effect was generic to the particular combination of the letters OGC - and it is not inappropriate to an organisation that’s looking to have a firm grip on Government spend”

A firm grip indeed. However when an identity becomes the laughing stock of the very staff at the centre of the brand, surely its time for a climb down? The poor spokesmen is right, the effect is generic of those letters, but surely simply boosting the kerning so the letters didn’t touch would go some way to easing the problem? A quick fix now would save the OGC years of internal and industry smirking. Clearly a little pride needs swallowed here.

This is the second government logo to come under fire in recent months. The Olympic logo was slain on sight and yet still endures. Perhaps the OGC brand managers believe their logo will survive in the same way. I wouldn’t bet on it though. The Olympic logo may be unpopular, but there is nothing inherently comical or obscene about it. I suspect we’ll see another quiet OGC rebrand shortly, and if not, another worthy inclusion in those “obscene logos” collections that do the rounds every few months.

Using negative space in a logo can be a clever way of getting an extra concept across with minimum fuss. I’m a big fan of the technique, and have used it in the last few logo’s I’ve designed with varying success. Today at work though a debate started as to whether negative space logos were actually effective at conveying a graphical message, or simply pass unnoticed by the untrained eye.

Its a point worth considering. The arrow camouflaged in the FedEx logo is missed by nearly everyone who dosn’t design for a living, just as the iconic building nestled between the knife and fork of My Cuisine is only going to be obvious if you actually know the building, its location and its importance.

 When hiding an object within negative space we’re asking the viewer to work that little bit harder to decipher the meaning, and we’re running the risk of having the trick being lost altogether. Despite this I think its worth taking the chance. Negative space logo’s still work when the colours are inverted, and only get stronger when in black and white. The trick can be subtle as in FedEx, or full on as in F1.  Besides, many dual and triple concept logo’s ask that little bit more from the viewer, even without the use of negative space. A great example is that of Posh Boats, where a cursory glance shows a Fleur-de-lis, but a moment of consideration reveals a prow cutting through waves.

When a second logo concept isn’t obvious, but at the same time isn’t critical to the designs success, the logo slips into a special place, were the brand is accessible at face value, but has that little secret for those lucky enough to see it. The FedEx logo is rock solid without the knowledge of the arrow, just as the Posh Boats logo works if the actual boat is missed.

When a viewer does see the trick, that special design gem, there’s a moment where the brand and the viewer connect, a moment where the brand reaches out and touches them.  Allright, it isn’t going to give them an orgasm, nor even make them reach out and buy the product, but what it will do is make the brand that little bit more memorable, that fraction more special. Once seen a design trick can’t be unseen.

 It’s this moment, preloaded into a design that adds brand value. It’s what will separate your clients logo from the competition, and why the logo’s core concept will survive longer than the original artwork will.

Logo for a local magician. I know I used the negative space trick on the wiggle logo, but It just felt right to use it here so went with it. The font is Trebuchet MS which is one of my favourites, its got a lovely “g” which adds a bit of character to the typeface.  

Last weekend I was doing some irresponsible drinking in Manchester and was having a ball, until we arrived at a sizable student club called 5th Avenue. After battling through the que and poaching a table I announced I was diving out for a sly cigarette and headed for the entrance, where I was promptly stopped by a man-mountain of a bouncer and told I needed a “Smoking Pass”, which was only available at the cloak room. Glancing down at the epic cloak que I gritted my teeth and went to stand in line. When I finally reached the front I was told the pass would cost me £1, and it entitled me to only four cigarettes, taking no longer than five minutes for each!  She then wrapped and secured an ILLUMINOUS ORANGE BAND around my wrist. Not only was I paying a quid for the right to smoke, I’m limited to five minutes and have this glowing orange beacon attached branding me a smoker. At least finding someone with a lighter won’t be hard, a swift waist level glance across the club reveals all the other addicts. 5th Avenue justifies the £1 price “due to the cost of more people supervising the outside smoking area”

I’ve been smoking since I was 16 so I’m pretty good at it. I don’t really need supervision, and lets face it, if someone was being rowdy in the “smoking area” which is actually the cold Manchester street at the clubs entrance, the regular bouncers would just deny re-entry.

I’m all for the smoking ban. Forcing me into the god awfull British weather makes me smoke less, and can be a good place to meet fellow clubbers, but charging me for my addiction and then branding me for all to see well over steps the mark. If I was given a coloured band because I was gay, had a criminal record or HIV thered be a public outcry, so why when I’m a ciggarette addict? Lets hope 5th Avenue shifts its attitude towards smoking, because if branding segments of society becomes acceptable the future will be that little bit grimmer for all, not just us deplorable smokers.

A logo I designed for an online radio station. Difficult brief this one. The station will be aimed at a wide age group, and is as much about local community and support for young people as it is about music.

