miLienzo.com » Branding and Logo Design

How a student’s iPod touch advert went mainstream

Aaron — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 21:48:31 +0000

An 18 year old British student has seen the mock iPod touch advert he made in his bedroom get aired on US TV and even shown live at the World Series.

Apple fan Nick Haley made the advert in his spare time and uploaded the 30 second spot to YouTube. Naturally he couldn’t believe his ears when an Apple representative called to buy the rights to the ad (which presumably they already owned?) and invited Nick to Los Angeles to help remake the video.

This first video shows Nick’s rough mash-up:

[See post to watch Flash video]

Apple’s advertising agency, TBWA Worldwide, applied a spot of Apple polish to create this second version, very faithful to Nick’s original idea:

[See post to watch Flash video]

I first came across this story at Ad Goodness where the mainly ad-professional community have been stroking their goatees and getting hot under their roll-neck collars, complaining that the ad lacks any creative concept or originality.

They may well be right but I think it’s a great ad. As brand developer Prescott Perez-Fox says, this ad is significant because it is one of the first examples of amateur consumer-generated content being implemented and used by mainstream professionals.

On his personal blog, risk-management consultant Indyman reflects on how refreshing it is to see Apple turn a blind eye to any copyright infringement issues and embrace the user-generated content movement.

I’ve written in the past at how Apple are the Jedi masters of marketing and PR. Here they’ve managed to produce a great ad (at a fraction of the cost of using a creative agency) and attach it to a great story (the guy next door striking it lucky). The result is a media- and blogosphere-friendly story that is well and truly going viral (almost 500,000 YouTube views, and counting).

Who needs a creative concept?

I truly love this ad, and I’m chuffed to bits for lucky Nick. What do you think?

PS – if you’re reading this Apple, why not checkout my iPod flex conceptual designs? Will consider fair offers

Is the London 2012 olympic logo really that bad?

Aaron — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 21:34:11 +0000

Everyone’s saying it, opinions seem to be unanimous, the London 2012 Olympic Games logo sucks!

Earlier today at a star-studded ceremony, Lord Sebastian Cole proudly unveiled the identity of Britain’s pride and joy, the London 2012 Olympic Games.

If reaction and publicity is what they wanted, it is most certainly what they’ve got. Lets just summarise:

In fact, through digging around I have yet to see or hear of even one slightly positive response. So I’m going to take a step back, look at things in a calm and reflective manner, and try to identify if there are any positives.

It’s not a corporate logo

It’s important to distinguish between a corporate logo and a logo for a large sporting event like the Olympic Games. Companies operate in a commercial world where there is competition from rival companies. Corporate logos need to be instantly recognisable from the competition; if the public struggle to identify with a logo this leads to a loss of performance, loss of sales, loss of jobs and all sorts of bad stuff.

The Olympics doesn’t operate in the same kind of environment as this. There will be no other large athletics games competing for TV and advertising space in the summer of 2012. Lets face it, we’re all going to watch the games on TV, the stadiums will be full, advertisers are going to pay millions to have anything to do with the games, and the public feeling towards the logo will have absolutely no effect on this at all.

So without these commercial pressures I think this enables the designers to take a few more risks and be unconventional. This logo certainly is unconventional and I think that’s fine. In fact, I think it’s a good positive thing.

Are logos for large sporting events ever any good?

Lets be fair and compare like for like. Anyone remember the World Cup in Germany last year?

If anything the World Cup has a larger world audience than the Olympics. So the highest profile of all world sporting events must surely be what we look up to and measure ourselves against, right?

Oh deary me, that’s not very good. In fact the German World Cup logo was hated so much by the German design community that they went ahead and designed their own (much better) alternative version.

So can we take heart from the fact that logos for large sporting events are always just a bit dodgy? How does the London logo compare with these?

The Barcelona Olympics logo, a stylised stick figure athlete clearly influenced by the works of Juan Miro, is a great logo. However, Athens’ and Atlanta’s logo are a bit ‘meh’.

