NOTE: This is an archived version of the first incarnation of Brand New.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.
Guest Editorial by James Bowie
Redfin, a Seattle-based online real estate service, was content with its little house-in-a-circle logo until Move.com threatened to sue to protect its house-in-a-circle mark. So Hornall Anderson Design Works was enlisted to create Redfin’s new identity, which features, in addition to a stronger wordmark, a more elaborate logo. It shows an aspiring homeowner (clearly a graduate of the Dallas Independent School District) reaching to pluck his ideal house out of the crowded market. And the whole thing looks like a tree!
Move.com’s innovative house-in-a-circle logo
Logo design presents the challenge of creating a symbol that is simultaneously distinctive and simple. The logo must differentiate the company or product it represents while remaining graphically concise and recognizable. The old Redfin logo was generic and unmemorable, particularly in a business awash in house logos, but was able to simply communicate that Redfin would help you buy a house. The new logo is distinctive and won’t attract any lawsuits, but it is also more complex, requiring more decoding on the part of the viewer.
“Redfin” is one of those Internet monikers that is unique but provides no clue about what the business actually does (the name is a play on the word “redefine,” as in what the company hopes to do to the real estate business). With such a mysterious and still relatively unrecognized name, perhaps the company would have been better off sticking with a boring yet clear logo, rather than switching to a clever but potentially puzzling symbol.
James Bowie is a sociologist and researcher at Northern Arizona University. His Ph.D. dissertation examined patterns and trends in trademark design.
Jump to Most Recent Comment
Peter Marquardt’s comment is:
I think it looks like a bunch of flowers... without a closer look this could clearly have been a flower sending service. I would have clicked it away when searching for real estate
On May.11.2007 at 06:39 PM
Splashman’s comment is:
The illustration is clever, but gawd, I've seen so many 3rd-rate logos with that form of human figure that I have a uncontrollable urge to retch whenever I see them.
The grey is bugging me, but obviously they couldn't use black; would overpower the type. I dunno. Maybe it's just that there's so much going on.
The type is a huge improvement, that's for dang sure.
Overall reaction is "Enh" -- nothing special, but at least it looks clean and professional, which is more than I can say for some of the other logos featured on this blog.
On May.11.2007 at 06:45 PM
Neven’s comment is:
It's a well balanced logo from a distance, but the little house shapes stack oddly, and the jumping person is eye-roll bait. A cute idea, but it's implemented in a very boring way. What would be wrong with an actual illustration depicting a house-picking human?
On May.11.2007 at 06:56 PM
Ephram Zerb’s comment is:
Definatly a distinct improvement over the old logo. I wonder if the decision to placed the visual mark to the right of the name also adds to the decoding issue brought up (as it's much less common) or, if instead, it helps with recognizability.
On May.11.2007 at 11:05 PM
Frank’s comment is:
Improvement over the old logo, but that's not too difficult really - how unique is a house shape in a circle anyway, uh.
As for the idea: I like the idea of the little guy and the houses forming into a tree.
However, i think it's poorly executed:
1) Different/too dark shade of grey for that person figure; they should have uses the same grey they used for the little houses.
2) Yeah, that "human figure" thing has been done to death.
3) The "R" is way too big in the word mark, looks strange altogether.
4) They could have decreased the overall size of the icon in comparison to the word mark; the way it is now the icon is too big.
All in all, an ok-ish logo - i've seen worse.
On May.12.2007 at 12:24 AM
Frank’s comment is:
Quick try:
joel’s comment is:
3) The "R" is way too big in the word mark, looks strange altogether.
-- I'm not sure if it's too big, I think it's just at the stage where it's neither big nor small. Too big to look like it is the same size as every other letter, but too big to be seen as consciously and deliberately made large.
It kind of just looks like an oversight.
Seth Aldridge’s comment is:
When I first saw the mark it reminded me of the Red Roof Inn. Which is a chain of Hotels. The tree of houses is weird and doesn't make much sense.
On May.12.2007 at 01:16 PM
Von Glitschka’s comment is:
This mark will have a seasonal problem as well. Fall that is.
Splashman’s comment is:
Heh, that's cute, Von. But one could argue that it fits the metaphor just fine. "All the others fall away, leaving the customer with the perfect house."
Frank: uh, no thanks. The problem with HADW's design isn't the type; it's the illustration. Your "try" is useful in one sense: it demonstrates how poorly the illustration survives at a reduced scale: the houses are unrecognizable as such. To keep them recognizable, you'd have to add detail (extend the roof?), and with that number of shapes, the additional detail gets overwhelming.
