Been to the market lately?

[J***@adobeforums.com]

I don't know about you or where you live, but there a few product redesigns that are just awful, plain bad, and in my opinion a big step backwards: Tropicana and Pepsi. Both had strong market share identities, bold graphics and strong typography. Does anyone know the thinking behind these? I mean, the text is weak and the color is muted in both cases. And that Pepsi icon! What the bleep?

[N***@adobeforums.com]

John,

Not just packaging, but corporate America logos. I still cringe every time I see the poorly executed, apple peel AT&T logo which looks like the second-place winner of a high school art class project. And wimpy "friendly" redrawing of the classic solid Kodak logo. And the...

Neil

[R***@adobeforums.com]

I think the redesign has more to do with looking better online than for print. Logos in general are becoming like unibody cars. Very similar in look and feel. It's like every logo has to be some variation of the swash and/or circle look that's so prevalent now.

[N***@adobeforums.com]

Richard,

It's indicative of lazy design from lazy or incompetent designers and clueless or cheap clients. You get what you pay for.

It's just a lot easier to put over that kind of kneejerk design in the computer age with all its easily accessible resources than it was with layout pads and Magic Markers. And some so-called designers haven't a clue how anything prints to paper.

And vapid or not, it sure looks pretty on screen!

That said, there is still good stuff out there. Check out any issue of "Print" and "Communication Arts".

Neil

[A***@adobeforums.com]

Curious what you think of the new Visa logo?

[N***@adobeforums.com]

Ariel,

It's another mindless "swoosh" effect with results in a mark that is less distinctive and harder to pick out of the crowd than the old blue VISA between the blue and orange bars.

Hey, they didn't consult me or offer me $250,000 to work on the project, so, their loss. <lol>

Neil

[N***@adobeforums.com]

Ariel,

It's another mindless "swoosh" effect with results in a mark that is less distinctive and harder to pick out of the crowd than the old blue VISA between the blue and orange bars. Maybe it's a bit dated -- but then, it is instantly recognized. Why the change in this direction?

But then, hey, they didn't consult me or offer me $250,000 to work on the project, so, their loss. <lol>

Another mistake? The new Pepsi mark. What IS that, anyway? For generations, folks knew and trusted a particular design, and associated it with that carbonated beverage. May as well be the mark for a new airline. Or Lionel trains. Or Delta faucets. Or...

Coca Cola seems to have been pretty happy with its 100-year-old mark. At least they haven't strayed far from that concept.

And the relatively recent evolution of the AT&T mark to some disjointed globe is kiddie stuff, poorly executed. The operative here is "executed".

Neil

[N***@adobeforums.com]

Ariel,

It's another mindless "swoosh" effect with results in a mark that is less distinctive and harder to pick out of the crowd than the old blue VISA between the blue and orange bars. Maybe it was a bit dated -- but then, it is always instantly recognized. Why the change in direction?

But then, hey, they didn't consult me or offer me $250,000 to work on the project, so, their loss. <lol>

Another mistake? The new Pepsi mark. What IS that, anyway? For generations, folks knew and trusted a particular design, and associated it with that carbonated beverage. May as well be the mark for a new airline. Or Lionel trains. Or Delta faucets. Or...

Coca Cola seems to have been pretty happy with its 100-year-old mark. At least they haven't strayed far from that concept.

And the relatively recent evolution of the AT&T mark to some disjointed globe is kiddie stuff, poorly executed. The operative here is "executed".

Change just for the sake of change makes zero sense.

Neil

[N***@adobeforums.com]

Just took a look at the Pepsi packaging.

"Sterile design" would be an understatement.

Neil

[R***@adobeforums.com]

I purchased some Tropicana yesterday and was looking at the container and wondering what the objective was. To water down the brand recognition as thoroughly as possible is the only thing that comes to mind. I'm sure they tested this but it's a dog.

I was working for NY Telephone when they changed over to NYNEX <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nynex.svg>. One of the ugliest logos ever. I can still remember my manager saying excitedly, "X stands for the unknown." If I remember correctly, it cost $115,000 or $215,000 for the new logo.

Remember the uproar when the London 2012 Olympic logo first came out? Seems to have died out. It'll revive in another 2 years as promos start to come out.

[N***@adobeforums.com]

"Misguided" is the only polite word that comes to mind, re: NYNEX and London '12.

Neil

[J***@adobeforums.com]

Here's another brand right out of Suck City: Mt. Dew ( just saw the new refrigerator pack redesign ). Go figure, it's a Pepsi brand.

[JunkMailer]

Speaking of Mt. Dew... I'll take the old hillbilly dew can logo design from the early '80s any day over the new one. I saw it at the local supermarket tonight as a matter of fact. It looked terrible.

[JunkMailer]

I loved the mesh back trucker caps that had the old Dew logo on them.