Compared with these, the London 2012 logo really stands out. My favourite of these (Barcelona) is also pretty conventional. London is trying to be brave which makes it stand out… some might say like a sore thumb. This might not be such a bad thing.

A brand isn’t just a logo

The London Olympics will be identified by far more than just the logo. Over the next few years we will be seeing lots of bright blues, pinks, greens and oranges; we will see lots of jagged shapes and sharp edges. If this logo is anything at all it is certainly vibrant, and will form the foundation for a much wider visual style, which is colourful exciting and vibrant.

This visual style will also be accompanied by carefully selected and equally vibrant theme songs by cutting edge and trendy British rock bands. Adverts will feature these songs, Happy Meal boxes will use these colours, Coca Cola cans will replace the curvy swoosh with a jagged edge.

OK, I’m being a tad presumptuous, but to demonstrate what I mean by this I suggest watching the official brand video which I think is excellent and might even sway a few peoples’ opinion.

EDIT: There have been reports of a section of the brand video causing epileptic seizures. In the interests of health and safety I have decided to remove the video. If a re-edited version appears on the London 2012 website I will post that.

Lord Cole has already stated how they are trying to appeal to the youth and they are approaching this with a cutting edge, trendy and vibrant brand. Whether this concept is cutting edge and trendy is still open to debate, but it must be viewed as more than just a logo.

Conclusion

I’ve intentionally been very fair to the London logo – perhaps overly fair. My instinctive reaction upon viewing the logo was one of shock and horror. From reading the reactions of the general public and respected designers alike, not many people seem to like this logo and some are quite angry about it.

The purpose of this article was not to be different for the sake of being different, but to identify some positives. To a certain extent I am playing the Devil’s advocate, but the points I raise are valid.

Lets not forget they are designing a logo for something that is happening five years in the future. That requires a lot of foresight, and a need to be courageous. With the world watching, the designers and the London team could have quite easily announced a ’safe’ logo. Instead they have boldly hit everyone in the face with something outrageously different.

Whatever your opinion of the logo, which is probably low, the people behind it knew it would raise a few eyebrows today, and on that basis their bravery, adventurousness, or downright foolishness, must be acknowledged.

Over to you.

Many thanks for the previous posts’ comments: Asgeir, Justin, Marc, Sera, Mac, David and Romeo.

What do you think of my NEW personal logo design?

Aaron — Mon, 14 May 2007 19:25:10 +0000

A few days ago I posted a personal logo conceptual design and asked for your feedback. What became clear from the comments I received was that everyone’s instinctive first response upon seeing the logo was not the response I desired. It drew the wrong connotations in the viewers mind.

So, back to the sketchpad I went, and taking the previous comments on board I have a new concept to present:

So once again, I open it up to you guys to give me your honest feelings about this design?

I promise later in the week to write a detailed post on how I came to this second design, and my rational behind this and the previous design, with a shed-load of sketches chucked in for good measure.

Many thanks for the previous posts’ comments: David, Asgeir, Paul, Tara and Rob.

What do you think of my personal logo design?

Aaron — Sat, 12 May 2007 20:07:17 +0000

For the last two years in my spare time I have been studying New Media Design at college. It all comes to an next month, and for the end of the course I need to exhibit all my work at the end of year exhibition. The exhibition serves as a great opportunity for showcasing my work to potential clients, employers and other contacts. So I need to brand myself.

For the past couple of days I’ve been very busy putting together a marketing plan for myself, brainstorming ideas for a personal logo and sketching some rough thumbnails. I must confess, I can’t compete with Mr Airey in terms of sheer numbers, but I got a good couple of pages of sketches done.

I will post the sketches soon, but I really don’t want to open up that can of worms just yet. Below is my preferred design which I have drawn up in Illustrator.

So this goes out to all creative professional and interested readers alike, what do you honestly think?

