Thread replies: 3
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
File: 0e0dd808ce5477e431b269ef2ffba37a.gif (12KB, 800x608px) Image search:
[Google]
12KB, 800x608px
Design is useless. Prove me wrong. Wait! Don't bother, you can't. Take for instance this guy who sells a pair of shoes for thousands of dollars. He considers himself a designer as well; fashion designer, not a graphic designer, but still—a designer nonetheless. He makes mad cash, but he can't pay a real designer to make him a decent identity. I've never thought that an internationally recognized luxury brand could have a logo that's way worse than anything you're going to find on Fiverr.
>>
>>313011
True that, I think this all the time, then I remember it's probably 50~ years old, and frankly more recognizable for it's prestige and heritage than actual aesthetic quality.
I guess what I'm saying is, of course they can get a better logo, but why bother when everyone knows this one so well?
>>
You really need to consider the whole value of branding, vs "is this a logo you like."
Personally, I think Ford Motors has a crappy, dated logo in a visual sense. But the brand is so strong that it would be questionable to completely redo it with modern aesthetics.
His brand connects with his market, who are themselves paying far more attention to the soles of the shoes.
If I were redoing this logo, I'd simply pull off the "hristian" and call it a day. Otherwise it's elegant, and feels like the fashion industry. It's not the awful logo you believe it is, imo.
Thread posts: 3
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1