NOTE: This is an archived version of the first incarnation of Brand New.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.
I will start this by saying that I am not a car person, I haven’t owned one in more than eight years and beyond the obvious subjects, my appreciation of cars and their makers is limited. Given the amount of e-mails I received about the redesign of French manufacturer Citroën, I am going to assume that their cars and brand mean a lot to a lot of people.
Citroën DS Inside concept car.
Designed by Landor, the new logo comes as Citroën celebrates its 90th anniversary (founded in 1919) and as it unveils new models of its DS line (no idea what the DS line is but, again, looks like it’s a big deal — no need, dear readers, to lecture me on the importance of Citroën, I do get it). The chevron icon has, of course, been Neue Metalized™ (someone had to come up with a style for car logos, right?) to appear as if it had come straight from the grill. Sarcasm aside, it is a somewhat attractive rendering, and the softer, rounder shapes make the new icon more distinguishable than the previous, in the sense that anyone can invert two straight-edged V shapes and call it a logo.
The typography, ayayay, I don’t know, why does it have to look as if it came from the future? The membrane-y stuff that comes off the crossbar of T and the joining of the umlaut just feels too space age. And why is the N lowercase? This would have been much nicer if they had dialed down on the sci-fi ingredients. In general, it feels like a good upgrade into the twenty-first century but a lot of the sophistication and Old World charm of the previous logo is gone which, perhaps unfortunately, was the intention. Here is a somewhat crappy but trippy video introducing the logo and the tag line créative technologie.
TV spot, “Creative Technology” by agency H for Citroën from étapes: on Vimeo.
Jump to Most Recent Comment
David Airey’s comment is:
I quite like the symbol upgrade (minus added effects), but I'm right there with you on the type.
On Feb.13.2009 at 07:56 AM
koyo’s comment is:
Nice Work. Fututistic.
On Feb.13.2009 at 07:58 AM
Graham’s comment is:
I'm not too sure about the type, either; the C looks like it's been accidentally cropped top and bottom, and the asymmetrical T is odd, but it might have worked if it had been subtler. Not fussed about the joined umlaut though, seems fine to me.
On Feb.13.2009 at 08:23 AM
Anonymous’s comment is:
I love the use of the symbol upgrade as a physical component of the car itself.
I'm also going to say that I really like the type; though I am a sucker for any sort of space age styling.
Also, while I'm on a streak of being contrary - what's so crappy about the video?
On Feb.13.2009 at 08:38 AM
Nick Irwin’s comment is:
I enjoy this
elaborate execution of a evolutionary design to the previous brand keeps the attributes, spruces up the dimension and typeface
overall nice face lift
On Feb.13.2009 at 08:38 AM
ondrej’s comment is:
well, the symbol is okay, the wordmark is terrible and one of my personal favourites is dead...
On Feb.13.2009 at 08:38 AM
John Leschinski’s comment is:
I really like the cheveron upgrade, the old one never did much for me, but do agree the type is a mistake at best.
On Feb.13.2009 at 08:44 AM
Andrew Sabatier’s comment is:
Previously I'd found the three-dimensionalisation trend of car brand identities nauseating. However, the new Citroen identity doesn't offend my pure design sensibilities quite so much. I believe any mark that ventures into the third dimention should be properly resolved in the first two, and only if it adds value. The old brandmark is clearly old fashioned and not a particularly successful pure design solution to begin with.
The new brandmark is a logical progression from the old identity and it communicates the sort of technological prowess we should expect from future-oriented car manufacturers.
Agreed, the typography is on the strangely and perhaps unecessarily affected side of 'technological' and so looses out on seriousness and gravitas, but then it does have some unexpected edges and would not look out of place on a new Citroen. An additional but minor gripe may be the colour incongruency of symbol and type.
This new brandmark should not be measured in terms of its value as a 'logo'. Brandmark, not logo. A brandmark represents the brand experience. A logo is something else which all too often is judged out of context. Get the language right and the brand experience follows.
Citroen's brand experience led by this new brandmark looks crisp and invigorated to me.
