More Logo Face-Lifts

Once again, I have two cases of major and highly recognized companies changing their corporate identity systems. In this post I had written about UPS and AT&T changing their logos, and as you may recall both new logos were losers in my opinion. Now we have Kodak and Intel on the table making the change, and while one isn’t too bad, the other is a nightmare.

Let’s start with the nightmare - Kodak. This is the worst face-lift I have ever seen on a logo. Kodak has taken their well known logo, which I’ll agree needed a little updating, and they’ve reduced it to what you see below. It’s some kind of ugly russian futurist style thing. I’m not sure entirely what they were trying to accomplish here, but if it was an attempt to modernize it they have truly failed at that. In fact, it looks like it’s from the same era as the original, just not as good. The old logo at least had a very clear connection with photography.

The only thing this new Kodak logo has going for it is that the “d” in the logo looks like half of a film roll that would have been used in those old instamatic cameras. The worst part is that they likely spent an unbelievable amount of money on this redesign. I’m still technically a junior level graphic designer, and I could have come up with thirty logos for Kodak that are ten times better than this. They should show us the rejects. I’d be interested in what they turned down for this.

Now, Intel. Not too bad, it’s bearable. But wow, a swirlie thing around the logo? That was old and busted back in 1989, when Ameritech changed their logo. I think Intel might be doing themselves a bit of a disservice with this logo. The sunken “e” was exceptionally iconic and unique to the Intel brand.

The more I look at new logos like Intel’s and Kodak’s and compare them to AT&T’s new logo the more I actually begin to like AT&T’s new logo, even though it replaces such a great original. You see, minimalistic curves and swishes with sharp edges are getting to be somewhat annoying when every single company on the face of the earth is trying to use them.

Man, I sure can be negative about these things can’t I? Why can’t I say something good about something for a change, you wonder? Well, I can. I will say that I like what Sprint/Nextel has done with their combined logo. I’ve always liked the whole “pin drop” clarity concept and think it’s communicated really well in the new Sprint logo’s illustration. The yellow and black colors they took from Nextelwork really well for a tech/communications company, the colors are high-tech and commanding. They did a great job, especially since they were dealing with the merger of two very large companies. One is so large, it’s the title sponsor of a major sport: NASCAR.

But it seems that NASCAR fans shouldn’t get too used to the new “Nextel Cup” name that titles NASCAR’s top series. Nextel Cup replaced the Winston Cup name in 2004 when Nextel purchased the naming rights. The “Nextel Cup Series” name is reportedly continuing until the end of the 2006 season, but we can expect a name change for 2007. It will likely be something like Sprint Cup, as Sprint remains the main corporate name, and Nextel will just be a sub-brand. (Source)

NASCAR has a right to approve or reject any name change that could result from the merger between Nextel and Sprint. The 10-year contract Nextel signed also limits how many times they can change the name. I can see how NASCAR would have an interest in such a thing, as certain names might not test well with fans and may effect the sport’s marketing. (Source)

Overall, this trend of modernizing corporate logos, whether it’s UPS, AT&T, Kodak, Intel, or whoever else decides to do it next, it’s been very disappointing so far. Sometimes minimal works, but I feel like it’s going a bit too far. No wonder so many ad execs and corporate types have no respect for graphic design anymore. Apparently they can get what they want out of a logo at one of those $75 online logo factories. It’s very, very disappointing.