On May.12.2007 at 03:33 PM
Von Glitschka’s comment is:
I think you may be correct Splashman, I could see them doing a nice flash animation along these lines.
I just wish the execution of the art would have been handled better. Looks more like a comp to get an idea approved then it does final art.
On May.12.2007 at 04:22 PM
felix’s comment is:
the mark itself is cute, very awards minded- meaning; it doesn't work. too intricate and the type is just too dated. i mean c'mon. seriously. what is that? Serpentine's cousin? Its very.. dare i say it -logoworks.commy. The chosen (red) apple being larger is indicative of something.. but I'm not sure what.
If the most important thing in real estate is location (& size), why not.. er, screw it... someone pay Rick Poyner $50 to make my case.
On May.12.2007 at 10:38 PM
Frank’s comment is:
Thinking about it, i wonder what a tree has to do with realestate anyway.
Problem is this: The concept tries to incorporate too many ideas at a time-> the guy, the houses, the tree.Just the combo of a person and ordinary leafs forming a tree alone would be enough of a concept.
Not for a real estate service maybe, but for just something.
Now to transform the leafs into little houses is just too much - either get rid of the "human trunk" or the "housy leafs".
And yeah i have to agree with Splashman - in small size the houses don't come across as such.
Still i appreciate at least the attempt of HADW to come up with a unique concept that tries to say something, even though in this case it failed.In these days of web 2.0 gradient logos, one has to be thankful for *any* attempt at a meaningful concept.
On May.13.2007 at 01:00 AM
Armin’s comment is:
My biggest problem with the logo is design-centric: Hornall Anderson should know better. As James pointed to in the original article to the Dallas fiasco, this specific execution of the human form is trite, cliche and low brow. As a design firm that has been around for a long time doing great work in packaging and identity design I find this to be sub-subpar work. The only positive thing I have to say is about the typography, an unusual and attractive choice — sadly, eclisped by the monster to its right.
On May.13.2007 at 08:47 AM
Mark’s comment is:
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!
why? why? why?
ugh they took a logo that was completely different and much better from any other real estate logos TOSSED IT OUT and made one that looks like every other type of real estate logo with the most overused cliché's as possible!
a "joyful" stylized person
a made-to-look-like a tree shape
bold,generic typeface
overly simplified duplicated plain house shape
No. No. No. No.
JUST because you're being threatened to be sued by a company with a similar mark DOESN'T mean you have to create a sub-standard logo!
ugh. this is so horrible looking that it's indescribable.
On May.13.2007 at 11:02 AM
Frank’s comment is:
I still fail to see what was special or unique about the old logo - to me it really was a house in a circle, that's about it.
As said, i think the new one has major flaws but at least they *tried* to come up with something original.
On May.13.2007 at 11:09 AM
stock_illustration’s comment is:
I'm not so sure Move.com even had a case...there's not much chance of anyone mistaking the two logos...just because it's a house in a circle, does that preclude ANY house EVER being placed in a circle in logo design? The differences are major. IMO the logo needed redesign, no doubt, but not because of the danger of infringement.
On May.13.2007 at 06:02 PM
thxcolm’s comment is:
It's also very similar to Associated Students Chico mark, designed by students from about 6 years ago.
On May.13.2007 at 09:40 PM
Multiple Personalities’s comment is:
Welcome Jim Bowie. (wink) Guess Who?
No Comment on the visual.
Hornall Anderson isn't Hornall Anderson anymore.
Jack Anderson sold his Seattle based identity consultancy three years ago to OMNICOM and retired a gazillionaire.
Hornall Anderson is another empty shell identity practice like all the rest which exist in name only and owned by a communications conglomerate.
... / t h t o o c i
On May.13.2007 at 10:05 PM
drew kora’s comment is:
HA! I'm watching 60 Minutes right now while web browsing and there's a story on Redfin. A very cool company, but they have bigger problems than their logo right now.
Overall I think it's a better logo than the original, even though it's not that original either.
Leanne Johnson’s comment is:
Bizarre, but the name made me think of Redken hair products! As mentioned above, it's not a great name for an estate agent and sounds more like a type of fish to me...
As for the logo, I agree with all the above - too many ideas pushed into one, too 'logoworks.commy', doesn't work AT ALL in smaller sizes. I'm actually designing a logo for an online estate agent right now, and it's hard getting the client to move away from the typical cheesy 'house in a box' symbol. I've got my work cut out!
