FormFiftyFive™

Inspiration / The Original Champions of Design

Liked that? Try these:

What do you think?

LukeTonge
13th Jul 2010
12:50 pm

1. Nice bangs!

   OCD have some brilliant work under their belt, be sure to check out the rest of their stuff.


anatolyvyalikh
13th Jul 2010
1:02 pm

2. Very nice works, what is good that they are not only clear and simple, but at the same time clever. Well done!
   Interesting to see their future works


David Boni
13th Jul 2010
2:33 pm

3. They ruined it. There’s no improvement about it—rather, complication. The bangs create an imbalance while making the foremost silhouette looks like she’s wearing a helmet, or possessing a fluffy afro. The straight necks look inhuman, and this is coming from a guy that loves angles (but that’s just it, angles are incredibly masculine, and these make the Girl Scouts look more militaristic…) Perhaps the only “ok” thing they did was perk the noses and lips; they should have stopped there.

   I like the patterns they made with the clover. Yet the logo was mutated. A shame.


anatolyvyalikh
13th Jul 2010
2:42 pm

4. Maybe ruined, maybe not. Client wanted changes and studio made them saving face on this logotype and saving recognition of Saul Bass logo.
   Main plus in this identity is that it is not absolutely different to previous.


Sean
13th Jul 2010
3:02 pm

5. Hi David, thanks for the post, well put.

   I agree with many of the points you make, what I admire is OCD’s respectful tip of the hat to Saul Bass by choosing to ‘refine’ the mark, and not overhaul it completely. (Such as the rebranding of Paul Rand’s classic UPS logo)

   I agree the bangs does make it slightly imbalanced and adds a further layer of complication, however I do think that the bangs do help to make the three girls look more youthful.


David Boni
13th Jul 2010
4:13 pm

6. I can’t say, if I was Saul Bass or Paul Rand (only not-dead), I’d prefer one of my original works to get little bits added on to it versus a completely different work replacing it (as was the case with UPS) despite how agonizingly contemporary and ill-suited the new logo might be. I liken the adding of bits to a child with a crayon drawing on a timeless photograph.

   I think the bangs are fooling people into thinking “youthful”—they are way too contemporary in my eyes.


Mat Dolphin
13th Jul 2010
4:59 pm

7. I can understand the brief requiring OCD to make the mark more contemporary, but take the new iD, simplify it, and you’re left with the old. That for me doesn’t signify an improvement that was necessary.

   This for me demonstrates Saul Bass original ability. Hats off to the man.


karl escritt
14th Jul 2010
10:30 pm

8. Some really nice work here the brand looks more up to date with the redesign.


Ranald Graham
15th Jul 2010
9:52 am

9. I agree with David here, its been modified in an attempt to update it but to me it feels a cheaper version of the original. I can’t look at the two without seeing how obviously superior the original is. As a drawing it is just so much more elegant and timeless… this new version looks far too much like a shamrock to me.


Andy Russell
15th Jul 2010
4:01 pm

10. I have to agree with most of the comments already on here… the brand development is a nice progression (patterns, stationery, colour palette etc) but the amends to the icon feel a little unnecessary.

    I think Mat Dolphin sums it up.


ed
16th Jul 2010
11:32 am

11. The first two faces in the new version look closer to each other than to the third one. The balance is all off (look at chin distances/forehead distances/lip distances. The original is much better balanced as a trio. It looks like a problem brought about by the tightening of the shamrock curves, but it makes the whole thing look a bit awkward to me.

    Other than that execution I don’t mind the thing, but I would tend to agree it’s fiddling for fiddling’s sake. Could’ve been better off applying the old logo in the more contemporary collateral styles. (Saks 5th ave anyone?)


Basquait
16th Jul 2010
4:20 pm

12. The changes are not an improvement. They add unnecessary complexity to the logo. It is fiddling for fiddlings sake. But it would be hard to ask a paying client to pay the fee when the better advice would have been to request the logo remained as is.


teejaystudios
18th Jul 2010
2:42 pm

13. Yeah, Most of the previous comments are spot on. The first design is much much better. and more modern if that makes much sense? The second ones look uneven and awkward. :/


Lauren
25th Aug 2010
12:46 am

14. I have to say, I like the original better. I see what they were getting at, especially the concept of the tipped shape at the bottom, which actually pays more homage to the 10-20s logo, but those bangs? You\’ve got to be kidding me! They\’ve already made the girls look more youthful by slimming them down.

    As for the text, I don\’t personally like it but it does not add any complication.

Name (required)

Email (will not be published) (required)

Your website