NOTE: This is an archived version of the first incarnation of Brand New.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.
On June 4th, Discovery Communications launched Planet Green, the “first and only 24-hour eco-lifestyle television network,” and with original programming on TV and a robust online presence Planet Green demonstrates that there is more than just gloomy, end-of-the-world content surrounding the environment. The new identity, designed by New York-based Open, is a green circle paired with a heavy-duty (and beautiful) sans serif designed by Chester Jenkins of Village. The logo, to some, may seem like an over-simplified or easy solution, but with a name like Planet Green, I doubt there was a more perfect — and most importantly, ad hoc — solution. And unlike the recent circle logo from Euronews this one doesn’t feel pretentious nor operate on pure quirk — the quirk actually comes from things like their green or greener press web site and the on-air graphics by Thornberg & Forester. How does such a simple and effective logo come to be in the twenty-first century? I asked Open’s proprietor and recent winner of the Cooper-Hewitt’s National Design Award for Communication Design, Scott Stowell, a few questions. Oh, and before anyone cries foul, this logo was designed before the We logo but both happened to be released at similar times.
Armin Vit: Without sacrificing any secrets from this part of the process, how did you bring in the project to Open?
Scott Stowell: Last year, we were hired (along with some other design and advertising firms) to develop some ideas for Planet Green. We showed lots of work on the identity, on-air design, and advertising, most of which didn’t get used. But we did a lot of thinking about the point of view and tone of the channel, some of which I think comes through in the logo.
AV: How long was the project, from briefing to launch? And what were some of the key benchmarks that you had to meet throughout (logo, on-air graphics, etc.)?
SS: The whole project took about six months. For the first couple of months we developed and presented concepts, and the rest of the time was filled with issues related to the logo: color, typography, guidelines, etc. We also produced a package of animated elements for Planet Green to use in ad-sales presentations before the launch.
AV: Could you also describe the type of decision-making process? Who was involved in it? Was there focus groups or other type of testing for the work?
SS: Open was connected to Planet Green through a consultant with whom we’ve worked on many projects for television. She brought us in to work with a marketing team that had been put together for the launch of the network. Ultimately, though, we presented our ideas to Eileen O’Neill, the president of the channel. We weren’t involved in any testing at all.
AV: What was the thinking that led to the final logo? Was there any apprehension towards the simplicity of a circle?
SS: We came up with that logo idea very quickly after we first heard from Planet Green. Serifcan Ozcan, one of the designers here at Open, first thought of the green dot right away. We spent a lot of time coming up with reasons why they had to pick it, but surprisingly they went for it without much hesitation. Once they did, we had a lot more work to do (see below).
Tom Green gives his opinion of the logo.
AV: Talk to us about some of the geekier details, where the following questions are all followed by “why?”: What typeface did you choose? What PMS number is the green? How did you arrive at the final lock-up with the circle on the right? (Yes, geeky).
SS:
• Many, many options for the type were considered, including the idea of no type (I hope that will still happen some day) and the idea that it could be any typeface at all. In the end we realized that such a surprising logo needed solid, consistent typography.
• We were looking at Chester Jenkins’ Apex family, and he suggested we look at a new version that was still in development. That one was perfect: clean, fresh, friendly, and really efficient, thanks to its large x-height. Planet Green licensed it and renamed it Planet Green (for now).
• The green is PMS 376, but it started as a CMYK tint: c50 y100. For reasons of ecology and efficiency, we wanted to make sure the logo could be printed in as few colors as possible, and reproduce in pretty much any context. Plus we like the limited/flexible palette of four-color process.
• As for the type lock-up, that grew out of the need for the logo to exist as a bug in the lower right corner of the screen — as well as a desire to have the lockup to be a solid unit. There are two different main lock-ups — the type can also sit on top — and lots of ancillary ones for HD, on demand, etc.
Sample lock-ups and color applications
AV: In the past you’ve designed the identities of Bravo and the now-defunct Trio. What did you learn from those projects that helped you this time around?
SS: Trio, Bravo, and Planet Green all had different parameters. On Trio we were given a new logo (by No. 17) and had to build a world around it. For Bravo, we got to create the logo and its environment. And for Planet Green, we just made the logo and set it free. Then Thornberg & Forester made a fun on-air package that works really well with the logo.