On May.14.2007 at 05:43 AM
Von K’s comment is:
The type is nice, but that face doesn't say "real estate" to me. It's got more of a seafood or micro-brewery look, IMO.
The mark is just awful. It looks like the realtors wanted the logo to "say" every little thing possible about the company.
Kind of like how realtors put way too much furniture and crap into the model homes they show, this logo is like walking through the bric-a-brac section at Goodwill--especially with that "joyous human" thing.
On May.14.2007 at 11:20 AM
Shaun’s comment is:
I think maybe just a sea of gray houses with one red house could have been nice, gotten point across. get rid of the tree thing altogether...
On May.14.2007 at 02:02 PM
Savan’s comment is:
Thanks for all of the comments! I spearheaded the redesign of our site and logo and wanted to thank everyone for their comments (good and bad).
I particularly like Von Glitschka’s comment with the animation.
Give our design some time and hopefully it'll grow on you.
Best,
Savan
Mark’s comment is:
Frank, you were asking why I thought the previous logo looked so unique.
Well I said it was unique because it was a much more clean and professional looking logo compared to other popular real estate companies
I other words it was a rare case where a real estate company had a logo that they can be really proud of showing and having as opposed to a logo that is embarrassing to put their name on
for a better perspective compare Redfin's previous logo to Remax's. or Coldwell Banker's or GMAC's or any other real estate logo, and you get the point .
I just find it sad that a company got a logo that made them stand out from the rest of the crowd on to replace it with a logo that basically made them fade right back in with the rest of the crowd, sigh
I think it had to do with the logo's simplicity and stark colors,it was sort of unusual in a ways to have that sharp looking of a logo in the real estate market.
only to replaced by something predictable and dull dull dull
Please WHY WHY WHY do they use gray!? the logo ALREADY looks faded and that color makes them almost disappear into the white background.
Sorry Savan,but this "tree of houses" isn't really growing on me so far.
(heh,I think I could make that logo myself in Powerpoint,ouch!)
dang "tree" stop disappearing!
On May.14.2007 at 10:24 PM
Mark’s comment is:
actually it looks more like a hotel logo, something like Ramada except with a Double-Tree touch to it.
plus that typeface looks more appropriate for a hotel.
(Redfin Inn perhaps?)
On May.14.2007 at 10:35 PM
Mark’s comment is:
3rd look around, looking at the logo I'm thinking "French" or "France" for some odd reason.
On May.14.2007 at 10:59 PM
Frank’s comment is:
Mark, thanks for your thoughts; i still think a logo consisting of a rather general house icon in a general circle is anything but unique or special.
Note that "clean" and "professional" doesn't automatically equal uniqueness.
Might be that other real estate logos are even more boring (although there are quite some nice ones out there), but that's not the point.
Point is, a house in a circle is as non-unique as it gets - at least the way their old logo was.
Quark's logo fiasco did not happen because it didn't look "clean" or "professional" (it in fact did) but because it wasn't *unique*.
Actually it was so non-unique it looked more or less exactly like 7 other companies.
That stuff happens if people just type "Q" in a certain font or put a house in a circle and leave it at that.
Which is the reason they got harrassed by move.com - because someone there thought they have a copyright for putting houses in circles.
Question still remains if move.com really would have a case in legal terms just because of the generic nature of their logo but that's the point:
You're better off with a *really* unique logo because the risk of your logo looking similar to that of another company is significant lower compared to "generic" logos.
On May.14.2007 at 11:37 PM
Tony Goff’s comment is:
Seems somewhat busy and as mentioned before there seems to be too many ideas in the one logo. Having said that its a friendly, welcoming logo which is probably more fitting then a generic house in a circle (which is so generic it might even have its own wingding by now).
On May.15.2007 at 04:36 AM
Nathan Philpot’s comment is:
The blue fin logo is awesome.
felix’s comment is:
thx. its 12 yrs old. i just googled to see if that old client was still around... no luck. They're probably dead. Long dead.
Regarding "Multiple's" Whore, Nawl, Pander & Son, Inc; have to agree they aren't what tey used to be... and I was never really impressed with all those swirly Jamba Juice/ Chicken Rotisserie logos.
But that the American way. Stack em deep, sell em cheap (see logoworks). Get written up as #66 in INC Mag's top 500 companies.
Insane? You bet. Thats why Blue Fin is officially up for bid, starting at $50.00. I'll take the 5th caller.