A.
Yannick’s comment is:
This is the original DS
The car is quite iconic in France.
On Feb.13.2009 at 09:02 AM
Scott’s comment is:
PONTIAC - WE BUILD EXCITEMENT
The late 80s/early 90s version, post-Knight Rider.
READ: Blah pseudo futuristic font.
On Feb.13.2009 at 09:08 AM
Chris Herron’s comment is:
The new mark is confident and well drawn, and its footprint has enough style to work without the dimensional effects. The logotype needed another week of consideration and fine-tuning.
On Feb.13.2009 at 09:28 AM
Jonathan’s comment is:
After the logo release, they are actually going to announce they are now making spaceships.
All kidding aside, I don't feel a connection between the metal things and the type. Two different feels, seems a little juvenile honestly.
On Feb.13.2009 at 09:34 AM
TMet’s comment is:
Overall it's an improvement but I agree with Andrew's comment that the design needs to be successful as 2-dimensional first. Call me old fashioned but would this logo be interesting flat/one color? Additionally, I don't think the mark and type relate well to each other in their current colors and type style.
On Feb.13.2009 at 11:16 AM
Fonto’s comment is:
I think this is a good upgrade for a very tired mark. I don't mind the logo or the font. The font will more than likely fit right in with the styling of the vehicles whereas the old mark looked very out of place on their products. The facility looks pretty good as well, although I'm not sure what it says about their brand from the curb. Pylon sign is nicely restrained, but does not speak to their somewhat quirky personality and would be hard to distinguish from a distance. It wouldn't look out of place in front of any dealership, which is a problem. Certainly brand must be communicated from every touchpoint, not just the mark. Their Niketown-esque facilty in Paris is a stunner, a must see if you go.
On Feb.13.2009 at 11:25 AM
Mr Posen’s comment is:
This is tragic on so many levels.
Firstly why is an American design company reinterpreting a classic french brand?
This solution shows, they just don't get it, it looks like a generic American brand now, the Hummer 2CV.
Bland and expected.
On Feb.13.2009 at 11:32 AM
Loyal Typo’s comment is:
Well, Me think the old mark very tired and this probably good for brand. don't mind font cause it looks like other stuff they make. building look good too. me have trouble seeing that pylon from the edge of town. It would look out of place in front of saloon but not a car dealership. Think brand is important for all their stuff, not just logo. Typo favorite is Niketown in Paris. Fonto rode me there once horseback.
On Feb.13.2009 at 11:32 AM
Armin’s comment is:
> Firstly why is an American design company reinterpreting a classic french brand?
On Feb.13.2009 at 11:51 AM
Aaron’s comment is:
Terrible. It already looks old. I would believe it ten years ago but the whole futuristic-flat typeface and gradient shininess makes it look like an off-brand energy drink.
On Feb.13.2009 at 11:55 AM
JeanC’s comment is:
Nice integration on the front of the car.
On Feb.13.2009 at 12:01 PM
gary b’s comment is:
i like the way the chevrons are reflected in the shape of the grill on the front of the car.
having the metal chevrons on the SIDE of the car - well, i'm sure someone's tried to open them, they look like door handles! :P
the umlaut is plain goofy-lookin'
On Feb.13.2009 at 12:12 PM
supercujo’s comment is:
"Sarcasm aside, it is a somewhat attractive rendering, and the softer, rounder shapes make the new icon more distinguishable than the previous, in the sense that anyone can invert two straight-edged V shapes and call it a logo."
You do realise what those V shapes signify don't you?
On Feb.13.2009 at 12:42 PM
Darrin Crescenzi’s comment is:
Hmmmm… type reminds me of the University of Oregon athletic wordmark:
Which, to be honest, already feels dated.
On Feb.13.2009 at 01:07 PM
Frank’s comment is:
Hmm, i dunno.
I kinda like the rendering.
But the thing is, the flat, one color version would look quite different from the original symbol's shapes and i don't think that's a good thing - brand recognition and all.