It was interesting this time around to put some of the things we figured out from working with a logo (made by someone else or by us) into action. We made sure that some things were simple and consistent, but that there would be a lot of opportunities for motion that was appropriate and surprising. Thornberg & Forester did a great job taking advantage of that.
AV: What were the biggest challenges about designing this identity, given that “green” is something that everyone’s doing with dozens of “green” initiatives popping up everywhere with new identities?
SS: Planet Green’s mission is to make green living as mainstream as possible. The logo had to work anywhere and everywhere. And we had to get through not just the clutter of tv, but all the other “green” messages out there too. This was a perfect opportunity to make the biggest statement we could with the simplest possible solution.
AV: Thanks for your time Scott.
Jump to Most Recent Comment
Jerry Kuyper’s comment is:
Armin and Scott,
Thanks for the informative interview and congratulations on the successful project.
On Jul.02.2008 at 10:38 PM
Ray’s comment is:
The simplicity is refreshing. I love that they managed to trademark a green circle—so rockstar!
The only gripe I have is with the black logotype. It seems unfriendly and stark. Doesn't seem appropriate when I think about how fresh and innovative this concept is.
On Jul.02.2008 at 11:36 PM
logorhythmic’s comment is:
There was an earlier version of the Planet Green logo floating around during the PR process leading up to the channel launch. Do you know if this was an earlier concept by the same group, or was it from another of the firms contracted to work on it?
It's hard to imagine how this design would have translated on-air as a bug, etc. Which is another way of saying, it looks like they made the right choice.
Lester’s comment is:
Really, really don't like Tom Green. Really, really love Planet Green, their logo, and this interview. Is there anyplace to see it animated, for those of us who don't get the network?
On Jul.03.2008 at 02:57 AM
Woke’s comment is:
Though I like the typeface, I do not see it holding itself well with the symbol and I fail to relate it with an 'eco-style television network'.
Maybe further implementations will prove me wrong.
On Jul.03.2008 at 04:53 AM
reyarts.com’s comment is:
Davekos’s comment is:
that planet green logo submitted by logoryhtmic sucks. disgusted by trebuchet.
hey u know what. we could pair this planet green logo with H&R Block's green rectangle. hahaha
next time a green triangle... LOL
On Jul.03.2008 at 06:07 AM
Davekos’s comment is:
Paul’s comment is:
*shrug*
maybe I'm just jealous of the development time and budget, the ability to post-rationalise the design ... and the client lapping it up.
nice interview. more of them please.
Daniel Campos’s comment is:
Nice! The tipography is amazing!
On Jul.03.2008 at 08:30 AM
dbrenton’s comment is:
I love simple design and simple logos. The less you have to show and still get the point across the more powerful it is. I like the green circle but the type could be a more open for me. Like another person said, above this comment, it doesn't feel fresh.
Even though this whole "going green, global warming" thing is a hoax and i will never watch this channel...i still think it's a nicely designed logo. I'd give it a "B".
:)
On Jul.03.2008 at 08:49 AM
Audrée Lapierre’s comment is:
great logo, simple and effective
On Jul.03.2008 at 09:13 AM
harv’s comment is:
I love this site, and 95% of the time agree with everything said, but cmon people, let’s be honest here; it’s a green circle. A green circle !
Does it work? Yes,. I guess it does, but does it leave you with any type of an emotion? Does it convey anything? Does it want to make you be more “green” ?
I know,..i know,…the absolute minimalistic seems to be the “new swoosh”,…but how little is too little? Do we really want trademarked circles? What’s next?
And how is one circle less pretentious than another circle? (euronews vs. planet green vs. we)
For me this would be the case of “The Emperor's New Clothes” type of a situation, where only the “wise” could see beyond the “naked obvious”.
And I’m sorry,…but it took six months? If 99% of that went into administrative crap, approval boards, and what not,..ok,…but 6 months to draw a circle? God bless clients like that, I wish more of those to all of us.
On Jul.03.2008 at 09:16 AM
Bart O'Dell’s comment is:
Very insightful interview. Keep them coming!
