Styleforum › Forums › Lifestyle › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › best/worst corporate logos
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

best/worst corporate logos - Page 7

post #91 of 487
4/15/06 at 1:41am
MIT Press has a great logo



the media lab used to have this one, but i'm not sure they use it any more:

Reply
Reply
post #92 of 487
4/15/06 at 11:59am
The best corporate logos I've ever seen are actually all fictional. They're from a game called Eve (http://www.eve-online.com). Here's a sampling:











































So cool they're hot.
Reply
Reply
post #93 of 487
4/15/06 at 4:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horace
I agree. I like a certain continuity. Look at the labels for Coke or Budweiser. They only get worse. And they probably change because some new MBA or marketing kid needs to justify his employment.

It completely depends on the market. Some organizations have to change their identity from time to time because they're in a market which is based around trendiness and hipness. For example, a hair product company is going to have to change their style every 5-10 years because hairstyles go back and forth and change radically so quickly. On the other hand, a company like Cummins (another company with a Paul Rand logo), who builds engines, you never have to change your logo unless your business changes so drastically that the old one will no longer encompass your ideals.

Labelking, if you like Adolphe Mouron Cassandre, you would probably also like Herbert Matters. Though he didn't commit suicide, and it seems improbable for you to get into anyone famous who didn't.
Reply
Reply
post #94 of 487
4/15/06 at 4:50pm
Penguin Books
Reply
Reply
post #95 of 487
4/15/06 at 6:04pm
Reply
Reply
post #96 of 487
4/15/06 at 7:09pm
Back in the day I really loved Girl and World Industries.
Reply
Reply
post #97 of 487
4/15/06 at 10:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS
Another craptastic logo:



Jon.


wrong. dead wrong.
Reply
Reply
post #98 of 487
4/16/06 at 6:53pm
i say:






i could find more but cant be bothered to do so right now
Reply
Reply
post #99 of 487
4/16/06 at 7:27pm
There is so much atrocious corporate swooshy thing action going on here. All y'all should read this article: http://dir.salon.com/story/tech/col/...145/index.html
Reply
Reply
post #100 of 487
4/16/06 at 11:48pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian SD
Funny you bring up the Porsche logo, because its very impractical to use [the crest] as a logo. Quite simply, if it cannot be displayed in black and white with no greys in between, it's not a good logo. Period. However, the Porsche "PORSCHE" logotype by itself is excellent for the company. If the Porsche logo were designed today, already knowing what Porsche cars are like, I dont think the crest would exist, at least in the form it does now.

you've proved my point.
Reply
Reply
post #101 of 487
4/17/06 at 1:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by LabelKing
New Order?

Indeed. In NewOrderStory, Peter Saville talks about how the design aesthetic almost became a "brand" and that, I think his words were, real fans would know it when they saw the records in the shop; it was like you were in a special club or were in on a secret.

And I think it is definitely true if you look at some of those old singles--there is not identification on them at all (on the front). You had to know what you were looking for. And it added to New Order's mystique as being anonymous. I think it is much like a corporate logo in that you know it when you see it.

bob
Reply
Reply
post #102 of 487
4/17/06 at 1:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by dirk diggler
wrong. dead wrong.

Ahem, why?

Jon.
Reply
Reply
post #103 of 487
4/17/06 at 8:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS
Ahem, why? Jon.
IIRC the GM logo has gone unchanged since the company's inception, there is a reason for that. It can be printed in black and white and in colour, is simple and balanced, instantly recognizable (even if the audience isn't English speaking) and conveys the GM brand image. Just because it's relatively simple, and has been around for a while, does not make it "craptastic." However, that says nothing about their cars... A.
Reply
Reply
post #104 of 487
4/17/06 at 11:06pm
Reply
Reply
post #105 of 487
4/17/06 at 11:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron
IIRC the GM logo has gone unchanged since the company's inception, there is a reason for that. It can be printed in black and white and in colour, is simple and balanced, instantly recognizable (even if the audience isn't English speaking) and conveys the GM brand image. Just because it's relatively simple, and has been around for a while, does not make it "craptastic." However, that says nothing about their cars...

A.

Exactly: it says nothing about their cars.

The Mercedes logo means: land, air, and sea. The engines built by Mercedes.

The BMW logo: A white propeller spinning in the blue sky, since the company started as an aircraft engine manufacturer.

The Audi logo: the 4 rings of the 4 companies of the Auto Union and the Silver Arrow connection.

And so on and so fourth....

Jon.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Lifestyle › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › best/worst corporate logos