I’m really interested to hear your honest and instinctive feelings about this: Do you like the logo? Is there anything you’d change? What do you think is my rational behind the design? And who do you think I’m pitching myself at?

Many thanks for the recent comments: Jim, billyjacks, webee, Asgeir, Tara and Evil Dildo.

How good design leads to world-beating brands

Aaron — Fri, 23 Mar 2007 21:27:49 +0000

Last week I treated myself to a new toy… an iPod shuffle! This is my first iPod, which I guess puts me behind the times, but there are good reasons why I have avoided buying an iPod in the past.

I always resent it when consumer electronics come bundled with proprietary software which you are forced to use with your new gadget. But I particularly resent it when that proprietary software forces the user to relinquish any control they might have previously had, and is built in such a way as to lock the user in to a particular brand.

There are lots of reasons I despise iTunes, but the software’s shortcomings are well documented elsewhere. Rather than turn this post into a rant, just bare in mind that my ill-feelings towards iTunes are very strong indeed, and let me tell you why I have bought the iPod.

The iPod shuffle is everything good design should be. It is a stunningly beautiful product – the perfect balance of clean, flat shapes and straight lines, combined with simple and elegant curves and corners – all with the right proportions. A range of attractive colours with an ever-so-subtle matt metallic shine. To look at the shuffle honestly gets my mouth watering in much the same way as looking at a Ferrari.

Even the packaging of the shuffle has been known to make grown men go wobbly at the knees. It comes packaged in a clear plastic coffin, delicately fixed to a pure white bed of card. The only decoration to the packaging is the Apple logo. It is strikingly simple, beautiful and distinctly Apple.

All this goes to demonstrate the strength of good design and a strong brand. In this case the design of the product alone has not only made me chose that product from many comparable (in terms of functionality) products, but has also made me ignore strong and long-held feelings that have previously made me chose the alternative products over the iPod.

Apple really have got it right at the moment. In my opinion the product design of both the iPod shuffle and nano are miles ahead of all the competition. In the desktop computer market the iMac is equally strong for all the same reasons.

Apple have always prioritised design, they have always been very clever with their marketing and as a result have built one of the worlds most famous and successful brands. Over the years they have not always got their product design right, but at the moment, they very definitely have!

Sony: the next-gen brand of doom

Aaron — Sun, 11 Mar 2007 00:16:23 +0000

If you’re a keen gamer you are probably aware that the 23rd March signals the European launch of the PlayStation 3. If you’re unaware of this I suspect you won’t be for much longer because (despite the fact I’ve already told you) the Sony PR machine will undoubtedly crank into overdrive in the next week or two.

And overdrive it needs to, because Sony seems to have been systematically destroying its brand for a good couple of years. It is astonishing to watch such a hugely successful corporation attempt PR suicide over and over again.

Reports from the US suggest sales of the PS3 have been poor, and something tells me March isn’t going to be prime console-buying season in Europe either. The fact that Sony have made last minute changes to the spec of the European PS3 has angered consumers, and adds to the ever-growing tide of bad publicity for Sony.

Personally I fell out with Sony when their own constrictive licensing arrangements prevented their excellent proprietary MiniDisc format (which I owned and supported) from becoming anything more than a five-minute wonder. A mistake they’d made before with Betamax and one they seem to be making again with Blu-ray.

However, we mustn’t forget how successful the PlayStation 2 was, especially in the UK where it dominated by a vast margin for over five years. That success alone guarantees Sony will be there or thereabouts with the PS3 in the UK market at least.

But when people start spending hour upon hour of their own time, carefully piecing together cleverly worded lyrics and creating an entire musical composition, with DIY video track to boot, just to slag you off, you know you’re in for a bad time. Especially when half a million people download said video clip from YouTube, and post comments mostly agreeing with the notion.

[See post to watch Flash video]

Now who said there’s no such thing as bad publicity?