NOTE: This is an archived version of the first incarnation of Brand New. All posts have been closed to comments. Please visit underconsideration.com/brandnew for the latest version. If you would like to see this specific post, simply delete _v1 from the URL.
Quickly one year after the first case of AIDS was registered in 1981, the San Francisco AIDS Foundation (SFAF) — then known as The Kaposi’s Sarcoma Research & Education Foundation — was established to help the local community understand the new disease, and since then it has played a significant role nationally in the ongoing battle in AIDS/HIV prevention and education. Earlier this year, SFAF adopted a new identity, designed by San Francisco based Mortar, to carry the organization forward as it continues its unfortunately endless quest to control AIDS/HIV.
Logo and applications with photography.
What I like the most about this identity is how uncomfortable it is. It is not pretty, or cool, or nice. The angled, jarring type, inside the puncturing polygon shape is like an uncomfortable thorn that just won’t go away, bitterly like the disease itself. The integration of the logo and the black and white portraits emphasizes the human aspect of the organization and helps make sure other people connect with on a more personal level.
The logo can be rendered as a classic square shape for more conservative uses or it can morph into a variety of increasingly progressive polygon shapes.
The overall effect of the identity is every energetic and bold, which are the right kind of attitudes needed to carry on this important work.
Thanks to John Colucci for the tip.
Jump to Most Recent Comment
TT’s comment is:
I wonder where they got the idea for the photography.
Kyle’s comment is:
I think this logo is bold and uncomfortable but really drives the message home and communicates the message in a way it needs to - I love the integration of the B&W photography. I'm not really digging the bus card, it just doesn't have the pop that the rest of the pieces have. Great concept & great work • a big improvement.
On May.06.2009 at 08:34 AM
asfdas’s comment is:
It looks too happy?
On May.06.2009 at 08:43 AM
joanna’s comment is:
Overall I love everything about it. Especially the envelope and the posters as well as the color usage. As to the type treatment something about the letters N, I and S connected bothers me perhaps that is the intention.
So glad not to see the obvious choice of color red.
On May.06.2009 at 08:47 AM
josh’s comment is:
the last shape kinda looks like a coffin...
On May.06.2009 at 09:04 AM
houdohugdfhogfdhufgdhoui’s comment is:
Way too kooky for a serious disease, reminds me of the london 2012 logo… ONLY NOT AS GOOD!
On May.06.2009 at 09:04 AM
Fish’s comment is:
Hate the mark with just the white and yellow, but maybe that's the intent... The "discomfort." Very compelling when used with the photography.
On May.06.2009 at 09:05 AM
Chad Kaufman’s comment is:
Over all I think it is a great logo and for the points mentioned–it is unforgiving, bold, and demands attention. The use of it layered on top of the photos is very successful as it seems to protrude and invade the personal space of the people pictured.
To be picky I think there are a few awkward situations in the stacked type:
-The 'N' in 'SAN' on top of the 'I' in 'Francisco' doesn't look like they touch completely (might just be on screen) and the thickness of the two different sizes creates a weird step where they meet.
-Still not sure how I feel about the row of stacked 'A's. It looks good when just the wordmark is used on the yellow envelope, but when it is contained in the shape, it almost adds a dividing line between 'S', 'FR' and 'FOUND' and the rest of the words. Thoughts?
Scott’s comment is:
Looks great ... until you showed us the collateral pieces at the end. The envelope? White type over yellow, with a ghosted image in the background? Not good. They had such good energy happening, then thud.
And the typeface ON the heads? Poor. Should've just stuck with the very nice logo applications above.
Is this a case of taking a strong idea too far?