On Jul.03.2008 at 09:28 AM
Rodrigo Müller’s comment is:
amazing logo. love the minimalism, the typeface, everything. it's sad that where I live, small town and all that, people are not ready to such a beautiful design. I dream of living in other country just so I can make the design I really love doing!
btw, more interviews like this, please!
On Jul.03.2008 at 10:14 AM
ScottS’s comment is:
That's exactly what I was thinking, harv: 6 months to finalize a green circle! Sure, there are worse logos out there that took longer to finalize and cost more $$...guess I'm just jealous!
Nice logo, "keep it simple stupid" is what this one screams. I like the type (also like Apex quite a lot), it feels appropriately organic and rugged (like the Earth itself!). Black and lime green are one of my favorite color combinations too--offers attention-grabbing contrast.
I have to agree with you Armin, this identity is a no-brainer and thus the most natural solution to the problem. Yes, there are a ton of circles and colored circles as logos out there, but in this particular example it's really the perfect design. One of only a few really well-done identities I've seen here this year!
On Jul.03.2008 at 10:22 AM
James’s comment is:
Thornberg & Forester worked on the network launch. Some elements were also done by Spirit Creative
On Jul.03.2008 at 10:26 AM
Armin’s comment is:
> And I’m sorry,…but it took six months? If 99% of that went into administrative crap, approval boards, and what not,..ok,…but 6 months to draw a circle?
Drawing a circle takes 5 seconds. Rationalizing, conceptualizing and contrasting that circle against other solutions, as well as contrasting it in the context of the industry, while going through the approval process, takes 6 months. Don't belittle the solution, this is not like designing a logo for the laundromat in your neighborhood.
On Jul.03.2008 at 10:37 AM
harv’s comment is:
@armin
I am not sure why you assume i am designing logos for laundromats in my neighbourhood,..but ok.
My point is - it works, but in my opinion, doesn't do the subject justice.
Btw. have you checked their website? Does the logo work for you there,..or looks like it was slapped on of a predesigned template? Overall,..bad branding.
For comparison,..go to animal planet's website. Isn't that just about 150x better? It's cohesive, tells a story, and paints the picture.
On Planet Green's website, the first thing i see is the banner for Chevy over the top of the entire site,...so,..excuse me,..but so much fot "green".
On Jul.03.2008 at 10:43 AM
arnoldp’s comment is:
Gorgeous!!!!
On Jul.03.2008 at 10:43 AM
Armin’s comment is:
> I am not sure why you assume i am designing logos for laundromats in my neighbourhood
Harv, sorry, just a broad generalization. But it's imperative to know that not a single logo at this level -- in this case, a nationally broadcast channel -- is "done" in 1% of the project's timeline.
On Jul.03.2008 at 11:03 AM
ben’s comment is:
i really cant see the point. not a lot of thought & an ugly shade of green.
loved the comment that says "gorgeous" - bet he loves to stare at the white album cover too!
looks like a design that can be looked at once and really never again.
On Jul.03.2008 at 11:11 AM
MADPHILL’s comment is:
Yeah, I dunno if I agree on this one. I think they will have to build quite the "world" around this mark to make it mean something to the masses. It's too run of the mill as a singularity. I think the ONLY thing salvaging it is the type. His goal of removing the type seems like a bad idea, because not only is that trendy green being used everywhere, but a circle? It could work, it will just require extra advertising dollars and exposure to build an maintain psychological and emotional recall. If the mark had more unique qualities this would not be the case.
I mean, in the video spot, already, I'm seeing logo deviation where they have added the 2.0, 3-d effect to the circle which is um, NOT the logo?!
It's problematic and overly-simplified.
Discover card is doing the whole 3-d circle thing (only orange) and Sunglass hut just released their extremely lame "O".
I mean. Why place hurdles in your path by using such and arbitrary mark?
I don't care for it and think that it could have done more of the heavy lifting as this brand grows if it were a bit more unique. It's like I said, they will have to keep their exposure up coupled with offering experience that people care about to make it remotely successful as an identity.
*One last thing:
Watch the video spots if you haven't and if you're like me (besides the fact that they ripped off a pre-existing style with the line work idea) the line work IS the hero. Not the circle thing. The interest for me, was all about the linework and not the bouncy dot. Which actually brought to mind a feminine hygiene commercial where the red dot (Kotex maybe?) is "your period".