I don’t often post up websites here, but having seen this site featured on the FWA I thought it was well worth pointing out.

http://www.hrp.com/ 

It’s one of the first websites to give the user the option to navigate through using a webcam as opposed to a mouse or keyboard. Granted it chugs abit, and the paint through water is an old trick, but the webcam navigation works impressivly well. In fact, once you’ve got the hang of sitting in the right spot and waving your hands around in the right fashion,  you can’t help feel the Minority Report dream isn’t all that far away!

Any idea what a metal magazine, an arctic adventure and an electro house night have in common? They’re all abusing the Base 02 typeface that I love to hate. When a new and unique typeface bursts onto the design scene It can be expected to proliferate like bunnies on viagra, I’ve no issue with that. What annoys me is when designers persistently use the typeface in place of actual design, letting the font do the work where a piece of original thinking would have proudly sat. Take Sam and Richard Bransons book Arctic Diary. Here was a great opportunity to create a clever, original title graphic showing the harshness of the arctic environment and the human struggle against the odds, instead we’re treated to an overused grunge font that we see at least five times a day on club flyer’s, CD covers and government anti-whatever adverts.

Like a DJ shunning that chart topper to play a gem of a record that few have heard but hits the spot, designers should take the time to explore the ever expanding font libraries to find the faces that will make their design unique, because the other option is recycling tired typefaces of yesteryear, and where’s the originality in that?

 cli•ché –noun

1. a trite, stereotyped expression; a sentence or phrase, usually expressing a popular or common thought or idea, that has lost originality, ingenuity, and impact by long overuse, as sadder but wiser, or strong as an ox.

2. anything that has become trite or commonplace through overuse.

Alright, next time I see the “dictionary definition as a graphic” technique on a flyer, bookcover, website, whatever, I’m gonna personally track the offending designer down and smack them over the head with a copy of Original Design for Dummies. This trick has been used so many times over the last five years that seeing it now is enough to make me hurl. It’s proliferated so much that yesterday when I innocently reached in my wallet to pay for a can of Irn Bru I was stabbed in the eye by the definition of 50 pence ON THE ACTUAL 50P!

When a design trick appears on the Queens currency you know its truly died a death. Guys (I’m looking at you, students) for the sake of original design, and my continued sanity, lets bury this trick alongside 3D spinning logos and Under Construction gifs, lest we as a community end up burning in design hell.

Over the last few weeks Coca-Cola have rolled out their new look can over the UK. In true minimalist style they’ve stripped the design back to its bare brand bones, the name and a single flowing white line. Bevels, colours, shadows and supporting graphics have been cast aside in order to push the iconic two colour design and flowing stripe.

It’s a good move. The design is striking, if only because we’re so used to seeing the cylinder in its Saturday night best vying for attention next to its equally noisy shelf rivals. It harks back to Cokes southern American roots, and gives the can a real “classic” feel.

The re-design is most likely a strategic decision. Pepsi have gone to town of late with their cans clothing, and to go left when the opposition goes right is always a bold move, especially for a brand as weighty as Coca Cola. Such a change helps differentiate one brand from the next, but perhaps more importantly allows for a fresh canvas for whatever marketing move they make next, which in today’s ever changing society you can bet will be sooner rather than later. 

This is a recent logo I designed for a Newcastle based company. They supply audio equipment for gigs, studios and clubs.

It’s great when huge companies make big brand changes. It gives brand designers a chance to see how big business view themselves in their current market place, it gives an indicator as to where the company sees itself going, and best of all you get to bear witness to the often hugely polarized online opinion, (which is always a great excuse to wade into a forum and lambaste a junior).

Xerox are the latest corporate behemoth to change face, casting aside the hard edged uppercase typeface of yesteryear in favour of a more huggable, smooth-edged, lowercase typeface of the moment. Even the famous pixel formed X icon has been shown the door, replaced by an abstract “X-Ball”, which I can’t help feel sits uncomfortably close to the Xbox 360 logo. The strong red remains however, being joined, we’re promised, by a variety of other brand colours across all media.

The rebrand seems to be well timed. I know little about the company, but thanks to some surprisingly straight-talking press releases from those involved it seems that it’s the right time for Xerox to update their image. Richard Wergan, vice president of their worldwide brand division states:

“Xerox is still perceived incorrectly as a copier company. We do not make copiers.”

Fair play. The change appears to be more than skin deep too, with one of their analysts, Angele Boyd saying:

“They have made significant changes in the last several years. Packaging and branding have not kept pace,”

All sounds good, however the motives for the re-brand have to be questioned. Xerox has worked hard to recover from heavy debt and financial scandal, yet their share price has yet to reflect this. If the rebrand is genuinely part of a concerted effort by Xerox to show the world they have evolved, then the I think the brand will become a success, and perhaps as Iconic as the identity they’ve discarded.  However if the new brand values are not carried through to the heart of the company, and their previously flawed business model corrected in step, then this latest re-brand may be the final multi-million dollar shot in the arm which finishes Xerox off.