On May.06.2009 at 09:16 AM
minxlj’s comment is:
"way too happy" - I think that's what an AIDS charity needs, to show that they support not just the disease, but the people and lives behind it, and helping those people to live the rest of their lives even though they have the disease. I think it's a strong and amazingly recognisable mark for a deserving cause. Just look at the logo they had before - dull, insipid, doesn't say anything about what they do (plus it was very dated)
I love how they've branded the logo to work in a variety of shapes too, it gives it endless scope. Very nice work, Mortar :)
On May.06.2009 at 09:20 AM
Proverbial Thought’s comment is:
Nothing like putting a big, yellow, stigmatizing mark on the face of people who have AIDS! Again, nothing like wrapping yellow, police Crime Scene tape all over the faces of peopl whose disease your are attempting to normalize. Nothing like having someone tell you, "Go fly a kite" when your organization shows up at your door with their new logo on their shirts asking for support.
Having worked cloesly with people who were HIV positive, and watching clients die of AIDS; I think the only color that would have been worse than yellow would have been red. This stinks to high heaven IMO. The logo looks like a kite for whatever reason, and the yellow marks look damning to the people who have AIDS. SOrry if I sound negative; but I HATE THIS!
On May.06.2009 at 09:22 AM
Proverbial Thought’s comment is:
One final thought... Not t omention the the logo looks like a kite that is not SOARING high above the earth... The dang thing looks like it is falling to earth. Hate it.
On May.06.2009 at 09:23 AM
Ryan Adair’s comment is:
Really nice.
Everything looks very compelling and interesting and just awkward enough to work just perfectly.
Downsides to the application though, I agree about the envelope. And I actually think the business cards are a real shame. Is it realistic to have a RHOMBUS business card. Answer: no.
Besides that, I like the overall look. I think that yellow was the only appropriate choice, of course.
On May.06.2009 at 09:36 AM
obse.’s comment is:
I like it. But Proverbial Thought is kinda right. Looks too trendy to be serious.
I wonder how it will work two years from now when yellow happen to be no longer fashion.
Not to mention polygon shapes, DIN-like typography and angled treatment are pretty out by now.
I insist, I like it, but I'm gonna get bored of this identity really soon.
(And what's up with that O at the end of 'Francisco' cutted in half? It disturbes me A LOT).
On May.06.2009 at 09:45 AM
JonSel’s comment is:
One thing that interests me with a mark like this is how the organization is going to be able to manage it. Is Mortar going to become an AOR, even on a pro-bono basis, to produce new iterations of the logo? Is there a set library of logos to work from, or is it stupid-simple enough that anyone in the organization can make a new one without worry?
On one hand, groups like this are ideally suited for a variable identity, as the creation of materials is usually only handled by a small group of people. The flip side is that non-profits are often very decentralized and overly democratic, meaning anyone can get in on the action and muck things up. I like this as an identity and am intrigued to see how it lives.
On May.06.2009 at 09:56 AM
Dale Campbell’s comment is:
Man,
I hope they don't use that yellow thing on white too often - that is just brutal on the eyes.
little too "sharp" for me...
Thanks,
Dale
Glenn Sakamoto’s comment is:
Really like this mark. Powerful. However, the yellow/white combination does not read. Much prefer the yellow/black combo.
On May.06.2009 at 11:21 AM
Lauren ’s comment is:
Collateral is nice. This walks the fine line of identity-as-campaign, and I hope there is enough flexibility in the long run for them.
I noticed (and appreciate) how the A's line up in the logo.
On May.06.2009 at 11:48 AM
b.r.o.o.d.y.’s comment is:
I'm puzzled. Perhaps someone can explain to me what I'm missing. I thought an institute with such a serious missing as educating about AIDS would need... a more serious presentation?
On the other hand this logo looks like it's trying to convey an edgy entertainment/fashion/etc. brand... It doesn't look suitable at all to me, even if it's kind of neat looking.
On May.06.2009 at 11:55 AM
b.r.o.o.d.y.’s comment is:
Dear god, I wrote missing for some reason. I meant mission* Apologies.
On May.06.2009 at 11:57 AM
Thomas Jockin’s comment is:
Ugly as fuck, but can anyone deny what it's trying to communicate?