And the wordmark - web 1.0 wedeliversolutions.com startup called and wants its font back.
On Feb.13.2009 at 01:09 PM
Nisio’s comment is:
A brief history of car logos
Version 1: car logo becomes badge, badge becomes 3d rendered logo
Version 2: badge becomes logo, logo becomes 3d rendered logo.
All routes lead to a 3d rendered logo and I think it's just boring. Sure you get nice examples - Alfa Romeo - but you also get Landrover's shiny button. Why does the logo and the badge have to mimic each other, wouldn't the badge on your car feel more special if the logo on the brochure wasn't some tacky representation?
Xav’s comment is:
In France all 3 car makers have a colour associated with them. Renault is Yellow, Peugeot is Blue and Citroën is Red.
I guess, for brand recognition purposes, Citroën had to put some red somewhere. The wordmark is as good a place as any.
Citroën designers are on fire at the moment, all their new models look very good (unlike Peugeot's - nuf said) - a new, more modern, identity was long overdue.
I like it, although I agree the wordmark could have been a tad better.
On Feb.13.2009 at 01:20 PM
DG3’s comment is:
I like it. It's certainly an improvement over the former logo.
On Feb.13.2009 at 01:43 PM
damon’s comment is:
I like it overall, but I think the chevrons are way too large. the propotions look odd to me.
i don't hate the type, it's maybe a bit cliché post-modern, but it could be worse.
On Feb.13.2009 at 01:45 PM
Jeremy’s comment is:
Although I agree that the use of mixed case is a typically awkward - in this case it nicely finishes the overall shape of the brand name in the logo. Citroën has the problem of starting with a rounded "C" and ending with such an angular "N" - they are hard shapes to resolve at each end of the word.
Even though font selection/design could bring these two together, I think the use of the lower-case "n" gives the Citroën name a nice shape within the logo.
On Feb.13.2009 at 01:48 PM
jRod’s comment is:
i wonder if the font is supposed to be memorably awkward. it certainly is stirring up a lot of dust here anyway...
On Feb.13.2009 at 02:08 PM
Mark’s comment is:
first impression:
*facepalm*
second impression it looks okay, nothing spectacular, I'd wish car companies would cut it out with the shiny logos, it doesn't look cool it looks bad and tacky. Plus it reminds me a lot of the 80's TV logos who makers like to employ that effect a lot to look futuristic or something.
On Feb.13.2009 at 05:11 PM
Bruce’s comment is:
I like the shape of the new chevrons, but can do without the metallic effect. The type looks like it came from a late '70s copy of Omni magazine. It just isn't well done. The tops and bottoms of the curved letters look chopped off. The lowercase n wouldn't bother me if other letters in Citroen were biform, but just one letter doesn't work. The car itself looks like a Frenchified Mini.
On Feb.13.2009 at 08:24 PM
Neil’s comment is:
You know, sometimes I wonder if perhaps we're just too stuck in our ways over what actually constitutes a logo. Maybe the "Neue Metalized™" look is the way to go. I mean afterall, at least when it comes to cars, the metallic look clearly reflects that of the car. I love the idea of incorporating the logo directly into the grill of the car.
I'm even a bit of a fan of the typography. I actually think it's an update (I want to refrain from saying an improvement) to the previous typography. One thing I'm not a fan of is the top and bottom of the C and O. I hate the way it looks as if it's been chopped off.
On Feb.13.2009 at 08:34 PM
Glenn Sakamoto’s comment is:
I like the mark. But 1990 called, and they want their typeface back!
On Feb.13.2009 at 08:53 PM
Serviceburo’s comment is:
I have to side with Andrew regarding resolving the logo in 2D. I think this is an excellent point of view from which to look at 3D logos. A lot of work winds up looking like a 90's rave flier - totally unnecessarily. This new badge totally works because it could be accurately rendered with simple color blocking. As far as the type goes, it's overworked - the asymmetry in the letterforms doesn't add anything to the overall effect of the font. It just ends up looking like the title to a B-grade scifi movie.
