NOTE: This is an archived version of the first incarnation of Brand New.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.
Designing an identity for a film festival — with their progressive, independent, slightly rebellious and amply creative spirit, plus the numerous applications and possibilities of creating a flexible identity — is probably high on the list of Types of Clients/Projects we Want to Get in design firms’ business plans across the globe. San Francisco based MINE™, run by identity fiend Christopher Simmons, got that chance with the redesign of The California Film Institute’s (CFI) identity, as well as that of its 29-going-on-30-year-old Mill Valley Film Festival (MVFF), plus an update of the institute’s education program and the Rafael Film Center’s. The opportunity to work on all these logos at the same time proved to be the most beneficial for CFI, as it was rewarded with a cohesive visual family of brands that respond to their place and context.
[MINE™] took their cues from the landmark signage of the local Rafael Theatre (designed by Mark Fox) which is operated by CFI and plays home to the Mill Valley Film Festival. “Even though the festival attracts filmmakers and stars from more than 49 countries, at its heart it is a local experience,” Simmons explains, “By capturing some of the local typography and colors we’re reinforcing that sense of place that is central to the festival’s identity.”
At the heart, in more ways than one, of the project is the identity for the MVFF: A lovely multi-stroke, brightly-colored MV, punctuated by a heart, that, in contrast to the previous identity by Futurebrand, conveys a sense of passion and pride, while being unique and dynamic. From the MVFF’s visual gestures, the rest of the identities follow suit with carefully rendered inlines and unified by the use of Gotham and Gotham Rounded.
In collaboration with CFI’s advertising firm, Scheyer/SF, MINE™ also developed a poster that further builds on the tradition of the festival and its decades-long contribution to local culture by emphasizing its 30 year birthday. In this application the MVFF logo shines even more, as a distinct and impactful mark in its field of rough black — plus anything looks great set against 300 point type in bright magenta.
Jump to Most Recent Comment
Christian Palino’s comment is:
The MVFF identity, beautiful in its concept and execution, really seems to be at the heart (no pun intended) of this overall re-branding. The other brand updates fall inline nicely – creating a thoroughly unified system which steers clear of the potential corporate solution of adding a new name to the same wordmark – though they certainly don't have the same strong conceptual underpinning as the MVFF. The color system aids well in distinguishing the divisions while remaining a cohesive system. The update of the education logo is handled with great restraint.
If there was anything worth picking at it may be the handling of the typography in the CFI and MVFF lock-ups, both of which employ kerning and line spacing that make the legibility suffer a bit. However as noted, its picking, this is an excellent re-branding and it will be something to look forward to seeing implemented across various media.
On Oct.09.2007 at 10:32 AM
Tor Løvskogén’s comment is:
Good to have you back, Armin - a throughout post.
On Oct.09.2007 at 10:43 AM
Lucian E.’s comment is:
Nice, the first impression is that it represents mountains and valleys - or better to say, Mill valleys - and of course, we have the colour green! As every logo on earth must be also green-designed. Even films must be green produced... Is that really so??
On Oct.09.2007 at 10:44 AM
Ty’s comment is:
I'm a big fan of the poster, it's very fitting. Good to see them moving away from gradients in the logo. I'd be interested to see how they apply the logo to the overall identity in their collateral.
On Oct.09.2007 at 10:57 AM
Bone’s comment is:
Really like the work.
Only criticism...
The weight in the type and the weight in the strokes in the mark are too close.
They need to be the same or drastically different. The way it is now provides unnecessary tension.
Otherwise, I love that it eschews the "film" logos of most festivals without completely alienating it's purpose for being.
- Bone
On Oct.09.2007 at 11:08 AM
Jackson’s comment is:
... more Gotham
On Oct.09.2007 at 11:23 AM
C-Lo’s comment is:
It works great together as a whole. Clean, slick, and it sticks.
On Oct.09.2007 at 11:44 AM
Patrick Senecal’s comment is:
At first glance, it looks like the "cfi" logo does'nt look well balanced. The weight of the "f" looks like its making it fall to the right. Is it just me or...
On Oct.09.2007 at 12:15 PM
Tyler’s comment is:
Taking the cues from the Rafael Theatre was a great idea with a great outcome.
My only critisism:
They need to be the same or drastically different. - Bone
That seems to be the overall problem with this identity. CFI logo, California seems just a wee bit too close in size to the type below, as does the type for MVFF. The line weight of the MVFF logo to the type weight.
In the end it is an excellent example of a succesfull rebrand over multiple identities.
On Oct.09.2007 at 12:32 PM
Tom’s comment is:
Completely agree with Christian's comments, right on the money there..I think the color choices are excellent, there's a great cohesive feel to the whole brand. And the poster rocks.
On Oct.09.2007 at 01:05 PM
5000!’s comment is:
I especially love that the new identity is inspired by, and relates to, the physical theater signage without being an overly literal interpretation.
