Graphic Design 2.1: Professional Practice, Project 3: ‘Understanding Visual Identity’ Research points
Origins of the logo:
“A logo doesn’t sell, it identifies. A logo derives its meaning from the quality of the thing it symbolises, not the other way around. A logo is less important than the product it signifies; what it means is more important than what it looks like.”- Paul Rand
Research Task 1: The Evolution of Logos
Identify examples of organisations, companies or other groups whose logos have evolved over time.
Consider redesigns and new designs of notable products, companies, services, and organisations across all industries and locations. How have the logos developed? When or why were changes made? What happens once the novelty of the change has worn off and the new logo is the new normal?
Compile a collection of the logo redesigns you have found to be the most interesting. Include a short explanation of why the particular design was (or wasn’t) successful. Challenge yourself by analysing what these changes tell us about shifts in approaches to logo design. For example, compare and contrast some historical or contemporary trends.
I began this task by watching some videos discussing logos and how they change over time. I began with Figure 1, which went through many famous internet company logo evolutions such as Facebook, Amazon, Firefox and Google. The same Youtube channel had another video discussing Food and drink companies such as Pringles, Burger King, Oreo and Pizza Hut. These videos made me realise that almost every logo has gotten simpler over time and often more bland. I went onto watching a few videos of people discussing this change and it’s effects on consumers and brands which made me think how this simplification reflects societal changes.
X/Twitter:
A brand and logo that has gone through drastic changes recently is X formerly known as Twitter. The origins of the X logo began as a simple illustration of a bird in 2006, in 2009 more detail was included, creating a cartoon character-like logo. The addition of detail to a logo is usually something not seen and is definitely not a trend throughout the modernisation of logos. In 2010 a simplified version came about with the ‘final’ in 2012, a perfectly drawn bird using the golden ratio. This logo was the most simple, satisfying and easily recognisable of all of it’s iterations, clearly representing the ‘Twitter’ brand. The 2012 logo almost went full circle back to the 2006 version but made it even more simple and a perfect icon.
When Twitter was acquired in 2023 and changed to ‘X’ it’s logo and colour was changed to a black and white ‘X’. The logo is less aesthetically pleasing than the Twitter bird but is very effective at representing the company. I looked into the brief history of the X logo and learnt how it is a unicode symbol (Delbert, C. (2023) which is 'an international encoding standard for use with different languages and scripts, by which each letter, digit, or symbol is assigned a unique numeric value that applies across different platforms and programs’.- (Oxford Languages and Google - English | Oxford Languages, 2024). This concept represents X well as it implies it is a space for all people who have access to X globally to communicate.
Mcdonalds:
Mcdonalds, another globally recognised brand has had multiple changes to it’s logo with the more modern iterations being more subtle. In 1940 the logo was quite simple, presenting Mcdonalds as a more niche brand selling barbecue food. 1948 presents a more complex logo with a chef illustration, utilising black/white negative space. This personally is my favourite logo. The reasons for black and white logos were for the ease of printing. In 1953 they have a more playful logo, in a red colour. This is somewhat more appealing but does look less like a food restaurant, which could’ve been the goal in order to differentiate from other companies. By 1961 the famous ‘M’ is used, but in a more abstract form. From here onwards various iterations of the ‘M’ are used with in my opinion the most effective being the 2003 version. The 2003 version is a great icon, minimal and requires nothing else. The brand is so well established that this stylised ‘M’ is immediately recognised. The 2018 version is a thinner more stylised ‘M’ with a red box on the outside. This again works very well as an icon for apps and social media etc but in my opinion yellow and red does not look aesthetically pleasing together, the 1983 version including the white typography looks much better. Overall the logo follows the modernised minimal trend, stripping back the logo from something more interesting into a simple ‘M’. I feel as if for more legacy brands that this simplicity is inevitable, they are established and recognised by almost everybody, therefore using the Occam’s razor approach, all is needed to be effective is a stylised ‘M’ in the brands colours.
