WHO NEEDS LOGOS?

beejay's picture

picking up from TY's identity thread, where

adriano's picture

I believe than when a client "thinks" he needs a logo that the starting point for giving some credits to the whole image. It's not often that I find clients tha treally don't care for logos, it's the name that counts (and I agree on some extent, depends on their business & mainly clients). Maybe it wouldn't be fun to have all the "no logos" on arial.

j_p_giese's picture

Hi Adriano,

press the "Post Message" button once and ignore the server error. Your message will be posted anyway. I get that "500" every time I post a message, too.

jpg

squeeze's picture

For clarity's sake, let's define a "mark" as a non-type graphic with or without accompanying logo type, "type" as a written/typed out name without a graphic, and ignore the merging element of a "typemark" (i.e. monogram) to avoid confusion.

I believe the type or size of a business or industry is irrelevant to whether or not a "mark" (vs. type) should be used to identify it. The process of designing an identity includes discovering a party's unique characteristics, relative to their industry and their goals/objectives, then capturing your findings in a mark or typographical logo. How can you assume one will work better than another without applying the design process to the individual project.

I have only been pursuing self employment for about five months now, after spending seven years working for in-house corporate design groups. One of the greatest benefits I have found working on my own is that I have enough control over my projects to individualize each one of them, instead of regurgitating portions of old projects. In the corporate world, the statement "don't reinvent the wheel" is practically a chant. I understand the concept of not throwing out everything you have learned, but I believe the statement is often used as a copout to avoid going through the design grinder (here design is used in its most general sense, as almost every discipline requires some form of design...see dictionary definition). It irritates me to hear or read that some designers are promoting what in my opinion is an unsubstantiated limitation to my control over individual design projects.

Aloha!
Scott

golfomat's picture

This is an essay's topic. (No, none is coming up right now.)

In general the quote says nothing wrong. If you don't have to say anything important: "shut up".

My bakery never told me someting intelligent, so their logo wouldn't tell me anything else (ignoring that they don't really have one, since it's times not even arial)

But even me doesn't really care nor do the hundreds of people that also buy their bread there, if the CI of the bakery is good or not.
as long as the bread is OK.

To propose some philosophic thoughts: "Do you really need need to design public space? Would you really like a totally designed world and public space arround you?

I know the thougts jump arround a lot, but I hope you understand the point I am aiming at.

Servus

Dominik

P.S.: I agree that the variation in the field of using different typefaces could increase, but only if it fits to the company and its suroundings.
(Might be a bit idealistic, but there have to be some of those folks, too.)

P.P.S.: No this is no neglection of graphic design but not everone needs it, because most people would lie if they had a perfect image (I couldn't deal with being approached nicely by the women working at my bakery (this might by different in the USA).

Joe Pemberton's picture

I agree, in general, with Zato and HD there. Most small/medium clients know they need a unique identity but only know how to ask for a "logo."

But when it comes to the actual design process I agree with Scott. I wouldn't rule either out without judging the merits of each, against the requirements of the project.

Syndicate content Syndicate content