2011 has seen its fair share of logo and identity redesigns. Here are some of the worst, according to Armin from www.underconsideration.com/brandnew, a blog that displays opinions focused on corporate and brand identity work. I am not sure I would consider all of them the worst but there are definitely some bad ones and others that may actually have some element of improvement.
Take a look for yourselves and let us know what you think.
Swiss International Airlines |
Armin states that he does not consider the redesign to be bad in this case but he takes issue with the literal interpretation of an airline through the use of a tailfin and the lack of simplicity from the previous identity.
I would have to agree that the logo is not bad at all but I am just not a big fan of literal interpretations. At least its just a tailfin and not the whole plane.
Edmonton Valley Zoo
Number 11 on the list is the identity for the Edmonton Valley Zoo. Armin asks "What does the new one have going for it? Animals with eyes bloated and crazy as if they just had a Four Loko and Red Bull cocktail".
Petco
I am really not going to say much about this one since Armin has already done so. He writes "I unleashed most of my ire on the tagline, which added the keyword “healthy” in it, to make sure no sad sack dog or cat dare enter their store — it’s as if Target changed its tagline to “Where the HEALTHY people go; the rest of you can go to Walmart”. I couldn't agree with him more. It just sounds discriminatory.
In regards to the font, the old version seems somewhat dated to me, however I do not feel like the new one is much of an improvement.
The Comedy Network
All I can say is that neither of them work.
JCPenney
According to Armin, the redesign is not bad. He is just offended by the process and how it came to be. After reading his comments, I am to. They basically crowdsourced the redesign of the logo. Meaning that they asked design studios and art schools to submit logos and then chose one. If you don't know why this is bad, check out this article on crowdsourcing.
In terms of the design, changing uppercase to lowercase doesn't always work. I know that it helps soften their image and make it more friendly but in this case I don't think it was really necessary. The previous identity was cleaner and more simple and still transmits a casual and friendly approach. The new logo seems tight and the box separates the name in a way that makes sense but is also akward when you are left with just the "enney".
Miami Marlins
"Baseball, with all its tradition and Americana values, is fertile ground for great identity design. Paired with the local flavor of each city, all of the MLB’s teams should have winning identities. But sometimes things go wrong. Very very wrong. Every single element of this identity — from the marlin to the color palette to the secondary typography — is botched in more ways than one. For a city like Miami, with such rich visual culture, it’s a shame they ended up with this. I would have preferred clichéd palm trees and white suits with pink t-shirts underneath than this" says Armin.
I don't know if I would prefer palm trees but this is all wrong starting with the fact that it doesn't even look like a sports related identity. I personally like the font but it just isn't appropriate in this case. Many have likened the identity to that of Maroon 5. Yes, it's the same, the same font. It just doesn't have any character or strength.