Also, I wish I could use Gotham on everything I do. ;)
On Oct.09.2007 at 01:43 PM
darrel’s comment is:
very nice!
On Oct.09.2007 at 03:37 PM
Marcel’s comment is:
Nice cohesive feel - great work
On Oct.09.2007 at 03:58 PM
Eric Strohl’s comment is:
Nicely done.
On Oct.09.2007 at 04:34 PM
damon crate’s comment is:
I like it, it works on a lot of levels. The foremost being that it isn't as literal as it's predecessor, but in many ways says a lot more.
I've worked on film festival stuff before (toronto international films festival) and the temptation is use really cliché graphics like film sprockets, reels, projectors etc etc, but in the end it only makes your work more sterile.
I like this mark because it has motion like a film reel, contains both an M and an V, represents hills, has a heart, and the type is quite nice as well.
I suppose my only comment would be that I think it might have been stronger with different colours for the glyph and text....although it looks as though all the identities are rendered one colour, and as a group they look quite nice.
On Oct.09.2007 at 05:12 PM
BWJ’s comment is:
It's not bad, and definitely an improvement over the old, however I think it already looks dated.
The color palette combined with diagonal stripes and Gotham rounded positions the logo among a myriad of post 2.0 graphics.
I do agree that the balance between the icon and the logotype is off. The width and weight of the logotype is just wrong.
My question is, does a festival really need a logo? Is an annual event that changes based on the submitted content really able to express and communicate a brand? Does this mark really capture the purpose of the festival? From reading the website it seems to have the same purpose or mission of any other film festival...
Speaking of other film festivals, anyone see last years Tribeca Film Festival campaign?
On Oct.09.2007 at 05:31 PM
JM’s comment is:
"The color palette combined with diagonal stripes and Gotham rounded positions the logo among a myriad of post 2.0 graphics."
Woah that's a bit rough, and a bit of a stretch.
I think you are on the wrong post, don't you mean the new Photoshop logo?
JM’s comment is:
Armin wrote:
"as it was rewarded with a cohesive visual family of brands that respond to their place and context."
Well not quite Armin. Apart from the use of the Gotham type family and the in line on three of the four logos, there is not much cohesion at all.
Symbols vs. logotypes.
Sentence case vs. lower case
Centered vs. ranged right
Justified vs. not
Open letter spacing vs. closed
Alternate color palettes
Chad K’s comment is:
They look pretty cohesive to me. There are shared elements by all. The differences come in the refinements to make the logos work individually on their own. The logos work as a family because they share enough of the same elements to link to one another without using identical styling, which would sacrifice their individual uniqueness when put together.
On Oct.10.2007 at 10:36 AM
Tyler’s comment is:
Chad K^
Agreed.
On Oct.10.2007 at 11:37 AM
JM’s comment is:
"Chad K’s comment is:
The logos work as a family because they share enough of the same elements."
Apart from font and in-line, what elements are those?
On Oct.10.2007 at 11:58 AM
Folksy’s comment is:
The elements are hot dogs, covered with relish from the valley.
On Oct.10.2007 at 02:11 PM
darrel’s comment is:
"Apart from font and in-line, what elements are those?"
Apart from font and in-line, what other elements do you need?
(But to add to it, the color system is also quite cohesive.)
On Oct.11.2007 at 10:38 AM
JM’s comment is:
"darrel’s comment is:
Apart from font and in-line, what other elements do you need?"
Well to start, how about some systemic typography or at least consistent alignments. Start with the basics, then add elements like 'in-lines' only if needed.
Anyway, I still think the designs are a vast improvement, and the Mill Valley logo is very nice.
I just disagree that they are a cohesive logo system.
alphadog’s comment is:
Unfortunately, contrary to the batch of posts, I don't like the Mill Valley logo. One giveway: I find the other three form a better set if you drop the MV logo out of the foursome.
I don't see "passion and pride". I find the MV logo too jarring and too aggressive for a film festival, even with the little heart. Poor little heart, about to sink in the maelstrom of diagonals! :)
And, it has a little of an optical illusion flavor that actually detracts from seeing the M and V.
Sidebar: why is it that so many designers always feel compelled to merge a V into an M?
However, obviously a big improvement.
On Oct.26.2007 at 01:33 PM
kbl’s comment is:
I missed the heart completely. Other than that, I like it. Clean, simple.
On Nov.07.2007 at 11:57 AM
cchs’s comment is:
So, here's a little update on the project. We actually did get to revise the landmark Rafael logo after all. The new version completes the identity set and has been slightly tweaked to hold up better on screen and at small print sizes.
To my view (contrary to some posts) they do represent a cohesive look and feel, though each retains a degree of individuality as well (and as needed).
Comments in Brand New, V1.0 have been closed.
