4 ms·
Saying that this guy's designs were terrible therefore all modern design is terrible is like saying all children's TV presenters are pedophiles (apologies I kno
by mrcartmeneses 4y ago
Saying that this guy's designs were terrible therefore all modern design is terrible is like saying all children's TV presenters are pedophiles (apologies I know that's an extreme analogy).
The truth is that the guy behind this design agency is not a good designer at all and his career seems to have been driven by confidence, greed and the incompetence of his clients. It's a sample of one. He's the Jimmy Saville of bad design
- thisOtterBeGood 4y agoThinking the same. They've made some fatal mistakes there. Heck of a lesson for the agency there :D
- hn_throwaway_99 4y agoWhich is why I linked the related recent HN post about tons of different brands, across tech and fashion, that wiped out any trace of their individuality for bold, sans-serif logos. I agree, I think this designer is just a particularly shitty designer, but he's a shitty designer that's just copying the broader trend of minimalist design laziness. I think the last section in that linked HN article (https://velvetshark.com/articles/why-do-brands-change-their-logos-and-look-like-everyone-else https://velvetshark.com/articles/why-do-brands-change-their-...) perfectly points out what went wrong in the Tropicana redesign as well: > There’s nothing bad in wanting your logo to look simpler, better, mobile-ready, or universal enough to appeal to the broadest possible audience. > But don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. > Shoot for simplicity and legibility, but keep your distinguishing features. Don’t throw away what the brand has been working on for decades. > Otherwise, you may end up in a situation where you could slap any logo on any product and hardly anyone would notice a difference: