Journal
Minimal Logo Design
25 March 2006 › 7 comments
Today, my wife and I spent the better part of our rainy afternoon at the H&R Block office. I say that not to complain, but to bring up something that I found quite interesting. Their signage was all quite nice, and the office was painted to match their branding. Overall, we had a very pleasant experience, and were helped by this elderly woman who got all our paperwork sorted out for us. Off-topic, it felt awesome to finally be able to file taxes as something other than “full-time student.”
Anyway, I digress. I found it very odd that their logo is a green square. As far as I can tell, they are a well established financial consulting company, with offices spread throughout the nation. They help with taxes, mortgages, and offer a slew of other money-related services I’m sure. So, I suppose it is puzzling to me that such a huge company has such a simplistic logo.
Still, there’s something to be said for simplicity. For instance, the green square you see here is the logo for Forty Media, a highly capable web design studio based in Phoenix, Arizona. Even though they are both green squares, the simple shift in color means entirely different things to my mind’s eye. #66CC33 stands for friendly tax service. #668800 stands for a cool web designer with shuffleboard skills.
I suppose it makes me wonder why so many other companies have such wildly unsuccessful branding, when simplicity seems to sell just as well. For instance, JCPenny has a long-established brand of their company logo written in a thin white font, placed over a solid square, which varies in color for seasonal advertisements. Lately though, I have taken notice and been amused by their TV ads, sporting a new “aqua” look to the square of the logo. I suppose it’s nice to see Apple’s brand influencing mainstream advertising. I can’t help but wonder, if by applying this effect to everything, companies aren’t actually diluting their own branding.
This is a brand that needs no introduction. Arguably, Nike is one of the singlemost recognizable brands in the world. It is unique in that it is dependent on neither language nor coloring, but is based on a symbol that is universally recognizable. This affords Nike quite a bit of flexibility in presenataion, while still ensuring that people remember it.
Right up there along with Nike is the branding for Coca-Cola, which is only slightly diminished in its recognizability because of the fact that it is based on lettering which has to be translated into various regional dialects. Still, the style of the script and the prominence in coloring make it quite distinctive. Other good logos that spring to mind are Cingular, Chevrolet, Volkswagen or just about anything created by legendary logo designer, the late Saul Bass. For more contemporary logos, go see Ryan Ford’s identity portfolio section.
Hopefully, Andy Rutledge will be happy I’ve written this article about design. For further advice on branding, check out Lea’s guide to Self-Branding, who herself has quite a cool logo. If you look closely, you will see that it not only spells Lea, but also looks like a cartoon of a girl raising her arms in triumph. For a great article on branding a website layout itself, based on a supplied color scheme / logo, check out Greg’s article on Airbag about Ma.gnolia.
I could go on and on, but I think you get the idea. Great logos are those that shine with or without color, are easily recognizable and just “work,” without extra graphical effects. The Apple logo works equally well with an aqua effect, or without it. When designing your next project, shoot for a distinctively new look, and try to make it unique unto the company that you are representing.
Discussion + Dissension
Comments closed after 2 weeks.
#1 Elliot Swan
Good tips. Another thing I’d say is that one advantage that using a symbol rather than your whole name gives you is that you can use it places where you wouldn’t have enough room to place your whole brand name. Or, doing something where you’ve got your text, then a symbol next to or as a part of that name, so you can have the with-text version, and just the symbol version.
#2 Nathan Smith
Elliot: That’s true, and something I’ve been thinking about quite a bit for my own site. Initially, I just sort of threw this it together, and never really bothered coming up with a solid logo / icon. I’ve been toying with some ideas for the May 1st CSS Reboot, but we’ll see if anything actually comes of it.
#3 Lea
However, one thing I will have to add—the simpler or more abstract your iconic logo is (and by simple, I mean something almost as silly as a square), the stronger your brand strategy has to be. In many ways, the reason why the icons you’ve mentioned are memorable and strong is because they’ve had millions of marketing money to keep their brand top of mind over years. For example, H&R Block opened in 1955—it’s taken time for us to equate “bright green block” to the tax man.
Also, the simpler you go these days, the easier it is to get into copyright infringement ala Quark. So be careful! But, it is possible to be original even while keeping things as clean and simple as possible. It’s our job as designers to figure out exactly how this is executed.
I also agree with Elliot—you can be really flexible with a symbol, and it’s the reason why many corporate clients even request it during project briefings. As someone who used to work daily in an in-house corporate setting, you’ll be amazed at the various places the logo needs to be squished to and added. A little swoosh is much more readable than the word NIKE if you’re going to put it on, say, something as small and textured as golf balls.
#4 Tor Bollingmo
I think if the product is good, people will remember the logo – even with a killer logo, and your service is bad, fewer people will remember it.
#5 Dennis
I have found that design in general is trending more and more to a minimalist look. You see it in homes, print, cars…basically everywhere. I like your deep dive here Nathan. Thanks.
#6 Nathan Smith
Lea: That’s a good point, H&R Block has put many years of marketing “muscle” behind their brand. Also, the arguably were one of the first companies gutsy enough to throw their weight behind a simple geometric symbol, and it seems like in this case, being first on the scene paid off.
Tor: That’s very true. Even with a good symbol, your company eventually becomes branded by its service. It’s for this reason that the cliché beveled text of Google has become synonymous with highly functional, albeit plain looking web applications. Likewise, people don’t care how ugly Amazon or eBay are, because their services have become their brand, beyond simple visual perceptions. On the flip-side, I’m trying to think of a case of good branding, but a bad product, but for the life of me nothing comes to mind.
Dennis: Yeah, I think a good logo / brand / symbol is one that works well monochromatic. I figure, additional aqua effects, or whatever is the latest trend, can be added easily enough, so it’s important to have a solid base or foundation upon which to build. Case in point, the Apple or Nike logos.
#7 Michael Buckingham
I would love to be in some of these pitch meetings. I’m sure there was a long story, probably followed by some impressive use of media when the idea of a green square was pitched to H&R…and none of us probably want to know what the firm was paid.