I think it's a crappy decision. Just another change to justify some of the big paychecks of a few people at the top.

The new logo does have a modern look to it, but at the same time, it looks too much like every other logo out there using round letters with straight endings.

The O and the d make me think of HOOTERS... :)
______________________________________________________________________
"Life is a dream in which you don't remember fallig asleep or waking up. Make the dream worth dreaming, don't just sleep in the idea of waking up." - PIMPTRIX

They should have just changed the font type on the old logo to the old one.

I agree with Ivan. I reckon they've only put those two lines in to keep the two 'kodak colours'. It's not that inspiring for a new era of imaging, is it?!

You are absolutely right, the lack of a logotype symbol greatly reduces the visual value of the logo. There's nothing to remember now.

The old logo, even if it suffered by somewhat lack of contrast between the arrow and the letters, was so characteristic. Red arrow, yellow letters : Kodak.

The new logo seems like just a.. font showcase for me.

I wonder how much people were paid for that.

Whatever happened to those super-minimalist plain black and white packaged Goverment issue generic brands for cigarettes and beer and yams and other staples of American nutrition?
It's funny. I haven't thought about those in years. This logo must have dredged it up. Bad Kodak... bad.

Ugly, ugly, ugly.

For me, Kodak have failed to realign themselves to the digital era, and they need more than a new logo to change that! I never think of Kodak anymore. And until just now, I didn't even know they provide the prints bought through iPhoto... I mean, who cares so long as the quality is fine? They've become a 2nd tier supplier with a 2nd grade logo, how sad.
--------------------------------------------
http://www.cameroncain.co.uk/
http://cccp.cameroncain.co.uk/

What an utter waste of money and management energy. It's typical of a company that I agree has entirely lost its way over the last few years. When you've such a well known logo, tweak and modernize, pump up the colours - don't replace unless you can do so with something so wonderful it turns heads.

John

BTW Ivan "Kodak released its new logo" - ie when you're using the possessive for "it", it's not "it's", it's "its". "Its" is an exception. I'm fussy.

Calm down - Ivan is not a native speaker of English. Try learning French, then blogging in French, then listening to French people complaining about grammar.

my two cents - the old kodak logo was instantly recognizable as the international icon of photography. they just wiped away decades of branding.

Im surprised they went for such a radical change in branding... the logo looks like it has been knocked up by someone trying out illustrator for the first time.

Bad move Kodak, when somethings not broke, why fix it.... But when something does go wrong.. Fix it asap!

__
Online Portfolio - in progress
jammindesigns.co.uk
scrapbook.jammindesigns.co.uk

First, I agree with everyone that this logo is pretty darn ugly. In fact, I think the type looks like something out of 1970's StarTrek shows. It's absolutely horrible.

Now, "branding" is NOT simply re-designing a logo. Branding involves a complete overhaul of the image of the company, not just their logo and advertising. Kodak is not changing their brand, they're simply updating their logo.

That being said, Kodak lost their role as leader of photography years ago. They have long since been a non-issue in the film world, and they never really embraced the digital photography era to begin with. I think it's a case of the "good old boys" at the top hanging on too long. They just haven't moved along with the times.

I do believe that they needed to think about re-invigorating the company, however, the change that they made to the logo is not a good one. If they were going to make a move to change their image they should have just gone for it!

Instead they came up with what is really quite a weak logo type. Nothing of real interest in it - one letter that actually disrupts. The 'a' really is clumsy and doesn't quite seem to fit. The problem is with the 'roundness' dictated by both the 'd' and the 'o'. The 'a' tries to follow this but fails and therefore seems orphaned. I really can't look at the logo without being drawn to the 'a'.

Bottom line. If they weren't willing to really go for it and come up with something really new and fresh, they should have just stuck with what they had.

I talk with a friend about this… and now I blog about this. My trackback: http://guillemets.de/weblog/kodak-aus-alt-mach-neu

THIS is a good logo update. Enough said.

I weep for Kodak.

Dear Ivan, I have found nothing about this new logo - neither at Kodak nor at Designtaxi.com nor at some website about design. Where do you have got this information?

Right... i've just got home from work (Bluewater ... for the Kent / london People on CB ) - Kodak had a stand to promote themselves, and they were using the new corporate image (correct use of terms this time Jim ? ;) )... It actually looks good, Im surprised but it does look fresh and they had a lot of people going up to the stand, most interesting :)

I'll try and get a picture on my mobile of the stand tomorrow, so you can see how it looks for yourselves, but if you wanna visit the stand its outside of House of Fraser downstairs.

__
Online Portfolio - in progress
jammindesigns.co.uk
scrapbook.jammindesigns.co.uk

Kodak for me brings back memories of double exposures and overexposures. I guess they better spend their money on a digital ad campaign :)

Sorry to bring this topic back. I just wanted to point out that as I predicted they dropped the two yellow lines. Faster than I expected:
http://kodak.com