idiologie

8 mistakes in logo design

A list of common but not that obvious mistakes in logo design

I’ve been recently commissioned to review a logo for a beauty product. The what do you think question. The logo itself was well crafted and will probably prove successful, but it got me thinking about general rules for logo design. The technical aspects are well covered (e.g. here or here), but there are a few guidelines that exceed the obvious “it has to be legible and memorable”. So, here’s my list of common, but not that obvious at first glance, mistakes in logo design:

  1. Cliché logos
    Undoubtedly clichés communicate. Usually they provide straight-forward symbols easily understood by all. They facilitate the communication process and therefore are quite common. The problem is distinctiveness: there are around thousand of logos with a tree (highlighting heritage), leaves (nature) or a globe (we’re global). The design idea does not have to be unique in the history of graphic design (which is highly unlikely), but it has to be distinctive in a particular marketplace.
    Every industry has its fig leaf, concealing the designer’s lack of original idea, so make sure you find one before the designing work. And if you, unfortunately, happen to exploit a cliché, make sure it is executed with a superb design.
    [Sidenote: the same applies to so-called generic shapes: a star, a heart, a circle et cetera: no matter how much effort is put to make them look distinctive, there are millions of other versions of the same shape.]
  2. Great name cluttered with an excessive symbol
    If the name is exceptionaly good (quite rare these times), don’t clutter it with an  excessive symbol, with apparently no or little meaning of itself. For instance, if the name of the product is Sun, drawing a sun symbol is entirely useless. It might of course provide a handy visual device to implement allover the promotional materials, but it does not bring a meaning. It’s just an illustration. There’s one exception, though: a symbol is virtually essential if it is to endorse other brands.
    [Sidelink: Symbol or Wordmark? by Tony Spaeth]
  3. Symbols oriented backwards
    If you ask somebody to draw an arrow pointed up or forward, almost certainly you’ll get ↑  for up and → for forward. Yet, there are at least dozen of logos heading backwards, with no logical or aesthetic reason whatsoever. So unless you want to highlight a company’s upcoming downfall, keep the symbol up and forward oriented.
    [Sidenote: The matter has a lot to do with left-to-right reading and is thouroughly discussed in Emotion matrix by Artemy Lebedev.]
  4. Message-in-a-bottle logos
    By definition, a logo is a quintessence of a company’s idea or conception expressed visually. Or in a more straightforward way: a compelling, conceptually relevant message conveyed with a single graphic idea. It’s like a figurehead at the prow of a ship, indicating the concept behind a brand and demonstrating its values, target image, positioning and/or other characteristics. Sealing this message in a bottle and releasing it into the ocean (so as no one can read it) is the worst scenario there might possibly exist.
    So first of all: find the message and express it in a creative and visually appealing way. Secondly: don’t ever put a meaningless dingbat just to have something there. Great logos are made by great concepts, not great dingbats. Thirdly: always keep in mind the positioning. Missing the target is a deadly weapon.
  5. I’ve-seen-it-somewhere logos
    There are two common scenarios that result in I’ve-seen-it-somewhere logos. The first one is plagiarism or counterfeiting, obviously to be condemned. The second one occurs when a client approaches with “we need a logo and we’d like something like that”, pointing for instance to Sony Ericsson symbol. There are at least two pitfalls behind this kind of reasoning. To begin with, companies are different, so the likelihood of the same corporate culture, target, etc, is close to zero. As a result, the logo will almost certainly fail to express the idea behind the brand, not to mention fitting the industry it operates in. Secondly, the stronger the pointed brand, the harder it will be for a company to gain distinctiveness.
  6. Snowboard-to-jewelry logos
    It’s kind of a no-brainer, but it’s often missed: a logo has to be appropriate for the target industry. If you’re designing a high-end jewelry brand and the resulting symbol could easily fit a snowboard manufacturer then — most probably — something is wrong. At times it’s a company’s strategy to break the rules (e.g. because of a specific positioning). Otherwise, it’s extremely risky and hard to successfully launch without significant promotional budget.
  7. Missed-the-context logos
    Logos are by definition seen in context. A logo might look great on a website, with all these gradients, shadows and so on. It probably looks even better printed beautifully on an expensive paper, A3 size. But is it going to work in the actual context, for instance on a supermarket shelf with all the other products around? When the customers are moving and not particularly intent on focusing their entire attention on a 3×3cm sign?  Does it grab attention?
    So: Do your homework and check the designs used by competition, find ways to be distinctive. Double-check readability, use mock-ups whenever possible. Prepare variations of the sign for particular applications (low-resolution, monochromatic, etc). Remember, that a sign is not a stand-alone symbol, but a basis of an entire visual system.
  8. Head-scratch logos
    In the end, a logo has to be easy to comprehend. The are several implications of this statement: it not only has to be legible and look good in most applications (from letterhead to billboard), but it has to communicate the message within just a few seconds. So don’t try to express more than one attribute per logo, it’s not a piece of art to be contemplated for hours. Thinking that it must contain entire message in detail is simply ignorant of how human brains operate. Focus instead.
    Again, remember who’s the target. If you use a sophisticated metaphor for a generic beer brand, the potential buyers might simply feel intimidated. And if you happen to do so, make sure the message expressed literally is relevant and appropriate as well. For instance, I might have never heard of Hermes‘ winged sandals, but when I see the Athlete’s Foot logo I get the message.