The point being, I can think of many, many thematic and visual clones in advertising/design to proclaim mediocrity at this branding effort and the irony is, I can not really recall the brands where I've seen it before dozens of times.
I think Microsoft did the squiggly line thing, a hotel chain, and Kotex/Discover card are both doing the personified circle thing.
Sorry..I just went nuts.
On Jul.03.2008 at 11:16 AM
harv’s comment is:
@armin
I agree, and understrand; however,just because something is launched on a national level does not mean it will be instantly recognizable, or should be simplified to that (generic) extent.
Sure,...even Ditech will be burnt into your mind if you see enough commercials,...but is it good branding?
Like Madphill said,...they will have to do some serious juggling to make this one stick and be memorable.
To give you my idea of a fairly new, (in my opinion) very well branded national channel,.. www.mojotv.com ...very simple, clean, and combined with their tv promos,...just extremely well done.
btw. nothing against simple,...i bow down to H&R logo,....but that one just works on so many different levels.
On Jul.03.2008 at 11:39 AM
harv’s comment is:
sorry,...link is www.mojohd.com
On Jul.03.2008 at 11:41 AM
DOD’s comment is:
seems that nobody has a problem with the circle here?
– contrary to euronews ... ?
Rachel’s comment is:
I think the logo is emblematic of the idea that going green should be simple and second nature to us. In this day and age we are overloaded by information and overdone logos and marketing campaigns. I believe it is the simplicity that will make this work. If you watch the Planet Green Channel, the dot interacts with what is going on on screen. It bounces or swings from an invisible rope. The circle incorporates the idea that everything in one and that the planet is cyclical in nature. This circle allows for so many additional interactive and playful concepts. I think it will be successful if they continue to use the dot to evoke further Green ideals and actions.
On Jul.03.2008 at 12:04 PM
Tim’s comment is:
My first reaction (honest) was that the green circle represented Venus...with its run-away greenhouse effect and visibility-choking smog obscuring any details on the planet.
On Jul.03.2008 at 12:53 PM
izzy’s comment is:
Really? Really? This took 6 months?!!
Its indicative of any college level design solution. Dont get me wrong, it works fine on a base level, but to celebrate it is just plain dumb.
Does anyone here think this solution is plain old boring?
The rationalization to be is a big... mheh. You can rationalize a turd if you really had to.
On Jul.03.2008 at 01:26 PM
Mr Posen’s comment is:
Formally at its core, it is just a generic colored circle. I love green, I love circles, but whether I want to let a television station take ownership of those two elements is yet to be seen. Being such a generic form, PG will have to earn the right to take ownership of the green circle, it's not theirs yet!
Also...
Armin said:"Rationalizing, conceptualizing and contrasting that circle against other solutions, as well as contrasting it in the context of the industry, while going through the approval process, takes 6 months."
Circles are overly prevalent throughout the media landscape, eg. ABC, Food network, HSN, TNT, PBS, Trio, Discovery, even Showtime.
6 months, I don't think so!
On Jul.03.2008 at 01:34 PM
Armin’s comment is:
> Really? Really? This took 6 months?!!
> 6 months, I don't think so!
Okay, I was being politically correct before, so I will say it more bluntly: Anyone who doesn't understand how a design like this can take six months to develop has never worked on a project like this, and should avoid using these long periods of time as an argument against any logo.
On Jul.03.2008 at 02:09 PM
kristoffer’s comment is:
Wow unimaginative.
Timeline:
Client gets contract
5 months 29 days spent playing video games.
OH CRAP WE NEED TO MAKE A DESIGN FAST
I know! The planet is round, and also green, so how about a green circle? GENIUS!
felix sockwell’s comment is:
its a great mark. and quite ownable in its territory. i remember a few month ago the huffington post ran a duo banner ad that was pretty smart. great work fellas!
On Jul.03.2008 at 02:24 PM
koyo’s comment is:
Nice and Simple.
On Jul.03.2008 at 02:26 PM
XK9’s comment is:
Again, another impressive, wildly successful solution by Mr. Stowell and Open.
The idea of owning a shape is an amazing act of graphic design confidence (some might say arrogance). And here that confident arrogance is well-placed. This works. It makes a green circle cool. Planet Green owns it. I would buy a t-shirt with a green circle on it because of the Planet Green logo (provided it was made of recycled materials and printed by union workers using soy based inks and eco-friendly screen printing).
