Top 10 design pitfalls: No.2 - Bad type
Ivan | Sun, 2005-05-15 20:38
Have you ever felt that a logo just doesn't fit the great brand that is behind it? That happens usually because of bad or boring type. When you design a logo avoid this mistake like vampire the holy water. So many times I see good logos with good symbols all ruined by a logotype that is just simply a not even a well chosen font. So, what can we do about it?
Logotypes have an equally important role in branding as symbols. When we design a logo we simplify and abstract. By removing the symbol and using just a logotype to get the brand message across one can create a very effective logo.
However, to create your own proprietary typeface like Disney, Milka or Johnson&Johnson requires very special skill. But, even if you don't have the time to make a special type you can still create great logotypes. Once you choose the right font for your logo, you should try to make the logotype somehow special. There are many ways to go about it and there is no foolproof method.
Here are a few examples to demonstrate different things you can do with existing type. To demonstrate the fine like between what works and what doesn't work that well I chose one good (left) and bad (right) for each approach. This of course reflect my taste only.
You can play with the letters to say dynamism, but never distort the typeface.
Use colors to communicate variety, but do it with taste.
Make small modifications to the type to communicate being different, but avoid cliches.
Combine different font weights, but don't overdo it.
Integrate the symbol to the logotype, but avoid childish ideas.
Modify individual letters, but again don't go overboard.
You may not agree with my examples, but I'm hoping I managed to get the point across. Type has many forms and you can use it to communicate a brand message equally well with it as with a well designed symbol.
Commenting on this Blog entry is closed.
Is the eBay/Google one backward? :)
I like the ebay logo. Google however is a hack. I think no designer had the freedom to work on the Google logo ever. I think it just evolved from a Times New Roman logo. :)
The google logo is pretty disastrous... but not much can be done about it now.
It just goes to show how much more important things like quality & service are to a company's branding than the logo.
www.alessandraandy.com
Some of the logos that made an impression in my memory due to their type logos:
---
http://twitter.com/waleedalzuhair
I do not like Pirelli's logo it took me about 10 years to notice that is is not Firelli. Anyway that P is distorted in a very strange manner that i would have never done, i think. (IBM logo is great, i like it, it displays that industrial feeling. It was a great job.)
Google is thee worst logo ever. It is everything wrong with computer created graphics. awful.
I think the Google logo is superb, they could not have wished for a bigger success. Google may not have a visually appealing logotype. However this is irrelevant as the multicolour letters are instantly recognizable. Try typing "Google" into word in the same colours, choose any font you want and it will still have the same impact. Even if you have written a different word you would still have thought Google because those colours are so distinguished.
Here's a bad logo that just the other day I was telling my roommate how much it sucked and that the designer didnt actually really design anything. The designer probably heard someone say "oh, wouldnt it be cute if we put a pair of glasses in our logo." So, instead of eloborating on the idea the designer who sucks took a big ugly type, found a pair of crappy clip-art glasses and declared it a logo. Haha.
Also, have you taken a look at the errors in the code of this page? Probably others as well. Check it out in Tidy, a web developer extension for firefox.
If you're going to attempt a logotype, start with good typographic layout and move outward to the graphic design, not the other way around. You can't use letterforms as disconnected shapes and expect a coherent design.
whenever i am designing a logo, the very first thing i do is look at the typography of the company name.
_________________________________________________
Let's go a little deeper.
Joshua Aronoff
email:
http://www.josharonoff.com
just a few thoughts :
Great post, btw :)
My thoughts exactly. I've never heard anybody say anything bad about the MTV logo, and the xXx logo probably wasn't even designed around a typeface.
If there was a championship for the worst logo, google and ebay would take first place together :)
I do not have any problem with ferrari's typeface. I think it's good. I like it.
What's your problem with pixar's logo?
Pixar is excellent. It's the xXx that I don't care for.
I think pricewaterhouse coopers looks like a wacky fun house idea.... not a investment firm or anything like that. what are they again?
_________________________________________________
Let's go a little deeper.
Joshua Aronoff
email:
http://www.josharonoff.com
The pricewaterhouse logo looks very childish. Not some where that I would want to put my money. Dell isn't that bad. It is very recognizable and that, I think, is what they were going for.
I also don't think the zippo logo is bad at all. It gets the flame message across and that is what the big selling feature is windproof flame.
One think to take into account when creating a logo is what it is going to be used for and what it is to represent. I don't think that the alias one is that bad. It fits it's use, a interesting logo for an interesting show. They also play off the logo whenever they go to a new location in the show. I don't think that logo would work for anything else. If you tried to use that for a financial institution it just wouldn't work.
I don't think the google one sucks. I think it just never evolved. People got to recognize it and all the gooooooogle at the bottom of the search. One think to remember is logos are the bread and butter of a company. If you cannot recognize what company it is in 2 seconds of looking at the logo than it didn't succeed. I don't think they want to changed it because it is soo popular that people might get confused if there was even a slight changed to the typeface.
These are just my thoughts...
...I chose one good (right) and bad (left) for each approach.
I like the ebay logo. Google however is a hack.
Pixar is excellent. It's the xXx that I don't care for.
Ebay & Pixar are on the left so I assume you meant good (left) and bad (right)?
Yes. Sorry for this major confusion. Insert blushing emoticon.
I think Dell and Zippo are fine. It would be nice if Zippo's logo could have incorporated a larger flame, though.
I agree with the above: xXx is supposed to invoke a tribal tattoo kind of design. Eh. It's just meant to look cool, nothing else.
I think mine really Sux. Nice point about harmony of Type. Its a tricky, slippery slope.
The letters in the Pixar logo do not appear to be modified. It's the Charlemagne typeface untouched except for a lot of tracking.
My personal favourites from the logos in Ivans blog post is:
Ferrari
Disney
Maya
Microsoft
Mountain Dew
MTV
Lonely planet
Zippo
Pixar