On Feb.13.2009 at 09:27 PM
ZedZedEye’s comment is:
Citroen has a history of meshing futuristic design styling with progressive engineering. I agree with the "futuristic" logo. I admire a company that doesnt rest on its laurels with an early 1900's badge, when it clearly intends to be in the forefront of the future of automobiles. (lol, rereading that I sound like a press release.)
On Feb.13.2009 at 10:51 PM
ZedZedEye’s comment is:
If this was an australian car company, I would praise the double boomerangs.
On Feb.13.2009 at 10:55 PM
Stuart McCoy’s comment is:
I like it. The type isn't perfect but I'm glad to see a designer take a chance with a crafted type face instead of slapping the sans serif d'jour on the logo. The shapes in the type face play nicely with the chevrons and the chevrons are a nice upgrade from the original logo as well.
On Feb.13.2009 at 11:57 PM
Chris’s comment is:
Terrible. Especially in regards to the poor choice in adding three dimensional effects to the look.
On Feb.14.2009 at 01:02 AM
Brad McCall’s comment is:
I think this is a vast improvement over their previous logo. I also like how they've picked up the logo shape in the grill of their car. I love when brands carry their logo elements into the product in a meaningful way. (Rather than just slapping it on there.) While the chevron icon is 3D, I don't think it is overdone. Very simple. I think the logo is a winner. Thanks for sharing!
On Feb.14.2009 at 01:40 AM
Colin’s comment is:
Post hoc, all over
On Feb.14.2009 at 06:51 AM
Paul Lloyd Johnson’s comment is:
What is wrong with making something feel futuristic? If I were selling classic cars and had a logo and font that was Times New Roman-esque would you complain that it was too old fashioned?
On Feb.14.2009 at 07:00 AM
Jonathan Carnehl’s comment is:
I agree. And, the 3D effect looks good. What car logo doesn't have the same. If the most common application of it is 3D on the hood of the car, then it it should be designed with that in mind. Also consider the audience. They want it shiny and futuristic.
On Feb.14.2009 at 08:47 AM
Rodrigo Müller’s comment is:
it's not even 3D, it's a vector based illustration with somw gradients and despite all of you saying bad things about it, it's pretty well done. not so shure about the letters C and O with that straight line on the upper and lower part, kind of lame. and the shape of the T is also strangem but yeah, it's a nice evolution.
On Feb.14.2009 at 02:46 PM
b.r.o.o.d.y.’s comment is:
The old mark wasn't anything impressive but it had lasted a looong time and would easily last longer still. The new design is trendy and probably will have to be changed back to a flat shape down the road, but the update certainly reflects the company's technological and aesthetical philosophy better.
I love my Citroen C3, by the way.
On Feb.14.2009 at 06:07 PM
Andrei Gonzales’s comment is:
I'm surprised by all the negative comments. Clearly you people have no idea what Citroen is doing nowadays.
Citroen are fiercely trying to drop their "weird old french guy" image (Yes, they had it for a LONG time in the car industry), and have gone from strength to strength. It started with the dancing transformer ad, to the really futuristic concepts, to the spaceship style-Gran Turismo contept car:
Could imagine marrying this product direction with the "old world" look?
On Feb.14.2009 at 06:54 PM
Mark’s comment is:
I'm sorry I was a bit harsh in my comments before.
It doesn't look that bad and I can see where they are a heading a different direction.
the new car pictures help to understand this.
I'm still not that excited by the new logo, maybe it's just me. It's an improvement but it's not spectacular. It does work though.
I still dislike the fact that many car companies go for the silver shiny look, it makes them all look the same, and it is quite boring. Maybe a lot of car customers like that look who knows, I just know it turns me off. It get's repetitive in a way.
On Feb.14.2009 at 08:58 PM
Mark’s comment is:
I'm sorry I was a bit harsh in my comments before.
It doesn't look that bad and I can see where they are heading, a different direction.
the new car pictures help to understand this.
I'm still not that excited by the new logo, maybe it's just me. It's an improvement but it's not spectacular. It does work though.