[T***@adobeforums.com]

Seems appropriate to mention the new Xerox logo in here. =)

[H***@adobeforums.com]

Great question, awesome answers. I'm not a true designer but merely enjoy it as a hobby, and even I can spot the uglies. The Pepsi logo is the worst offender in my book, and I have been saying this for the last 15 years. I'm glad to see others think so too. But keep in mind who Pepsi's target audience is (no offense to Pepsi drinkers haha).

I guess we have a slightly different problem of product design in Japan. We are dealing with 2 different alphabets, 1 set of kanji characters, numbers, and roman letters. It all tends to get jumbled together, I call it "visual pollution". A trip to my fridge revealed 8 different fonts on the front of the orange juice carton alone. It's a real hot mess! Of course this is not limited to just product design.

[N***@adobeforums.com]

BTW, my wife, who is not a designer, picked up a couple of the new Tropicana orange juice and grapefruit juice containers yesterday, came home and asked me, "Have you seen how ugly these are?"

Neil

[N***@adobeforums.com]

Let's turn this around...

Has anyone noticed any really good new corporate redesign? (From a major corporation.)

Neil

[R***@adobeforums.com]

Wonder Bread has a new logo. Just enough to freshen it up without losing original identity.

Here's a review of some recent makeovers featured in Dynamic Graphics: Death of a Logo <http://www.dynamicgraphics.com/dgm/Article/28770>

[H***@adobeforums.com]

Sorry, I thought we were talking about bad product design in general... my comment was a little off-topic.

I like the Adidas logo. When I was a kid, it had three leaves. Now it has a triangular shape, and reminds one of the tread of a sneaker.

[N***@adobeforums.com]

Heather,

Yes, the topic is bad design. But it helps put it all in perspective if we can also point to some good stuff. Richard's link is very good reference as well.

Neil

[J***@adobeforums.com]

I like what UPS has done lately. I also like what Coke is doing ( although I thought Tropicana was a Coke brand ). I threw this topic out to you people because I'm confused, I thought these big dollar redesigns went through market testing, internal and external reviews, extensive approval processes and some effort to strengthen the brand was made. I find it hard to consider that these particular redesigns ( Pepsi and Tropicana ) won a large amount of approval, but they had to and based on what? Negative publicity? The Pepsi icon, forgive me, but looks like an Asian brand, definitely not American.

[N***@adobeforums.com]

John,

I thought these big dollar redesigns went through market testing, internal
and external reviews, extensive approval processes and some effort to
strengthen the brand was made.




Right. And sometimes the pontificating that goes on behind those doors is little more than misguided, self-serving drivel, based upon who's personal agenda and ego wins out. Or it's a misinterpretation of accumulated focus group data -- or even the wrong demographic chosen and responding to the questions. Garbage in; garbage out.

How many times have you catered to a client's whims only because he hands out the work and signs off on your invoices?

Neil

[N***@adobeforums.com]

John,

I thought these big dollar redesigns went through market testing, internal
and external reviews, extensive approval processes and some effort to
strengthen the brand was made.




Right. And sometimes the pontificating that goes on behind those doors is little more than misguided, self-serving drivel. The most vocal personal agenda, bluster and ego wins out. Or it's a problem of bad taste or no taste. Or it's a misinterpretation of accumulated focus group data -- or even the wrong demographic chosen and responding to the questions. Garbage in; garbage out. How do you think the Edsel ever made it from the drawing board into dealer showrooms in the late '50s?

How many times have you catered to a client's whims only because he hands out the work and signs off on your invoices?

Neil

[R***@adobeforums.com]

And when a logo/brand/campaign fails, the marketing agency can say, "but the testing showed it would work". No one goes with their gut instinct these days.

The revised UPS logo was good. Freshened up a dated brand just enough.

I was in CVS last week and the KY lubricants <http://www.dollymix.tv/2008/05/ky_jellys_latest_lube_the_thri.html> which used to be in plain white tubes are now in new sleek blue/red (his and hers) tubes and branded as personal lubricants which are now advertised on TV! Used to be one of those things (like condoms) that you hope no one on line notices you holding.

[N***@adobeforums.com]

The KY redesign and TV commercials are good targeted marketing, and make it "cool" to discuss sex in a more open way, without guilt or shame.

The current UPS shield is probably the best mark they've used as far as modern high recognition is concerned. But, it says little about UPS being a package delivery service.

Neil

[R***@adobeforums.com]

UPS, like Xerox and IBM, has a mark that doesn't need to explicitly state what they do since everyone knows. And what logo does anyway? Just looks a little fresher.

[N***@adobeforums.com]

Richard,

And what logo does anyway?




It seems that particularly with the larger, better known companies, they can have marks that just have a general feel for a company persona. Apple Computer and other large technology companies also fall into this category.

On the other hand, smaller companies and services are more likely to create marks that to some degree acknowledge specifically what they do.