In terms of communication, it's a home run. (People may disagree with the "CAUTION! CAUTION!" tone, but that's more a question of the brief the designer was given rather than the designer's skill)
In terms of craft... I think some of these items needs another round of reworking. (Yellow on white? Ouch.)
On May.06.2009 at 12:23 PM
V as in Victor’s comment is:
I feel like this particular sytle is being used more and more these days. As much as I like it for the fact that it is working to be cutting edge, I have to wonder about the longevity of the look. Just as the original looks dated (as 80s logos often do), how long until the trends change and this logo needs to be freshened up?
On May.06.2009 at 12:27 PM
Emily Brackett’s comment is:
I feel like there is too much variation.
1- it's white type on a yellow rhombus: I like it although it's not very legible
2- it's black type on the yellow rhombus with photos: I like it better because it's more readable
3- it's gray type on different variations of yellow rhombus. Here I think they should have either stayed with white or black type.
4- it's words, without the yellow rhombus directly on the faces. Which then makes me think it's only a word mark and the rhombus is not part of it?
I think if they had stuck with 1 & 2 and closer variations it would be stronger. They've really opened themselves up to a lot variations and I think it may lose cohesiveness quickly as different designers (and non-designers) start to work with it.
On May.06.2009 at 12:43 PM
Mark’s comment is:
Nice simple and dramatic.
I like it, I also like that it has several versions of it that can be used for different mediums, and it's not just one size fits all.
It is a clear improvement over the 1993-esque static old logo.
Well done.
On May.06.2009 at 02:28 PM
hofn’s comment is:
I like the fact that it reads "SAN AIDS" in a slightly subliminal way.
On May.06.2009 at 02:34 PM
jRod’s comment is:
although i am all about artistic side of branding, i think a firm needs to take a long look at how a person affected by HIV would look at this, which you would assume they did. so with proverbials thoughts about this rebranding effort taken into account, i have to wonder if there is a good way to handle something like this at all.
doomed if you do or doomed if you dont.
not a project i would want on my plate. give me kids, or puppies, or kids and puppies...
On May.06.2009 at 02:50 PM
mario's pants’s comment is:
I totally agree with the evaluation that its angularity and posterized announcement treatment of the font grabs attention.
For those of you complaining about the color choices, I noticed that this is, in fact, a one-color logo. The text is actually a cut-out so that it takes on the color of the background. If there was a purple background behind the logo, the text would be the same color as well.
The diagonal stacking of the 3 A's is quite clever as it adds a further subtle diagonal line bisecting the quadrilateral. This jars the logo even further yet somehow avoids appearing cutesy.
On May.06.2009 at 03:36 PM
Sean DL’s comment is:
Shoot, there goes my idea for my non-profit...lol.
But I'm glad they got away from that 80's/90's logo, as we are almost 30 years in the war against AIDS.
On May.06.2009 at 04:01 PM
Efrat’s comment is:
I like this edgy, severe typography treatment. I'm not sure what the diamond means, does it mean anything????
I think it looks serious and now.
Egraine’s comment is:
The yellow is too confrontational for this context. It also reinforces that “stay back” and “don’t touch” message. And the kite-like form falling downward brings up hopelessness. For people who are diagnosed or potentially HIV-positive, this is telling them, “prepare to be disenfranchised.” To the community at large, it says, “Run away, run away.” But, I like the design a lot, it’s compelling and edgy -- just a bit too haunting.
On May.06.2009 at 05:23 PM
Patricia Finnegan’s comment is:
David:
It really sends the message that this is a very serious illness. Glad to see another color other than red.
On May.06.2009 at 05:36 PM
Clay’s comment is:
While I do think the typography is a definite improvement over the old mark, I think they should have stayed away from yellow ... As far as charitable causes or non-profit foundations are concerned, Lance Armstrong "owns" yellow -- at least in terms of recognition with his high profile celebrity sports star status, ubiquitous wristbands, etc. When I look at the SFAF identity, I am reminded of fighting cancer, not AIDS.