One Comment, Comment or Ping

  1. I like that post, indeed quite helpful

Reply to “8 mistakes in logo design”

On Elegance

Elegant ideas — products, services, performances, strategies, whatever — all have some degree of these four elements: symmetry, seduction, subtraction, and sustainability. Guy Kawasaki interviews Matthew E. May on his recent book: The Pursuit of Elegance. +.

The Road to Clarity

NYT on typographical changes in American road signs: an article and slideshow. [via: notcot]

Debbie Millman on designing brands

“When designing brands, I believe the identity should be as simple as possible, telegraphic and single-minded.” Debbie Millman on designing brands.

Next Dinn

Sensing a deluge of font overexplotation, nonetheless introducing: DIN Next™ by Akira Kobayashi. Noteworthy alternative to FF DIN or a dozen other dins.

On writing (habitually and well)

Notes in the margin of Design Writing Research & On Writing Well: The Economist Style Guide (the title speaks for itself) and How we work: “We’re interested in the habits, rituals and small (and occasionally big) methods people and teams use to get their work done. And in the specific anecdotes and the way people describe their own relationship to their own work. Here’s a list of some stories and habits.”

2009 ReBrand Awards

So you know: The full listing of 2009 ReBrand 100 Global Awards Winning Brands. In rare cases even a crappy logo can’t hinder well-crafted identity system. Though, for others there’s no hope.

TDC2 2009 Winners

The Type Directors Club 2009 Winners: 18 winning entries and Typography 29 Winners.

Paola Antonelli: Core principles

“Design takes into account people’s needs and concerns, helping them live better within the broad context of the world; it maximizes the available means to achieve the most satisfying outcome, and produces culture in the process.”
Paola Antonelli: Core Principles: How science can help form a theory of design.

Typographic Posters

We intend to become a good resource of graphic and typographic posters to serve all your research needs – either historical or inspirational. So, here you have it: typographicposters.com .

Paul Rand

Should a logo be self-explanatory? It is only by association with a product, a service, a business, or a corporation that a logo takes on any real meaning. It derives its meaning and usefulness from the quality of that which it symbolizes. Paul Rands’ Thoughts on Design. [via subtraction.com]

Links:

  • Brand New Displaying opinions, and focusing solely on corporate and brand identity work.
  • Design Observer Features critical essays and selected writings of design culture.
  • Designmind Business, technology & design magazine with perspectives on industry.
  • Identityworks Corporate identity as a management tool by Tony Spaeth.