NOTE: This is an archived version of the first incarnation of Brand New.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.
Unfortunately I have nothing to reference or go by for this redesign. (According to this blog post, it’s feasible that Chicago-based VSA Partners did the work — given that First Data has been a client of them since 2001, and the logo is indeed VSA-ish, I would jump on board and agree.) Fortunately, it’s great enough on its own that we can talk about it. First Data is one of those complex companies that make things behind the scenes work flawlessly through mind-bending systems, fancy computers and, surely, some type of mathematical equations. Or, in their words, “First Data processes transaction data of all kinds, harnesses the power of that data, and delivers innovations in secure infrastructure, intelligence and insight for its customers.” What it boils down to is technology, data, and getting it from one place to another — the new logo manages to convey all this and more. The interlocked “F” and “d” signal connectivity and interaction, while the hard-angled shapes convey that this is a technologically astute company that — instead of softening its image like the rest of the rounded identities (xerox, docomo, kodak) — isn’t afraid to communicate that it’s authoritative and hard-nosed. The old logo was a heartwarming play on visuals and language, but felt decidedly vintage. If there is one major complaint I have about the new logo is the annihilation of the dot over the “i.” Sure, it solves the boinking of it against the “F” but I just find this continued practice of de-dotting to be wrong. Nonetheless, In contrast to the remarkable new modern-day monogram introduced by First Data, it’s a small quibble. First Data could transfer my data any day of the week.
Thanks to Joe Szczepaniak and Rachid Molinary for the tip.
Jump to Most Recent Comment
Stacy’s comment is:
I think the new logo is nice, and less outdated, but I didn't see the FD connection until I read the review. Did anyone else have issues with that?
On May.14.2008 at 03:25 PM
christopher’s comment is:
Very nice. In my opinion a total knockout of a design. It will last for a long time.
On May.14.2008 at 03:25 PM
cheetahboy’s comment is:
I think your evaluation of the new First Data identity is a bit misguided. Until I read your description of the symbol, the use of "F" and "d" completely eluded me. My brain was too busy trying to decipher what the shape was and what it was trying to represent.
" What it boils down to is technology, data, and getting it from one place to another — the new logo manages to convey all this and more."
This symbol conveys nothing about anything moving from place to place. The four tightly interlocked shapes does the exact opposite. It is more like a log-jam that the free flow of information.
I do enjoy a strong angle style identity, but in this case I think the shapes are a bit awkward looking which detracts from the overall impact.
I would agree with the missing dot over the "i", but find the name (in Avenir?) much more pleasing than the older all caps version, but the black colour choice seems a bit jarring.
On May.14.2008 at 03:27 PM
Peter Marquardt’s comment is:
I've enjoyed figuring out the Fd before reading the article. I also applaud the step away from the rounded 3D gradient trends.
The dot of the i could be easily incorporated by shortening the F a tad in height and width (and the D in height to reflect the change):
I also think the dot should not have been left out... makes me subconsciously worry about the integrity of the data I entrust them.
On May.14.2008 at 03:48 PM
Able Parris’s comment is:
The F/d relationship didn't pop-out to me at first either, but it kinda does in the favicon on their site. I like the new logo a lot, and think it fits in well with the icons they use on the subpages.
It's a bit ironic that this is the least Web2.0 logo we've seen on here in a while, yet it works real well on the web...
cheers!
On May.14.2008 at 03:49 PM
Armin’s comment is:
> I think your evaluation of the new First Data identity is a bit misguided. Until I read your description of the symbol, the use of "F" and "d" completely eluded me. My brain was too busy trying to decipher what the shape was and what it was trying to represent.
Not sure how that translates into providing a misguided evaluation. The moment I saw the logo for the first time I immediately saw the "Fd".
> It is more like a log-jam that the free flow of information.
Where you see a log-jam, I see shapes that have been traveling from one end to another, resting briefly to form the FD and then continuing on their journey, while they zig and zag. It's all about a little imagination. This logo could animate pretty awesomely.
On May.14.2008 at 03:52 PM
lodenmuse’s comment is:
Perfect--if your company name is First 4ata.
Love Peter's comment on "the integrity of the data." I still don't know where the d is supposed to be. I keep seeing the Adobe A. Adding to the AWOL i-dot, I get the impression of incomplete, even corrupt data--the illustration of two puzzle pieces that do not fit. Not exactly the definition of "flawless transactions of data."
On May.14.2008 at 04:12 PM
Kim Siever’s comment is:
@Stacy
I saw it before reading, but it took me a few seconds to realize what it was.
On May.14.2008 at 04:35 PM
Kim Siever’s comment is:
I really like how the blue and orange shapes mirror one another. Clever.
On May.14.2008 at 04:37 PM
dk’s comment is:
I agree, the logo animates well. But next time, someone needs to explain that to FD's website designer. The shards of blue and sienna flying at 45 degrees may well mimic the angle of the slice in several pieces of the logo, but it doesn't incorporate the essence of what the logo really looks like. And you're right, it does look like a literal magnetism of individual parts forming the 'FD' image, but again, in probably the only place the animation would make sense is on the website; and there it's absent. Nice review, nonetheless. :)
On May.14.2008 at 04:40 PM
Autobot’s comment is:
It reminds me of the Transformers logo
Paul Riehle’s comment is:
Yeah, absolutely no gain in losing the dot... it should have been kept in the logo
On May.14.2008 at 04:47 PM
Mr Posen’s comment is:
I'm not convinced by this one.