Mike’s comment is:
I think the word AIDS separates the yellow from Livestrong right away. If it were just the polygon I wouldn't think SFAF right away, if I didn't know it.
The jaggedness is definitely uncomfortable and effective. I could feel the sharpness. I also love the versatility of the shape and the typography.
As for Chad's comment (the lined up A's separating the letters to the left), I think it still looks whole, even after it was pointed out.
Name (Required)’s comment is:
ya know, it's a cool piece of type. happy stacky "A"s and all that. but that's it. it's just a type exercise. "increasingly progressive polygon shapes"? point?? c'mon.
ie: SAN! That's the first read. Why are you screaming "SAN" at me? (because it scales the N up so it can sit flush on the I)
form over function.
cool over depth.
matt’s comment is:
To me, it looks to... artsy, somehow. Like, AIDS is going to be showing at that slightly trashy gallery/commune tucked away downtown between an asian buffet and a seedy adult book store. It doesn't look like a charity. It reminds me of the olympics identity that used crazy shapes.
On May.07.2009 at 07:29 AM
Daniel Bertalotto’s comment is:
I think this identity works well. The type setup feels very assertive and confident, and the yellow adds that level of cautionary intent that is all across our culture telling us to pay attention.
I especially like it with the imagery because it get quite emotional. It doesn't feel like an organization that holds an ambiguous dinner to pander donations, it feels involved and hands-on with their mission.
Kudos, I say.
On May.07.2009 at 09:28 AM
Keli’s comment is:
Where's the hope? Everyone in those application photos looks miserable. I understand aids isn't a happy thing, but why go that route. Rather than creating hope with this identity-campaign (whatever) they're just enforcing the negative side. It's important to be aware but I think we can do awareness in a more positive way. Persuasion by fear is not my thing.
On May.07.2009 at 11:31 AM
orangetiki’s comment is:
I don't think it stands well by itself, but the logo in use with the packet, photos of people, and more really are top notch.
On May.07.2009 at 01:20 PM
Keen Wilkins’s comment is:
I love the sharp contrast between the photos and polygon and the way this campaign "personalizes" HIV/AIDS by having the logo actually "cut into" each person. As a person with HIV, I can identify with this "edgy" and "sharp" tone and I don't think it is too dark or negative. The photo treatment is very dynamic, however I agree with others about the need for re-working some of the other treatments like the white on yellow type over the faces on envelopes. Perhaps the sixth polygon shape which looks like a kite can be used for more "upbeat" communications....
On May.07.2009 at 09:02 PM
Kurt’s comment is:
The best word to describe this work is "an original." In the modern world there are no new ideas. Everything has been done and everything is repackaged or recycled, it is safe and expected. What is the design fundamentals that will take us beyond 2010? In the past decades, we had an overuse of right angles in skyscrapers filled with right angle windows and within those windows are right angle shaped cubicles. During the dot.com period, every other company had an oval or swoosh in their logo. Today the world lives and thinks in digital-space. No one shape will due for a logo or brand. You need an adaptable icon and this design is bold, brave, and makes us uncomfortable... I say Bravo! It's these attributes that challenges, is what makes it an original.
Sure, the visuals resemble some other work but there is a more valid purpose of thought to this effect. AIDS is something that casts a shadow over all of us. Discomfort and fear are the only emotions that cause people to focus and act quickly, it's human nature. This is exactly what the foundation needs.
On May.07.2009 at 10:41 PM
Mongoose’s comment is:
The older one was far too soft; I'm reminded of an 80's software company or pizza parlor. The move from pink (now the color of breast cancer) to yellow (As mentioned, the color of yellow cancer bracelets) is a positive step.
And the jagged, uncomfortableness is as expressed,a positive and a negative. Wanting people to be jolted about the disease but not jolted by people who have it is a fine line, but I think this is solidly on it. AIDS is still important and needs attention, and the jagged shapes help that.
