New Visual Identities that Matter (Re-Branding)

From Kodak to The Met the brand new visual identities that matter
Posted by Type Room (January 2017)

How to rebrand a company through all this chaos? How to stand out with a visual language so original that will become your official signature for the year’s to come? How to win the branding game when almost every graphic designer tries to come forward with a unique vision? Well, leave it to some pros to show you the way. Typerooom wishes you a very inspirational 2017 in this presentation of everything that challenged the graphic design scene the year of the Trump, aka 2016. The following logos and rebranding projects took the world by storm -either because they are original or challenging. These new entries are already iconic for all the right (and sometimes wrong) reasons.

The Met logo

Netflix logo

MIT Media Lab Logo: Flexibility

Somehow, I missed the fact that MIT Media Lab changed it’s logo. There’s an article about the change at UnderConsideration. I don’t care for the ML logo itself, and think the formal relationship between the mark and the Helvetica is problematic, but love the application of the logo as well as the flexibility of the system to work for different projects and groups within the Media Lab. In fact, the projects and groups often have better logos!

Below are some images from the article.

Screen Shot 2016-03-30 at 9.08.03 AM Screen Shot 2016-03-30 at 9.08.24 AM Screen Shot 2016-03-30 at 9.08.38 AM Screen Shot 2016-03-30 at 9.09.00 AM Screen Shot 2016-03-30 at 9.09.18 AM Screen Shot 2016-03-30 at 9.09.34 AM

Brand Identity Essentials

A companion site to the book 100 Principles for Designing Logos and Building Brands, this site groups principles into three categories: Graphic Identity, Identity Programs, Brand Identity.

First, think critically while reading anything that uses the term “essentials.” The essentials in this world are things like oxygen. And water. And sunshine. And sleep. And maybe cats. This book lists something things as “essential” that aren’t. That’s OK. It’s still a good resource.

Second, be wary of anything that provides a nice, round number of principles. 100. They may have only had 94 and needed to break things up (or slightly repeat things) in order to meet the goal. They may have actually had 103 and cut a couple. That’s OK. It’s still a good resource.

They have a great intro too.