The four elements seem disjointed, like jigsaw pieces that don't fit together. Formally this creates some overly complex negative shapes within the symbol. It looks like it should be perfect, but it's not.
Whenever I design a logo, I always go through the "geometric shapes exploration" phase. It's the easiest to create and extend, though it rarely produces the final solution. This is mainly because it is hard to create something unique from such simple and universal forms, sure it can be done, but needs a deft touch.
For me it needed further refining.
On May.14.2008 at 05:21 PM
Colin’s comment is:
I too missed the "Fd" in the mark, but I don't think I wouldn't have ever caught on if I was an actual consumer of First Data. It works well for me, and I think it will gain much more equity than their previous, lackluster mark. I score it a 9.5 out of 10.
On May.14.2008 at 05:35 PM
Mog’s comment is:
Kim Siever: They almost mirror eachother perfectly. But they don't. There's one angle that's off. I'm not sure why they don't - the logo would still read as "Fd", and IMO it would actually look a bit less disjointed and "flowy." I'm not on my main computer; would anyone like to make a sixty-second mockup of the logo if the "F" mirrored the "d"?
On May.14.2008 at 06:08 PM
Joel’s comment is:
I dig it too - especially the fact that it bucks the current trend toward rounded corners and bubbliness.
I also like that it's one bevel away from being rotationally symmetrical which always lends a sort of Escheresque appeal, but without being too forced (Yeah, I'm talking about you, Sun Microsystems).
Joel’s comment is:
They almost mirror eachother perfectly. But they don't. There's one angle that's off. I'm not sure why they don't - the logo would still read as "Fd", and IMO it would actually look a bit less disjointed and "flowy."
Mog,
I think if they were completely symmetrical, it might read as "P" "d."
I prefer that it's not quite symmetrical.
On May.14.2008 at 06:24 PM
jc’s comment is:
dk: The “shard” element is part of the new system. Check out the link - it's one of their new sales sheets.
On May.14.2008 at 07:08 PM
jc’s comment is:
Oops. That worked GREAT. Here:
http://www.firstdata.com/product_solutions/pdf/3297_Loyalty_Solutions.pdf
On May.14.2008 at 07:10 PM
Michael’s comment is:
Absolute improvement, very nice...
On May.14.2008 at 11:41 PM
dale harris’s comment is:
Not really a fan I must say.. I mean I get it, a collection of data coming together in a perfectly controlled system. I just don't the execution is all that special.
On May.15.2008 at 03:11 AM
MiSc’s comment is:
it's a great favicon, though
On May.15.2008 at 03:34 AM
adam’s comment is:
My mind is stuck on banking. The first logo looks just like an 80s bank logo, and the second, for some reason, reminds me of Deluxe checks.
On May.15.2008 at 08:43 AM
Jim Welch’s comment is:
First Off - Thanks Armin (and contributors)for a great blog.
My question for the group is regarding "marks". The original logo seems to have a registered trademark, the updated logo is now a trademark and jc's finding
of their data sheet has First Data (in headline) as a service mark?
Explanation would be appreciated.
On May.15.2008 at 09:02 AM
Josh’s comment is:
I just love the mark. It comes alive. I agree that the non-symmetry of the letterforms helps the dynamism of the logo.
I'd like to see the animation show some of the interweaving that happens in the logo.
All in all, though, very cool.
On May.15.2008 at 12:22 PM
Darrel’s comment is:
"Until I read your description of the symbol, the use of "F" and "d" completely eluded me."
Is that bad? It's neat if you see it. It's still a unique element even if you don't.
On May.15.2008 at 12:24 PM
Andrew Harrington’s comment is:
A TM is a trademark and an (R) is a registered trademark. Unless your trademark is registered, you have limited resources for ursuing legal action against someone who has infringed on your ownership of the mark.
You may not use the (R) until your mark has been officially registered with the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office. You may use a TM as a sort of 'warning' to others that this work is protected, but it is not officially protected unless it has been registered. You may also use a TM in place of an (R) while the paperwork for trademark registration goes through the USPTO.
An SM is a service mark, and rather than protect and represent the origin of a specific product, Kodak(R) One-Touch Camera(R), it protects and represents a specific service, Kodak(R) One-Hour Photo(SM). This is a made up example.
On May.15.2008 at 12:34 PM
Jim Welch’s comment is:
Thanks Andrew!
In the case of First Data, any idea why they changed/used all three marks?
On May.15.2008 at 02:35 PM
Nemesis’s comment is:
Having worked with First Data, to me the new design reflects the byzantine, disjointed structure that exists behind the scenes. For folks that haven't seen the sausage being made I could see it being more positive, though.