I'm not so sure about 'SAN' needing to be so large, but making 'AIDS' in the large size is the right visual balance, and the joined-'A's obviously dictated some of the overall balance. I particularly like the N, O, and F all cut off at the edges.
I give it an A- for being a sharp, literally and figuratively, logo.
--Mongoose
On May.07.2009 at 11:29 PM
Andrew Sabatier’s comment is:
I would expect a brand about HIV/AIDS to have a strong sense of empathy and meaningfully directed intervention. Instead, I get shards of discordant shapes aimed at heads and letters layered over faces.
Sure... HIV/AIDS is a persistent and uncomfortable issue. It shatters people's lives. But... do we really need to be reminded about something so painfully obvious?
Sure... good, reliable and appropriate information (and storytelling) is crucial to the HIV/AIDS campaign. But... information is a means to an end. There is no apparent need to demonstrate a given.
Sure... HIV/AIDS foundations need to fight for attention and sufferers need to fight to survive. But... fighting encourages fighting. An organisation of this kind fighting for attention is more likely to induce compassion fatigue.
Yellow seems to have been chosen because it looks 'now', not because it helps to tell a relevant story. It can be easily spun that instead of meaningful stories of HIV/AIDS affecting all types of people in deeply personal ways, no matter how stylishly and artfully produced, letters have been urinated on sufferers and they look stigmatised and diseased.
There doesn't appear to be a sustainable emotional core to this new identity. The process appears superficial and visually-driven, hence the cerebral post rationalisations. This identity is conceptually flat and the project looks like a design-led exercise.
This brand identity doesn't have the strength to be gentle.
A.
Daniel Bertalotto’s comment is:
To clarify from earlier, I stated the visual language/imagery is emotional, not merely hopeful. There is no distress or fear in this.
AIDS campaigns are not necessarily bent on hopefulness (unless you're running for an office), but on the reality of those affected by the disease.
Just in case you missed my point.
On May.08.2009 at 12:27 PM
Amanda’s comment is:
There may be a few things here and there that I would change, but overall I like the impact, style, and it's connection in the strength of the message.
On May.08.2009 at 02:47 PM
Char’s comment is:
I LOVE LOVE LOVE THIS!
I'm confusing with the people saying this looks too happy. Is it supposed to look depressing? Yellow is the color of hope! It's an excellent choice. Gorgeous photography, I don't care if they took inspiration from some dutch dance event. I think it's adequate and so right in so many levels.
On May.10.2009 at 07:30 PM
Brandit Logos’s comment is:
Yes, great work ... when we design logos at Brandit Logos, we're often faced with the question of where can we connect 'intentionally bold' (getting people's attention in our cluttered world) and 'timeless' ... it's important to have both I think.
On May.11.2009 at 12:17 AM
Keli’s comment is:
nice plug...
I thought I'd give it a few days and maybe I would see the hope everyone was talking about... nope... not there for me, I still don't see it. It still looks sharp, jagged and rough. Just my personal opinion though.
On May.11.2009 at 10:18 AM
E for Everyone’s comment is:
Bold, inspired, and one thing I am noticing from the comments - it brings out a heck of a lot of emotion in people.
If your intention was to get people talking, you're spot-on.
As to the part with the people with the identity on their faces, I don't think it looks like they're being marked, as one or two have suggested. I think it meshes the identity with the humanity of the disease, which is too often missing.
On May.19.2009 at 11:12 AM
Panasit’s comment is:
White on yellow? Apparently the designer skip the lesson on one of the first thing they teach in design school.
Anyway, the whole thing remind of the yellow corporate identity for ABC during the late 90's or early 2000's. It's just weird to use this one color, and this color for this cause.
AIDS ribbon is red. Is there some symbolism behind the color yellow we don't know about? As far as the design is concern, without any other context, it's too boring and stern. It's like those cliff notes book that was used by kids that don't want to read summer reading.
On May.27.2009 at 02:57 AM
Comments in Brand New, V1.0 have been closed.