Burberry:
Burberry is a brand that has had few, but very important changes to their logo. from 1901-1968 the famous Burberry ‘crest’ of the knight on a horse was used in a red/cream colour with the brand name ‘Burberrys’ underneath it in a playful typeface. The brand logo at this stage when compared to it’s later version looks less like a luxury clothing brand, despite the intricate illustration of the knight on the horse. The 1968-1999 version reading ‘Burberrys’ in my opinion brings the brand together and has a luxury feel to it. The contrast of the ‘Burberrys’ and ‘OF LONDON’ underneath it is aesthetically pleasing and the ‘of London’ has a luxurious feel to it, reminding the consumer where the brand is made, established and of it’s quality. When Burberry changed it’s name to ‘Burberry’ I feel it began to go downhill, the simple ‘s’ being removed I feel makes the brand feel less luxurious
and more like a ‘normal’ everyday wear brand. The ‘s’ makes it feel like more care was given to every item as if each is hand crafted by an individual. The ‘Burberry’ feels more clinical. The later, very minimal brand logos are very ineffective in conveying a luxury brand. The trend, particularly within fashion and with high-end brands for a minimal logo in my opinion is detrimental to their companies and public perception of them. The influence streetwear has had on high-end brands has caused many to follow suit using sans serif typefaces or just simple typefaces devoid of any individuality. The 2023 logo is a slight improvement with the serifs, but is not comparable to the earlier 1968 or even 1999 iterations.
Adidas:
In contrast a clothing brand which I feels logo works better in a more minimal style is Adidas. Adidas’ target market has changed over time from being solely an athletic/sportswear brand into daily/streetwear. This is a different target market to Burberry which means that the logo should be representative of this. Adidas is not a high end brand therefore I feel that a more minimal style logo works really well. Over time the various logos have gone from more intricate and visually interesting from the ‘Dassler’ days in the early 1900’s to it’s modern 2022 logo. The 2022 logo I think is perfect for the brand. The 3 stripes branding is what Adidas is known for and this stripped back logo works perfectly as an icon for the brand. This simple logo with no type can be printed easily at any size, any material with ease and is great for a streetwear/athletics brand to be easily recognised.
Ford:
Ford’s logo follows the modernised minimal trend. Their 1903-1907 Ford Motor Co looks ‘old fashioned’ but in a really good way. The detailing around the edges makes the brand feel more homely and of good quality, a feeling that I feel is immediately lost with the following logos and lost further over time. The 2000-2003 logo has brings back this homely and quality feel with the figurative typeface but still lacks something. The need for a simple, recognisable logo for a car manufacturer I can understand as it needs to be distinguished from others from close up and afar but I feel there are other ways to represent the brand in a more interesting way, similarly to the original logo.
Tesco:
Tesco, a now superstore has had less iterations of it’s logo than I expected but it has evolved in a different way than many. Tesco’s earliest logo is a nice, simple sans serif typeface and extremely minimal. The contrast between the original logo and the logo today almost looks as if it is ‘the wrong way around’. This is an example of a logo that has not followed the minimalism trend line but has instead became more colourful and has added shapes. The logo has remained unchanged since 1995 and has become an easily recognised brand. Tesco doesn’t need to change the logo style because of this, the blue contrasts nicely with the red and represents food aisles, people, different items, whilst highlighting each individual letter of ‘Tesco’.
Nationwide:
The evolution of the bank Nationwide’s logo is interesting to me. The logo begins very obviously using a pound sign, leading into a house/roof shape over a simple typeface of the companies name. This is effective and quite minimal. The symbolism I feel is not very aesthetically pleasing and is a bit too obvious of a logo to be appealing, despite this I feel that it works better than all following logos until the 2023-present.
The change to the abstract money/house shape in 1987 makes the logo look too busy, especially when paired with a lot of type within the logo. This to me almost makes the bank feel unprofessional. Following this change the logo changes colour but does not change much at all until 2023. 2023’s changes I feel work very well for a modern bank. The logo icon is recognisable, simple and unique, preserving the banks colours, without looking over crowded. The simple typeface being in lower case makes the bank feel inviting and friendly. The type is easily legible, something very important for a bank which will deal with people of all ages and ranges of sight.