On May.15.2007 at 09:39 AM
C-LO’s comment is:
So generic I wonder where's the bar code? I mean I understand the whole looking for a home BS. Area where I live has more real estate agents then roaches thanks to the wonders of "emminent domain". But try to put a little bit of thought into it would ya? People are looking
On May.15.2007 at 02:56 PM
Drew’s comment is:
>Jack Anderson sold his Seattle based identity consultancy three
>years ago to OMNICOM and retired a gazillionaire.
Correction:
John Hornall retired several years ago.
Hornall-Anderson Design Works was then sold to Omnicom.
Jack Anderson is still very much a part of HADW.
>Hornall Anderson isn't Hornall Anderson anymore.
I would agree with this, wholeheartedly.
There is 'new blood' here and we are transfusing as opportuned.
The HADW of the future will not look like the HADW of old - and I think that is a good thing.
Blake’s comment is:
Yeah, I'm no designer, but the logo just doesn't work for me. The first time I heard about Redfin, I envisioned something cheesy like a dorsal cresting out of the water (maybe the association with propertyshark.com - the foreclosure site). That would be more in-line with their target audience (bargain hunters).
Also, a grey tree is kinda sad. It reminded me of the cover of "The Halloween Tree" by Ray Bradbury. :-(
On May.16.2007 at 02:27 AM
disgruntled designer’s comment is:
nice type with a simple house icon, that's all you need. not some monopoly inspired psychological test. doesn't the new type look like a variation of radison or red roof inn?
come to think of it i just looked at the red roof inn logo and whoa... disastrous hand-written type! but someone has had a similar type lock-up recently.
On May.17.2007 at 04:09 PM
Mark ’s comment is:
Talking about the Red Roof Inn logo, I've seen it and it's hideous probably even WORSE than this logo. (Redfin's)
I prefer this logo (the old one) more than the current one
anyway I don't have much to say anything else about Redfin's logo it gets kind of boring to talk about. Theres not much you could add to it since it's just blah.
On May.17.2007 at 04:51 PM
Monostereo’s comment is:
Mark’s comment is:
Okay the loewst of the low you can go with a logo
isn't Redfin not even close, the lowest of the low you can go with a logo is Countrywide's logo
see for yourself: http://www.roadtoinsurance.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/09/arizona-car-insurance.JPG
That logo looks so elementary it's not even funny,what was it made out of construction paper? it looks like something out of a children's book,no even worse it looks like a poorly made 8-bit computer icon that supposed to represent a "house".
gah.
Who would seriously paint their roof purple? and their outside walls green? with orange windows? ugh,bad bad bad bad taste.
On May.17.2007 at 05:08 PM
Mark’s comment is:
Okay the lowest of the low you can go with a logo
isn't Redfin not even close, the lowest of the low you can go with a logo is Countrywide's logo
see for yourself: http://www.roadtoinsurance.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/09/arizona-car-insurance.JPG
That logo looks so elementary it's not even funny,what was it made out of construction paper? it looks like something out of a children's book,no even worse it looks like a poorly made 8-bit computer icon that supposed to represent a "house".
gah.
Who would seriously paint their roof purple? and their outside walls green? with orange windows? ugh,bad bad bad bad taste.
On May.17.2007 at 05:10 PM
Mark’s comment is:
MBNA does look similar,but to me at small scale the Redfin logo reminds me of Cumberland Farms:
Justin’s comment is:
the little man is taken from this clipart:
Mark’s comment is:
Okay, I'll admit it, compared to a lot more worse logos on this site, this one isn't actually that bad.
At least it's simple, and has some sense connected to it.
On Jun.15.2007 at 12:15 PM
Bart Wilson’s comment is:
Whover did the new logo for Redfin needs to get a few lessons from Saul Bass, Jerry McPhail or Fred Randall. Because there is nothing remotely cool or remarkable about the new Redfin logo. I look at this and think: Lending Tree? Wait, no Redfin. Something about this logo just doesn't work. A tree with houses like leaves? Nonetheless, if Glenn had hired our design and marketing firm this is the logo that we would have introduced. Full service brokers are already quaking in their boots and let's face it. The DOJ has jumped over Realtor.com, Homestore.com (now Move.com) for restricting listings from FSBO's and discount brokers.
On Jul.29.2007 at 02:26 PM
Tim Oliver’s comment is:
Redfin? A house in a tree? What is the connection?
At least with the tagline "Find, buy and sell homes online",there is something to tie it together. The earlier design was more compact, which is important with a logo that needs to be scalable for various printing purposes. A website that specializes in logo design printing is
Link: Logo Design Printing
On Jan.17.2009 at 02:18 AM
Comments in Brand New, V1.0 have been closed.
