4 ms·
Compare to this (Pepsi logo redesign booklet): [PDF] http://www.goldennumber.net/wp-content/uploads/pepsi-arnell-021109.pdf http://www.goldennumber.net/wp-conte
by josephpmay 12y ago
Compare to this (Pepsi logo redesign booklet): [PDF] http://www.goldennumber.net/wp-content/uploads/pepsi-arnell-021109.pdf http://www.goldennumber.net/wp-content/uploads/pepsi-arnell-...
- abc_lisper 12y agoYeah. I remember reading that one. I can see it is bad, but honestly I don't follow what Rand is saying. I always thought the Next logo kinda looked bad! But that may be because I don't have the aesthetic sense.
- abc_lisper 12y agoYeah. I remember reading that one. I can see it is bad, but honestly I don't follow what Rand is saying. I always thought the Next logo kinda looked bad! But that may be because I don't have the aesthetic sense.
- nemo1618 12y agowhat...the hell am I reading. The last two pages especially -- "Dimensionalize exponentially?" Not to mention all the golden ratio BS. I'm struggling and failing to imagine a scenario in which this document could be presented with a straight face.
- trhway 12y agoso they did redesign the logo recently. I didn't even notice. Though i'm not a significant drinker of *cola. Anyway, just went to the fridge - yep, Pepsi cans of the new design there - the saturated solid blue color of the Pepsi cans (with lesser saturated colors of the logo itself) looks less sophisticated, more proletarian vs. Coca cans on the same shelf. Well, may be i'm already on the other side of the generation gap, and ultimately it depends on what new generation would choose.
- rmsaksida 12y ago> gravitational pull of Pepsi Is this an actual design document or just satire?
- Loughla 12y agoThat's not a real thing, right? I missed this joke? Is marketing really that utterly laughable?
- psweber 12y ago1. It's real 2. No 3. Generally, no
- imjk 12y agoReading that document a few years ago lead to an epiphany for me in realizing that there may actually be value in some of the BSing you're forced to do in school. I think human nature leads people to seek deeper meaning and explanations, and the BS assignments force you to create convincing rationalizations that satiate that need. This is particularly true when you're trying to justify spending a lot of money on more abstract things like, say, a logo redesign. From what I remember, Pepsi paid the firm that put together that presentation about a million dollars for that logo. Granted, I think it's a good logo and certainly an improvement on the old, but I don't think that the artist(s) actually looked to Da Vinci's Mona Lisa or the expanding rate of the universe for influence. That's just the BS rationalization that was added later to help them close the deal.
- mmxiii 12y ago>in realizing that there may actually be value in some of the BSing I don't know if this is the conclusion to take away. The OP of this topic is an example of where meaning and relevance does exist for design decisions, and can lead to a very thoughtful conclusion. The Pepsi one, in contrast, is just applying as many functions/transforms on a problem, and hoping some of the results look OK.
- gohrt 12y agoAnd the end result is http://www.hookedonads.com/pepsi-logo-is-actually-a-fat-guys-stomach/ http://www.hookedonads.com/pepsi-logo-is-actually-a-fat-guys...