Chase:
Chase banks logo also interested me. The changes made in 1961 to the banks branding were drastic but effective, changing from a simple typed legacy logo to an illustration of the state it was founded in, to a clean, modern icon which is great at representing the bank. The logo being circular plays into the ‘chase’ name, each individual shape appears as if they are chasing the next. The circle also represents the shape of money, a circular banking system, the globe etc, I think it’s a really impressive logo. The 2005- present branding however, the type face and colours in particular I feel do not look like a bank, more like a tech company or even a game. The bank logo does not look inviting and does not feel as if it is one of the oldest banks to be around, which I feel could be referenced with a change to typeface, or even colour. A purple colour may have a more important feel to it, with a more stylised typeface, still using the same pointed corners as the icon uses.
Instagram:
The evolution of Instagram’s logo is interesting. Compared to many of the logos I find interesting that I have collated so far it is a very new company that has had 5 iterations of logos in just 14 years. The style of the logos are also surprising to me. In 2010 the logo is a detailed illustration of a polaroid camera, the concept I like but the execution of it as a logo it really did not work, it was too busy and looked like it was designed in the early 2000s. Following this the next logo is a massive improvement, but still seems unfinished and unprofessional. When considering their original younger target audience I begin to understand the choices more as the logo does look playful but the changes in 2016
are like something I hadn’t seen from a logo from such a global reaching company before. The colours used are very vibrant and stand out from all other logos, again looking playful but I feel that this does not work. Instagram is from meta (Facebook) whose logos are both simple and clean, the contrast is deliberate but I am unsure if it is effective, it has just become accepted over time as it is an application many people go to every day, regardless of it’s aesthetics or even functionality.
UPS:
The original UPS logo including the visual of an Eagle makes sense as it is an American founded company, this also implies that delivery would be quick and personalised. I really like the inclusion of the Eagle which is an icon thats lost from 1937. The shield is a great shape, implying security, something everybody wants for their post. Paul Rand’s re-design in 1961 is great, he takes the shield icon, breaking it up into 2 parts (the sender and receiver) creating a subtle arrow shape. I think this logo is excellent and the subtle/clever work of Rand was over looked during the changes to it in 2003. The 1961 logo looks ahead of its time, it is minimal and gets the message across whilst have subtle clever hints that make the logo interesting. Rand’s version looks as if it could of been a design for todays UPS logo.
The present logo is very minimal, with updated colours of the original UPS logo. the curve, implying travel and even curve of the earth is some nice imagery and clever to show with just a simple curved line. The shield shape is also still used, which I feel is important at implicitly making the company feel secure and that your post would be safe with them.
Historically, logos were more detailed using animals or characters to represent the ideas of the company. Logos around the late 1800s to early 1900s had very similar styles, much like modern logos do now. Comparing the earliest logos from Adidas and Ford (Figure 10 and 11) they are both detailed differently, showing different imagery but still appear similar. The use of black and white is a contributing factor to their similarity but the typography is the main point that I feel makes these logos appear similar or of the same style. The older typography wasn’t produced by a computer programme and was hand drawn/printed allowing it to have a more unique, personable feel. Even from Burberry in figure 9, the logo is in colour, completely different from Adidas and Fords’s but appears ‘of the same suit’. Despite these companies being involved in very different sectors of business, they appear similar which is very interesting.
Tescos earliest logo shown in figure 12, from 1932 is an exception to this, a reason could be the slightly later era but comparing from others from this time, it seems that Tescos original simple sans serif logo was unique and ahead of its time. This logo has many similarities with companies from today including fashion house Burberrys logo. Many companies, with fashion in particular are moving towards simple sans serif typefaces used as logos with no iconography, being as minimal as possible. The fact that Tesco, a grocery store had done this back in 1932 is very interesting and that they moved on from this minimal style, introducing icons within their logo which are still used today could show that minimal logos aren’t always best.
The logos that function best seem to have 3 separate components to them, an icon, clear type and colour. The need for an icon now is even more important, being utilised for social media, websites, apps etc, brands need to be recognisable by a symbol. An icon paired with typography that mirrors or contrasts it works really well, the typography needs to work synergistically with the icon. A great example of this is Chase’s most recent logo shown in figure 14. Despite the fact that I personally don’t feel that this looks like a banks logo, the typography works excellently with the icon.