On May.15.2008 at 03:24 PM
hmh’s comment is:
i'm not a graphic designer or logo designer, but i read this blog daily and enjoy the clash of design philosophies expressed by the regular posters and the balderdash of marketing rationales that accompanies some of the logo changes/brand relabellings...
all i can say about this one from first data is that it took me five minutes to see the capital "F" and small "d"...until then it looked like one of thousands of impersonal meaningless square logos, unidentifiable without the accompanying name...and in this case, the name itself is pretty meaningless, too...
i suppose if you are in the data business, you already know the name "First Data" so you have some built-in context...so i guess this re-labelling is aimed at those already in the data market...but i get no sense of what the company is about or what message it is trying to communicate with this new branding...
hmh
On May.15.2008 at 03:27 PM
Darrel’s comment is:
"but i get no sense of what the company is about or what message it is trying to communicate with this new branding"
I think many make the mistake thinking that the logo has to be burdened with the task of literally describing the company...what it does and how it does it.
That's not what a logo does. It's merely a mark that represents the company. The company, itself, is tasked with the chore of defining it's brand.
Granted if you run a road-side coffee shop, it's prudent to put the word 'coffee' in your logo or at least a picture of it, but that's more akin to advertising, and rarely does a logo, itself, have to be the advertising (street side signage probably being the main exception)
On May.15.2008 at 03:58 PM
ScottS’s comment is:
Interesting update, and definitely a bold step in a new direction. For that, I applaud the creators.
I rather like the tangram-quality of the mark, and the lines create a circuitboard-like effect. However I don't much care for the empty shapes it creates. It's like a puzzle being put together wrong. And the triangles missing here and there...haven't I seen that somewhere? See Reader's Digest's new nameplate: http://www.rd.com/. I think a strong logomark is one that doesn't require too much studying to understand, and I'm not sure this one satisfies that criteria.
On May.15.2008 at 05:11 PM
Darrin Crescenzi’s comment is:
Though a overall a strong update and a nice mark, I agree with ScottS and Mr Posen that the negative forms are very distracting. I get a very "square peg in a round hole" feeling from it, like it just doesn't fit.
Perhaps it would lessen the unity that most commenters are enjoying, but I would like to see a version with the negative strokes opened up just a tad so that they don't get so jittery at small sizes.
On May.15.2008 at 06:18 PM
Paul’s comment is:
Really liking it. Saw the F ... still waiting for the d to appear.
Strong mark though.
On May.15.2008 at 07:59 PM
dk’s comment is:
hey jc, that's my point. i LIKE the shards and what they represent -- futuristic without looking like an homage to superman so it, for me at least, perfectly melds the human vs. data/tech aspect of what they do. but their logo simply doesn't capture, or as it were look like it's from where the shards were derived. so i think there's a disconnect. that's all. though, love the sell sheet! actually, looking twice at the sell sheet reminds me of a modified BMW 'M' logo.
On May.16.2008 at 04:32 PM
Sanjay Basavaraju’s comment is:
Some of us may feel that the logo is working. I was told that graphic design is about evoking images that already exist in the mind.
I feel colors are very close to FedEx, so our minds connect with the logo.
As far as the perception is concerned, fd may seem obvious to some, but the entire form is a heavy weight slab serif 'Z'. Almost looks like an initial on a major league baseball player's cap.
Definitely, an improvement from the earlier version.
On May.17.2008 at 12:43 PM
damon’s comment is:
it's pretty cool....
my only complaint is the blue. The orange is so nice, it feels to me that it needs a fresher colour for the blue. Not trendy, but just something with a bit more life, or in turn, to deepen the orange more into the realm of pumpkin perhaps to give them more of a similar sophisticated feel. I don't feel that data is more important than first, so it shouldn't really be as blinged out compared to a relative dark palette.
On May.22.2008 at 12:44 PM
David Sanchez’s comment is:
I don’t know guys, but this new logo from First Data reminded me a lot of HSBC’s, specially their tangram. Playful.
On May.22.2008 at 04:06 PM
Oxit’s comment is:
hmh, you've got a point.
They say clients are always right, right? hmh defines him/herself as an outsider, like clients typically are, although many consider themselves smart guys, others actually are smart design buyers, and still others love design. Now, there's something you may expect from an outsider, and that is common sense, which is a never to be neglected point of vue – even when you dare to defie it, so as to achieve invention or surprise. I agree with hmh, this one is just another hard edge square mark. Zillions of these around the world since the 70's. It looks inevitably naive, ultraobsolete, and will inevitably annihilate itself (and its owner's prospects of an effective identity) due to its redundancy.
When you say first, there's a one on it, right? Unity. That one and... the rest. Now, consider the relative economy of the old mark, compared to the 'byzantine, disjointed structure' (as Nemesis described it) of the new brittle one. But I'd never support neither of them, of course.
Somebody said that the way between rigor and splash is a boring one. Ok, but neither rigor nor splash is a warranty against being innefective. Many successful marks do not fall within these extremes, but they usually show some intelligence – or elegance – that makes them work. This one doesn't work, in my opinion. Instead, i'd explore the limits of the 1D IDea.
On May.22.2008 at 11:59 PM
Comments in Brand New, V1.0 have been closed.
