4 ms·
Companies are very very very specific about their logos, how they are to be used, what backgrounds they can have. It's not unusual for their to be a branding "b
by ShakataGaNai 9y ago
Companies are very very very specific about their logos, how they are to be used, what backgrounds they can have. It's not unusual for their to be a branding "bible" thats hundreds of pages. Why does this matter? Because the background is on white. They're going to require that if the logo design looks best on white, that there must be white.
So all you've done here in introduced ANOTHER color to be printed in a lot of cases. Ok, it works fine on a Starbucks cup and on a webpage... but in most real life cases? Way way more complicated. The McDonald's Arches are prominently lit on the front of their buildings. Now instead of one lighting loop, there needs to be two.
And while I do like the design of some of these logos, like Coke. The Apple logo is TERRIBLE. Some logo's this High School design class of "lets make some of the logo white", just doesn't work.
- captn3m0 9y agoCompanies already have multiple versions of the logo: print/web/monochrome/glyph etc. Since this only affects print, it would only affect the printed versions of the logo. The Brand guidelines could be reflected for the same. The complete logo could still be used in print scenarios, but if it is something that is very print specific (brochures, magazine ads, newspapers), then you specifically pick the "eco" logo, as per your branding bible. I agree on the Apple logo being terrible though. It could have been a bigger bite.
- OutsmartDan 9y agoAgree. The Apple logo eco-design is the worst thing I've seen since iOS 11.