Neil

[R***@adobeforums.com]

they can have marks that just have a general feel for a company persona




Doesn't UPS have a secondary mark with a jet circling a globe? I remember seeing that on a trucks for a while.

Here it is: UPS Truck <Loading Image...>

[D***@adobeforums.com]

Not sure if that is a trademark, logo, or just an illustration. To keep out of the latter category, the same image would have to be used in other locations, besides the trucks (advertising, stationery, etc.).

[I***@adobeforums.com]

Here in GB a few years ago, someone thought it was a good idea to change not only the logo, but also the name of Royal Mail to Consignia. Now I'm no royalist, and the Royal Mail has its share of problems. However, the Royal mail still has a generally favourable - ish image and remains a strong British brand.

Not suprisingly, most thought it was a waste of cash. As Richard said, it was a variation of the circular swoosh design. Private Eye, a satirical British magazine made fun of this and for several weeks produced several examples of similar lazy designs.

See below for comments and how they came up with the name:

<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/2002480.stm>

Also the logo itself:

<http://www.brandchannel.com/features_profile.asp?pr_id=76>

Not suprisingly, the name Consignia was consigned to the dustbin and the old Royal Mil name and Logo made a quick comeback!

Ian

[N***@adobeforums.com]

Ian,

Thanks for sharing. The name is laughable -- not even suggesting what the service is, and it easily opens the door to mispronunciation. As for the mark itself? Looks more suited for a bottle of laundry detergent or toilet cleaner.

Neil

[L***@adobeforums.com]

I didn't read the whole thread so forgive me if this one was already mentioned but I saw pepsi mention, what about Sierra Mist?! Eww, it looks like something from a horror movie! I saw that at the market and was really confused!

[N***@adobeforums.com]

The problem with much marketing is that proper research is often lacking. For example, a number of years ago, General Motors decided that the intermediate size Chevy Nova would be a good car for the Latin American market. Right size for the roads; right price for the demographics; right look, etc. Lots of money spent here before GM's commitment to sell that car to a largely Spanish-speaking population.

But sales were not so hot -- and this was years before the current economic crisis. It was only then that they realized (or were told) that in Spanish, "Nova" means, "It doesn't go."

Neil

[N***@adobeforums.com]

The good news for Tropicana packaging is that public outcry won. With tail between their legs, Pepsico is reverting to the old, tried and true Tropicana orange juice featuring the classic half-orange with a straw coming out of it. It is the picture of "fresh" orange juice.

Neil

[Michael Kazlow]

I must be fried:

I read "reverting to the old, tired and true"

...Mike

[N***@adobeforums.com]

Mike,

I like your version better.

Neil

[J***@adobeforums.com]

They didn't have to revert back, but they didn't have to destroy their image on the shelf, either. It's a premium brand. It's a strong brand. No need to mess with that.

[R***@adobeforums.com]

The Pepsi logo has kind of grown on me over time. The Tropicana thing didn't work in any way, shape or form.

[N***@adobeforums.com]

I prefer Coke, both the drink and the old-fashioned logo. The new Pepsi "smiley face" logo and the absurd logic that went into its development make me want to knock on Pepsico's door and offer to sell them a nice bridge in Brooklyn.

Neil

[R***@adobeforums.com]

Probably the better way to have said it was that the Pepsi logo doesn't irk me as much as it did initially. (That fixed it!)

[J***@adobeforums.com]

Maybe I'm putting too much thought into all of this. Nobody has been able to explain the theory behind the new Pepsi icon. It has not grown on me. In fact, I despise it. What is that White shape supposed to signify anyway? A worm? A Korean worm? A Chinese worm? Sure, when you see it, you know its Pepsi, but does that do them any favors? It's an American brand, hence the Red, White, and Blue.

And, the Sierra Mist. If they want an award for most memorable crap, they've won it hands down.

[s***@adobeforums.com]

I was looking at a bottle of diet pepsi in my fridge yesterday.... hate hate hate hate the new look. It's so weak compared to what they had before. I just can't understand why they would drop such a strong look for a wimpy font, and even wimpier symbol. You'd see the old logo busting out of a billboard with water droplets bursting around and it just grabbed your attention.

[J***@adobeforums.com]

My thoughts exactly. Thank you, Stan. Weak vs. Strong. I'll take strong, thank you. Tropicana suffered the same fate...weak, weak, weak. If you're at a nascar event, you'd need a telescope to see the graphic and font. You're going to use a light, sans serif font in a logo?

[N***@adobeforums.com]

In my opinion, like the "new" Tropicana package, the new Pepsi package is another cold, clinical, institutional, impersonal (etc.) design, removed from anything that has to do with a popular carbonated beverage supposedly taunting my taste buds.

Neil

[R***@adobeforums.com]

Visual Muzak.