I still dislike the fact that many car companies go for the silver shiny look, it makes them all look the same, and it is quite boring. Maybe a lot of car customers like that look who knows, I just know it turns me off. It get's repetitive in a way.
On Feb.14.2009 at 08:59 PM
Justin Hill’s comment is:
Repetitive...like your comments?
On Feb.15.2009 at 05:43 AM
Marcin’s comment is:
Really, nice job.
Maybe, all those metal-effects in symbol looks a little bit ,,plastic-fantastic''. Typo lookss really nice...
On Feb.15.2009 at 06:06 AM
Mike’s comment is:
I don't disagree about the redesign, aside from a little nostalgia. But I think it looks terrible on the Loeb car (he drives for the Citroen rally team). it looks like a cheap "hey let's make a 3d logo!" effort, printed flat like that.
On Feb.15.2009 at 01:44 PM
Filipe’s comment is:
I actually like it, but i just think all these shiny-3D-gradient-shaded logos will look so 2000's, ten years from now. Just like swoosh logos look 1990's
On Feb.15.2009 at 05:29 PM
Paul Ducco’s comment is:
Agreed ... the updated mark looks good ... the text however ... is meh.
On Feb.15.2009 at 06:59 PM
T-Bone’s comment is:
this is cool – i think futuristic is better than retro for citroen, especially when you look at the radical concept cars they're currently pushing. (thanks Andrei Gonzales for posting that pic!)
i think it's a fitting logo considering their all-out futuristic design direction. and the umlaut being joined probably makes for an easier-to-apply badge.
On Feb.15.2009 at 07:44 PM
goffredo Puccetti’s comment is:
I totally agree with Andrew Sabatier’s comments.
I am not a big fan of 3d effects, fashion bevels and stuff but this kind of comments will miss the point completely, imho.
This redesign - very well executed and magnificently implemented through all the media, from website to dealers - will reinforce Citroën brand values.
Almost perfect. Top marks.
Vegard’s comment is:
very nice symbol, but that has to be the ugliest "T" i have seen in a while :)
On Feb.16.2009 at 02:48 AM
erik spiekermann’s comment is:
double boomerangs
The double chevron points back to the time when Citroën made gears, before they went into cars. They represented cogs, a nice reference for a car maker, if somewhat obscure by now.
The two dots over the E are not an Umlaut (which would change the sound of the vowel), but a Trema, which separates the two vowels. It would be pronounced Citrow-ain by an American, rather than Citroon or Citrön (by us Germans).
Andrew Sabatier’s comment is:
Brand new just upgraded.
Now there's a name I didn't expect to see on a grassroots blog, Erik Spiekerman.
An interesting insight into the origins of the Citroen brand. And an interesting criticism from a veteran typographer. Typographer in the better sense of the word. A common misconception is that fontography is typography.
Let's hope we see some more industry big names prepared to brave the pot shots that populate these blogs.
A.
Adam Bestwick’s comment is:
I agree with the majority of the comments, and feel that with an uber-modern update of the chevron, the typography could have been pulled-back slightly on the futuristic styling.
The temptation is always to put something out there that feels bang-up-to-date and slick, whereas the more timeless executions are the usually the more simplistic ones. A study of any big brands that have achieved longevity will usually indicate this.
Randy Hill’s comment is:
I don't like this at all. It seems disjointed to me...not cohesive. And I hate the metallic thingies.
On Feb.20.2009 at 03:21 PM
Jesvin’s comment is:
This is the cool one
On Feb.25.2009 at 07:15 AM
Julio Ferro’s comment is:
This chevron is one of the most recognizable icons in the industry. Why not use it as Volkswagen did it without the namena and that bland rationale?
C'mon! Let's round everything to be close to the consumer!
Yuk!
blankH’s comment is:
The symbol is too big compared with the type, it looks unbalanced. Look at the old version which I think has better proportions.
On Apr.06.2009 at 01:15 PM
Comments in Brand New, V1.0 have been closed.
