Exactly what is going on in the world of corporate image mongers these days? Where have their minds wandered off to? Have they decided that flinging a couple of hundred thousand dollars to some design firm or ad agency is going to bring them new patrons or watchers or users of their products? If what’s been coming down the pipeline is anything to consider, then I might just need to put on my art director’s clothes again and smack some design sense back into these idiots. Sheesh… what now?

I understand that some corporate yoyo somewhere said to his/her/its underlings ‘our image is stagnant – we need to update and reinvision ourselves’ – ooookay, maybe YOU thought so, but excuse me, sometimes its best not to mess around with a good thing just because you think it needs tweaking.

Some folks learned from their mistakes – NASA for example. They started out with what is affectionately known as “The Meatball” – that blue star-filled ball with the serif NASA centered in it, a red streak swoosh (long before Nike had one) and the white orbiting spacecraft circling it. Then they went with “The Worm” – an okay icon, if only that it lacked the warmth and feel of the original one, which they are currently using again. Then there was Major League Baseball, who went and revamped many team’s logos and designs in the 70s, some of which were actually quite nice (heck, The Philadelphia Phillies still use their classic ‘Baseball-In-The-P’ as their unofficial logo on many items – mostly hats and shirts), but they lacked the classic feel of the grand old game, so they reverted back to their old unis in the 90s.

But then there are folks who changed their identities and aren’t about to listen to the roar of the masses – like, for example, Xerox. Here is a company who has been trying to reinvent itself for the last 20 to 30 years. A few years ago, someone decided that the classic logo, which had a slight revamping in the 80s when they were the Document Company, had to go. What replaced it was an odd looking rounded text thing that inspired no one, and said nothing, while the old logo told a story. Heck, all you needed to see was the stylized X and you knew it was a Xerox product, not a limp hot dog like the new one. There are few logo designers who like it. The same thing happened over at Compaq. Some HP honcho decided that the logo they purchased with that company didn’t fit the bill, so they plunked down good money to replace a well known icon with a flat hope-it-dies-soon piece of road kill. SIGH!

So, what got me into this design rant? Well three things really – two that are related, one is just… stupid. Actually two are stupid, but… oh, you’ll see…

In the first batch, the soda wars continue. The first miss goes to Pepsico, who decided that a logo that is recognizable throughout the world, needed to be changed. So what did they do? They made it into a drunk smirk (it’s supposed to represent someone smiling… sure). I think the song is ‘Rum and Coca-Cola’ not ‘Rum and Pepsi-Cola’.

Speaking of Coke, they’re the center of the next design error. I guess they couldn’t let Pepsi get all the bad publicity, so they just wheeled out their new 2 liter bottles – Yes, they finally made their large bottle in the shape of their iconic glass bottles… great. It’s just…

…they don’t fit in my refrigerator, dummies! The new designs make them nearly 3 inches taller, and many fridge doors, where the bottles are designed to fit, are too short for the added length of the bottles. And worse, they are too tall for the retailer’s shelves as well. I’ve seen at least two times in supermarkets where customers have caught the upper shelf with this longer bottle and sent them bouncing down the aisle. And then there was the pizzeria where I first ran into one of these big icons. The lady behind the counter asked me to PLEASE take that last bottle because the new design in her display case not only did not fit, but because of the new design of the bottom, it tended to fall out on her. Remember McDonald’s and their coffee-in-the-lap lawsuit? Coke’s going to have to place warning on their bottles at this rate – WARNING – NEW BOTTLE SLIGHTLY TALLER AND OUT OF BALANCE! MAY CAUSE YOU TO DANCE LIKE SOMEONE’S SHOOTING AT YOUR FEET AS IT BOUNDS ACROSS THE GROUND – AND BESIDES, IT WON’T FIT YOUR REFRIGERATOR’S DOOR! Stupid #1.

Which takes us to Stupid #2 – Leave it to a lawyer to come up with this one… Someone at NBC/Universal spent a good night thinking this one out. On July 7th (Happy B-Day Shads!), the Sci Fi Channel will be rebranded… the SyFy Channel… sigh why…

To a lawyer it makes sense. SyFy can be trademarked and copyrighted – Sci Fi on the other hand is a generally used shortening of Science Fiction, and thus is public domain. So, what’s next? Anne Mondai?

Guys, sometimes it’s best to leave well enough alone. But when it comes time when real rebranding, logo modifications, reselling yourselves as something new and improved, would you PLEASE put more than two brain cells into it? I mean, come onnnnn!

A-N

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

I see potential in everyone's work! I see a world of artwork and creative geniuses!

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-



Way Too Much Good Stuff to + Them All!! Special Artists Sites



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-



The Shot of the Week - Pics So Goood it Hurts!







:thumb51520797: :thumb71825223: :thumb72728797:
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-