An example of 2 brands that are now able to function using just an icon are Adidas and Mcdonald’s. I feel like this is the pinnacle of branding, where your company name is synonymous with a symbol or letter. This is done over time by pushing these symbols in front of consumers, resulting in not even a need for colour or words. These icons are shown in figures 8 and 10. The Mcdonald’s ‘M’ does not need colour or the box around the letter, just the simple curved ‘M’ to be recognised. For adidas their abstract triangular 3 stripe logo works excellently alone.
Resources:
Figure 1: Magnify (2022) Internet Logo Evolution. Youtube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-G0v3eBbdk (Accessed: 3 March 2024).
Figure 2: Magnify (2021) Food & Drink Logo Evolution. Youtube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXJthTxqHQU (Accessed: 3 March 2024).
Figure 3: Satori Graphics (2022) EVERY YEAR LOGOS GET SIMPLER! (logo design evolution). Youtube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoVZaigkZso (Accessed: 3 March 2024).
Figure 4: Quicktake, B. (2022) Why Companies Are ‘Debranding’. Youtube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1bjkPerpPs (Accessed: 3 March 2024).
Figure 5: Solar Sands (2021) What on Earth is going on with simplified logos? Youtube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA6L7pgcUbM (Accessed: 3 March 2024).
Figure 6: Vox (2015) What makes a truly great logo. Youtube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBTiTcHm_ac (Accessed: 3 March 2024).
Figure 7: Estefani, J. N. A. (2023) ‘Tweeting into the future: How the “twitter X logo 2023” marks A New Era in digital branding’, Raw.Studio, 29 September. Available at: https://raw.studio/blog/tweeting-into-the-future-how-the-twitter-x-logo-2023-marks-a-new-era-in-digital-branding/ (Accessed: 3 March 2024).
Figure 8: McDonald’s logo (no date) 1000logos.net. Available at: https://1000logos.net/mcdonalds-logo/ (Accessed: 3 March 2024).
Figure 9: Burberry logo (no date) 1000logos.net. Available at: https://1000logos.net/burberry-logo/ (Accessed: 3 March 2024).
Figure 10: Adidas logo (no date) 1000logos.net. Available at: https://1000logos.net/adidas-logo/ (Accessed: 3 March 2024).
Figure 11: Ford logo (no date) 1000logos.net. Available at: https://1000logos.net/ford-logo/ (Accessed: 3 March 2024).
Figure 12: Tesco logo (no date) 1000logos.net. Available at: https://1000logos.net/tesco-logo/ (Accessed: 3 March 2024).
Figure 13: Logos, F. (2021) Nationwide logo, Logos-world.net. Famous Logos. Available at: https://logos-world.net/nationwide-logo/ (Accessed: 3 March 2024).
Figure 14: Chase logo (no date) 1000logos.net. Available at: https://1000logos.net/chase-logo/ (Accessed: 4 March 2024).
Figure 15: Instagram logo (no date) 1000logos.net. Available at: https://1000logos.net/instagram-logo/ (Accessed: 4 March 2024).
Figure 16: UPS logo (no date) 1000logos.net. Available at: https://1000logos.net/ups-logo/ (Accessed: 4 March 2024).
References:
Delbert, C. (2023) A brief history of twitter’s new 𝕏 logo, which is actually meant for typing out math, Popular Mechanics. Available at: https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/apps/a44641211/twitter-x-unicode-symbol/ (Accessed: 3 March 2024).
Research Task 2: The Language of Logos:
While the visual language of logos can create a sense of permanence or heritage, the same approach can leave them rooted in a particular era and therefore outdated and out of touch. It’s vital to update the visual language of logos over time to keep them relevant, without necessarily changing the content of the message. This is not a problem if the logo in question only has a limited shelf life, for example a short-running venture, but for more established organisations changing their identity can have its risks. Many of the logos mentioned so far have been visually refreshed to bring them up to date.
Identify examples of well-established organisations, companies or other groups whose logos have evolved over time. Alternatively, pick examples of historic logos and compare them with contemporary ones. Ask yourself - What do these changes tell us about shifts in approaches to logo design? For example, can you pick out particular historical or contemporary trends?
Try and choose a range of examples that draw on traditions of logotypes, emblems, insignia, or use mascots. Plot the development of these logos, describing how their form has changed over time.
