4 ms·

I'm trying to think of another logo that is so simple yet is so relevant and communicates so much, but I can't seem to. Any other examples?

by dilanj 18y ago

kirse 18y ago
Uhh, the Nike swoosh? The Adidas three-stripes? McDonalds arches? Obama's logo is good, but if you're talking about simplicity and communication, it barely compares to the culturally-transcendent nature of those corporate logos. Those logos don't identify with a language or anything, they simply carry meaning.
- izaidi 18y ago
  But did those logos carry meaning right from the start or was that brand recognition built over time? What's interesting about the Obama logo is that it's instantly evocative of a message without needing years of branding, yet it still manages to be super simple.
  - kirse 18y ago
    without needing years of branding Both parties stuffed "years" of branding effort into less time through an incessant and overwhelming campaign effort. From the Obama camp, the "O" logo was literally unavoidable... TV ads, magnets of all types, shirts, pins, flags, posters, lawn-spam, the list goes on. If any company had that amount of time, money, and insane level of word of mouth, they'd be just as well branded.
    - izaidi 18y ago
      Oh for sure -- I'm not saying there wasn't tons of branding on the part of the Obama campaign. But this logo was launched at the very beginning, with the speech in Springfield in early '07, before he raised a billion dollars, and even then it communicated a clear message. I'm not sure the same was true of the corporate logos you mention.
- dilanj 18y ago
  I’m talking about how much the logo alone by itself communicates. Lets see, 1.The ‘O’ symbolizing Obama. 2.The colors of the flag. 3.The unification of red and blue, indicating cross-party unity. 4.The sunrise image aligning with the ‘hope’ and ‘new start’ campaign themes. 5.The horizon, indicating the future. Just a few that came to mind. Does the Nike swoosh, the Adidas three stripes or the McDonalds arches symbolically convey nearly as much?
  - deleted 18y ago
    [deleted]
  - kirse 18y ago
    I guess what you're saying is how much communication was intended for the logo when it was designed, correct? A logo doesn't communicate anything "by itself" but its empirical nature (text, colors, shape etc.) without branding. You wouldn't intrinsically know those 5 things having never seen the Obama logo, in the same way you'd simply see the McDonalds arches as a yellow "M".
  - byrneseyeview 18y ago
    The unification of red and blue, indicating cross-party unity This is going to be pretty confusing when we go back to thinking that red symbolizes commies. The swoosh communicates more densely, I think: it's a single, monochrome visual element, while the Obama logo is busy being a shape and a letter and a picture and a flag. The Nike logo says a lot, laconically; the Obama logo says a lot by being visually chatty.
    - talboito 18y ago
      Seems like we'll continue with the red=Republican thing for the forseeable future. There isn't anything intrinsic about communism that says "red, that's the color!". It was just a useful convention. I don't know how much the Nike swoosh can say, perhaps movement/agility?. It's always been fairly meaningless to me, aside from the whole being the Nike logo thing.
      - 18y ago
pistoriusp 18y ago
I think the University of Johannesburg's logo falls into this category: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:UJ_logo.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:UJ_logo.png (Excuse the quality of the image). Here's some information behind the logo: http://www.uj.ac.za/Informationabout/OurBrand/tabid/8287/Default.aspx http://www.uj.ac.za/Informationabout/OurBrand/tabid/8287/Def...
dc2k08 18y ago
I liked these ones recently: http://abduzeedo.com/clever-logos http://abduzeedo.com/clever-logos In particular; lochness, food writers guild and gotham books. Fedex gets undue praise everywhere and I think it is a lazy design. the F,e and d don't sit sharply anyway.

I'm trying to think of another logo that is so simple yet is so relevant and communicates so much, but I can't seem to. Any other examples?

by dilanj 18y ago

I'm trying to think of another logo that is so simple yet is so relevant and communicates so much, but I can't seem to. Any other examples?

kirse 18y ago

Uhh, the Nike swoosh? The Adidas three-stripes? McDonalds arches? Obama's logo is good, but if you're talking about simplicity and communication, it barely compares to the culturally-transcendent nature of those corporate logos. Those logos don't identify with a language or anything, they simply carry meaning.

izaidi 18y ago
But did those logos carry meaning right from the start or was that brand recognition built over time? What's interesting about the Obama logo is that it's instantly evocative of a message without needing years of branding, yet it still manages to be super simple.
- kirse 18y ago
  without needing years of branding Both parties stuffed "years" of branding effort into less time through an incessant and overwhelming campaign effort. From the Obama camp, the "O" logo was literally unavoidable... TV ads, magnets of all types, shirts, pins, flags, posters, lawn-spam, the list goes on. If any company had that amount of time, money, and insane level of word of mouth, they'd be just as well branded.
  - izaidi 18y ago
    Oh for sure -- I'm not saying there wasn't tons of branding on the part of the Obama campaign. But this logo was launched at the very beginning, with the speech in Springfield in early '07, before he raised a billion dollars, and even then it communicated a clear message. I'm not sure the same was true of the corporate logos you mention.
dilanj 18y ago
I’m talking about how much the logo alone by itself communicates. Lets see, 1.The ‘O’ symbolizing Obama. 2.The colors of the flag. 3.The unification of red and blue, indicating cross-party unity. 4.The sunrise image aligning with the ‘hope’ and ‘new start’ campaign themes. 5.The horizon, indicating the future. Just a few that came to mind. Does the Nike swoosh, the Adidas three stripes or the McDonalds arches symbolically convey nearly as much?
- deleted 18y ago
  [deleted]
- kirse 18y ago
  I guess what you're saying is how much communication was intended for the logo when it was designed, correct? A logo doesn't communicate anything "by itself" but its empirical nature (text, colors, shape etc.) without branding. You wouldn't intrinsically know those 5 things having never seen the Obama logo, in the same way you'd simply see the McDonalds arches as a yellow "M".
- byrneseyeview 18y ago
  The unification of red and blue, indicating cross-party unity This is going to be pretty confusing when we go back to thinking that red symbolizes commies. The swoosh communicates more densely, I think: it's a single, monochrome visual element, while the Obama logo is busy being a shape and a letter and a picture and a flag. The Nike logo says a lot, laconically; the Obama logo says a lot by being visually chatty.
  - talboito 18y ago
    Seems like we'll continue with the red=Republican thing for the forseeable future. There isn't anything intrinsic about communism that says "red, that's the color!". It was just a useful convention. I don't know how much the Nike swoosh can say, perhaps movement/agility?. It's always been fairly meaningless to me, aside from the whole being the Nike logo thing.
    - 18y ago

pistoriusp 18y ago

I think the University of Johannesburg's logo falls into this category: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:UJ_logo.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:UJ_logo.png (Excuse the quality of the image). Here's some information behind the logo: http://www.uj.ac.za/Informationabout/OurBrand/tabid/8287/Default.aspx http://www.uj.ac.za/Informationabout/OurBrand/tabid/8287/Def...

dc2k08 18y ago

I liked these ones recently: http://abduzeedo.com/clever-logos http://abduzeedo.com/clever-logos In particular; lochness, food writers guild and gotham books. Fedex gets undue praise everywhere and I think it is a lazy design. the F,e and d don't sit sharply anyway.