I researched many well-established companies across various sectors, ranging from older legacy companies such as Santander, Heineken, and Morrison’s to more modern companies such as Air Bnb and Ebay. I found that many logos appear of similar styles at different time periods, especially when they are from companies operating in similar sectors to one another. Throughout time many companies seem to follow the overarching trend of minimalism with a focus on using simple iconography. I collated examples of logos that follow and go against this trend, beginning with comparing logos from similar time periods and from similar sectors.
Amazon and Ebay are 2 tech companies founded at similar times. Their initial logo styles were analogous to one another, both using simple black and white styles. Amazon’s iconography of the Amazon river I feel worked well, representing the place the company was named after, where as eBay’s imagery not at all, being a simple rectangle split into two which I assume was representing the buyer and seller interaction.
Around a similar time to one another colour was introduced into both company logos, Amazon used one colour and eBay used multiple. Amazon, instead of sticking to using iconography of the Amazon river developed iconography that represented the curvature of the earth in an orange colour. The use of the colour orange is interesting as a green or blue colour may of been the colour one would assume would be used. The orange colour used is not too vibrant or energetic but represents a positive feeling. eBay used and continues to use multiple colours to represent the varied items you can sell on the site and the different people that will be selling on there from around the globe.
Amazon developed this logo further into an arrow shape icon, a clever multi-faceted meaning logo which shows the curvature of the earth, a smile, the direction of sending items from seller to buyer or product from Amazon to consumer and moving from letters ‘A’ to ‘Z’ within the logo to represent how Amazon is a company which provides ‘everything’ from A-Z. Ebay’s logo development in 1999 was great, the typography placement was fun and represented the ‘jumble sale’ like platform that eBay is.
Both of these logos were simplified over time, which could be a result of the more modern design era as a result of the development of the internet which exacerbated a need for simple, recognisable logos.
HSBC and Santander are 2 banks founded at a similar time that used different styles of design. HSBC began in Hong Kong and Santander in Spain. The HSBC crest was used since the inception of the company, this crest is perfect for a bank, it has a royal, trustworthy feeling to it which makes customers feel more comfortable to bank with HSBC. Santander’s logo was a serif typeface ready ‘Banco De Santander’. This was simple but effective, explaining exactly what the bank was and where it was, similarly this approach although different to HSBC, again conveys a sense of trust to the customer.
Santander went through various iterations of their logo before coming across it’s classic icon in 1986. HSBC arrived at their icon at a similar time. The change of style around this time is very interesting, how both banks move from a more classic style into the modern, simple iconography we know today. This could be a result of postmodernism and companies like banks feeling a need to catch up and stay relevant. Both modern icons work very well, although I feel that they do not represent how a bank should feel which is trustworthy, important and inviting.
Both logos have now become globally recognised, meaning the likelihood of either logo changing is very slim. Although the general trend towards minimalist designs may inspire a counter movement back to more maximalist designs, which could work for certain business sectors, including banks. A more maximal style symbolises importance, a feeling that a legacy bank may want to convey, but the risk of re-branding without a desperate need to would be a huge risk for these companies.
Morrisons and the Co-operative were both originally markets, eventually becoming supermarkets, with the Co-operative now offering other services such as banking and insurance. The Co-op’s logo in 1968 was designed by Lippincott design agency and for it’s time was different and bold. The neoteric design included a bright blue colour, which they have reverted back to using today after a few different versions of the logo. The Co-op’s original logo is an example of a logo that pioneered the minimal icon style trend. In comparison the Morrison’s logo from the same time period is completely different and appears less considered and clever. I feel that it is not until 2015 that Morrisons has an interesting or even remotely meaningful logo. The new logo is still minimal, but includes a useable icon representing a tree above the ‘i’ in Morrisons. The need for a useable logo/icon is ever more important and using the letter ‘M’ up until this point limits how the company can be seen and how it is perceived. The capitalised ‘M’ was not very friendly or inviting and the use of the letter ‘M’ is now almost entirely associated with ‘Mcdonalds’ despite it being completely different style-wise.
Uber and Air Bnb are examples of 2 modern tech companies that operate in a similar industry. Uber’s original logo is quite minimal using a ‘U’ shape icon representing travelling from destination to destination. As the company has changed over time, so has the logo.
Air Bnb’s original logo has no concept or function other than 2 colours potentially representing customers being paired with places to stay. Up until 2014 there was no clear logo, icon or concept to Air Bnb’s logo. This is very interesting as the ‘type only’ concept is usually shown by older more legacy companies who originally had less of a need for an icon to represent their company. Both Uber and Air Bnb have gone through quite a lot of logo changes and re-brands over a short period of time. This could be to show how they are changing as their brands do, which is true in Uber’s case but not Air Bnb’s. Air Bnb’s current logo is brilliant, I had researched this during the previous task and the meaning behind it allows for it to function perfectly. The logo is a blend of A and B, representing travel, location and enjoyment of travel.
In contrast, I feel that Uber’s current logo does not work well. The original logo works better conceptually than it’s current logo. A version I would be interested to see would be the ‘Uber’ typography above the ‘U’ removed and the colouring changed to something more positive and representative of Uber’s service. I am surprised Uber has not followed the general trend of a need for an Icon, despite it’s main use being a phone application. A simple shape icon could be great to represent their service.
Holding company Berkshire Hathaway and confectionary company ‘Lindt’ are 2 examples of companies that do not follow the minimalism and simple icon trend, nor do I feel that they they need to. Since the companies inception Berkshire Hathaway has had one logo, a simple serif typeface exaggerating the B and H. In my opinion this is perfect for the company that it is, essentially being an investment portfolio, owning various companies and investing in them. The logo is simple and necessary with nothing superfluous about it, something that it’s target audience can feel that they can trust. For example if Berkshire Hathaway re-branded every 10 years it would seem untrustworthy and therefore it would appear as being uninvestable.
Lindt is a company logo I had researched during a previous task and am very inspired by. Since ‘Lindt’ was founded it has had a single logo which appears timeless. A great example of a more maximal logo including a stylised typeface and a detailed dragon illustration. The logo feels important and almost regal, it definitely conveys to the consumer a sense that what they are buying is premium. If Lindt re-branded this again may inspire distrust in their target audience. Despite the 2 companies operating in polar opposite fields, their customer base could potentially cross. People interested in investing in Berkshire Hathaway must be wealthy and therefore potentially interested in premium confectionary products.
When considering companies that I have researched previously such as HSBC and Santander who are in similar sectors to Berkshire Hathaway, it makes me consider why they have re-branded yet Berkshire Hathaway hasn’t. A potential reason being that HSBC/Santander’s customer bases consist mainly of the ‘average’ person as opposed to those looking to invest extremely large sums of money, therefore they want to appeal to the masses. Lindt chocolate however is consumed and attainable by most people, but wants to be considered more of a premium product and by not re-branding it allows people to think that it’s age equates to quality products.
Similarly to Berkshire Hathaway and Lindt, Apple and Balenciaga are brands that offer premium products to their audiences, who at a certain point converge as the same audience for the 2 companies. Apples original logo is very interesting, it is an illustration depicting Sir Isaac Newton discovering his theory of gravity, showing an apple falling from a tree. This logo is excellent and representative of a brand that aimed to change the tech industry, focusing on quality and aesthetics. The almost immediate change from the detailed maximal logo to the Apple icon in 1977 was the beginning of them becoming and having one of if not the most easily recognisable brands ever. Despite the fact that I personally prefer the original logo, the new version is the perfect modern and simple logo, including a bite from the Apple representing the story of Adam and Eve. The logo shape is very simple and arguably rudimentary but it’s simplicity and marketability has proved it’s effectiveness.
Balenciaga was founded in 1919 and used the same logo up until 2013. The fashion house offers high end fashion and more consumable streetwear style clothing to it’s varied target audiences. The original logo includes 2 B’s back to back with 3 lines across it to represent stitching. This logo is simple, effective and most importantly looked balanced and premium. The company fell for what seems to be the overall trend for high-end fashion brands which was a minimal sans serif type logo.
Ferrari is a great example of a legacy brand that has hardly changed their logo at all over time. The luxury car company horse logo is recognised globally and is representative of the brands luxury and power.
Heineken is a globally recognised beer brand whose heritage goes as far back as 1864. Heineken is marketed at everyday people and I imagine is consumed by all markets of alcohol drinkers- people interested in drinking lager.
Heineken’s logo design over time has changed drastically, particularly in 1974. Heineken’s logo began as an interesting, detailed badge-like design which exudes a sense of heritage and has an almost craft like feel to it. I personally feel that these designs work the best, especially for a legacy brand. Heineken’s design in 1884 I feel works best, particularly if ‘pilsener bier’ was replaced with ‘Heineken’ brand name. This gives the beer a premium more legacy feel to it.
The modernisation of the logo in 1974 was obviously strategic and again follows the minimal trend of modern brands. The logo is inviting but doesn’t stand on the brands history, which is perhaps their strategy to become a ‘new Heineken’.
The re-addition of the Heineken star to the logo in 1991 I think is great and makes the branding work significantly better. The icon in red is now recognised and associated with Heineken, bringing back a more premium ‘star’ feel to the brand.
Peugeot is a car brand significantly older than Ferrari with a different target audience. Peugeot car brand is marketed to the every day person with cars at affordable prices. Peugeots logo has changed many times and quite significantly throughout time. An element of logo design that draws these 2 car brands together is their use of similar iconography. They have each chosen an animal to represent the brand and have displayed the animal in similar ways throughout time. This. is an example of a trend that is effective for certain types of brands, especially cars. Having an animal as your main iconography allows the consumer to associate the brand with the ‘power’ or ‘strength’ the animal represents.
Peugeot’s most modern and more minimal logo is an example of a logo that has followed the minimal trend but has found a way to make it work very well for them. Their logo icon in the centre of the shield could be used as a stand alone icon for social media etc, whilst the full shield logo can be used as the car badge. The modernised representation of the lion works excellently and makes the car brand feel way more premium than the previous blue and silver style logo beginning in the 1980’s.
Resources:
Figure 1: Looka.com. Available at: https://looka.com/blog/amazon-logo/ (Accessed: 17 March 2024).
Figure 2: EBay Logo (no date) 1000logos.net. Available at: https://1000logos.net/ebay-logo/ (Accessed: 17 March 2024).
Figure 3: HSBC logo (no date) 1000logos.net. Available at: https://1000logos.net/hsbc-logo/ (Accessed: 17 March 2024).
Figure 4: Santander logo (no date) 1000logos.net. Available at: https://1000logos.net/santander-logo/ (Accessed: 17 March 2024).
Figure 5: Co-op Logo (no date) 1000logos.net. Available at: https://1000logos.net/co-op-logo/ (Accessed: 17 March 2024).
Figure 6: Morrisons logo (no date) 1000logos.net. Available at: https://1000logos.net/morrisons-logo/ (Accessed: 18 March 2024).
Figure 7: Fatanmi, V. A. (2018) A case for the mobility of Uber’s logo-life - Victor A. fatanmi, Medium. Available at: https://victorfatanmi.medium.com/a-case-for-the-mobility-of-ubers-logo-life-b9caaeccac38 (Accessed: 18 March 2024).
Figure 8: Airbnb Logo (no date) 1000logos.net. Available at: https://1000logos.net/airbnb-logo/ (Accessed: 18 March 2024).
Figure 9: Logos, F. (2022) Berkshire Hathaway logo, Logos-world.net. Available at: https://logos-world.net/berkshire-hathaway-logo/ (Accessed: 18 March 2024).
Figure 10: Lindt logo and symbol, meaning, history, PNG (no date) 1000logos.net. Available at: https://1000logos.net/lindt-logo/ (Accessed: 18 March 2024).
Figure 11: Apple logo (no date) 1000logos.net. Available at: https://1000logos.net/apple-logo/ (Accessed: 18 March 2024).
Figure 12: Balenciaga logo and symbol, meaning, history (no date) 1000logos.net. Available at: https://1000logos.net/balenciaga-logo/ (Accessed: 18 March 2024).
Figure 13: Heineken Logo (no date) 1000logos.net. Available at: https://1000logos.net/heineken-logo/ (Accessed: 19 March 2024).
Figure 14: Peugeot logo (no date) 1000logos.net. Available at: https://1000logos.net/peugeot-logo/ (Accessed: 19 March 2024).
Figure 15: Ferrari logo (no date) 1000logos.net. Available at: https://1000logos.net/ferrari-logo/ (Accessed: 19 March 2024).