The typeface is kind of an anomaly. I'm surprised by the use of Apex. It is successful and appropriate, yet it seems to me a little "stylish" and self-conscious for this studio and this solution.
On Jul.03.2008 at 02:26 PM
Darrin Crescenzi’s comment is:
Planet Green is a bad skier.
Love the interviews and behind-the-scenes discussion of process — they really add more depth to the conversations on Brand New. Keep them coming!
On Jul.03.2008 at 02:58 PM
izzy’s comment is:
Armin,
I completely appreciate your bluntness. I have worked on a few projects of this size, perhaps not as large. Feel free to bust me on that.
My point is, regardles off the pitfalls of working with multiple clients etc... would you still disagree with me when the statement is made that its a rather plain looking logo?! Its a pedestrian symbol with a font.
I follow Brand New and am completely overjoyed by some of the logos the site and its community bring to my attention. Even the ones I dont personally like aesthetically.
I guess my final point being even if the landmines of the projects and the clients, target audience etc, the merits dont seem to out weigh the final solution. Its a green circle with some type.
Just my two cents.
On Jul.03.2008 at 03:02 PM
Christian Palino’s comment is:
I believe some individuals are equating simple with simplistic. This logo is clearerly the prior and not the latter. A comparison was noted with Euronews employing a circle -- an example that helps illustrate the difference between simple and simplistic. Euronews' circle requires the viewer to stretch the syntax or semantics to fit eachother somehow whereas employing a green circle for Planet Green maps clearly and immediately without any stretch.
Open clearly uncovered an opportunity here to "...make the biggest statement [they] could with the simplest possible solution" which they took advantage of. And as for the timeline of the project, as Armin mentioned there is much more involved than just the ideation process of any single idea. As for that idea, some good ideas take days and months to develop, others come in 15 seconds -- in the end, this makes little difference outside of the branding project itself.
On Jul.03.2008 at 03:08 PM
Mr Posen’s comment is:
Well Armin, I have designed identities for large US television networks, and 6 months is extremely generous.
My experience is two months from start to delivery.
The entertainment industry is an impatient one.
On Jul.03.2008 at 03:18 PM
teampahl’s comment is:
what will they tell smaller companys that have already adopted this as thier logo?
http://www.greencirclepartners.com/
On Jul.03.2008 at 03:21 PM
teampahl’s comment is:
or even the "green dot" logo and product mark.
On Jul.03.2008 at 03:25 PM
Armin’s comment is:
> Well Armin, I have designed identities for large US television networks, and 6 months is extremely generous.
My experience is two months from start to delivery.
From briefing to launch? Unless I see a real-life example I remain skeptical. Happy to eat my words if such is the case : )
On Jul.03.2008 at 03:33 PM
Steve’s comment is:
I prefer shape logos that get me drunk.
On Jul.03.2008 at 05:11 PM
David’s comment is:
not really sure what you guys are looking for, nike is a check mark with some type, mcdonalds is an m with some type, while i understand the 'levels' that H&R work on its still a green block with some type.
point being the larger the brand the simpler the solution should be in my option so that it can work across the plethora of uses its going to needs to fit in and to be memorable amongst a ton of other logos trying to do too much to get our attention.
now as far as the timeline, why is anyone even talking about this, you all sound like you are trying to say that the company ripped off its client, which is extremely offensive, i don't care whether they did the logo in 2 hours if the client agreed to a 6 month process then so be it, having worked in an agency with 12 designers and having working by myself im sure the client was informed throughout the whole process and the agency/team didn't just show up on day 179 and say here's your logo, and im sure that those 6 months wasnt jsut spent on the identity, it was mostly likely exploring the entire branding and how best to deploy everything... anyway my 5 cents
On Jul.03.2008 at 05:59 PM
decksnap’s comment is:
I never knew the planet was so boring! groan.
On Jul.03.2008 at 06:12 PM
Amanda’s comment is:
Davekos FTW.
On Jul.03.2008 at 06:58 PM
Mr Posen’s comment is:
When designing a logo for the media industry, simplicity is a good strategy for differentiation,though simplicity alone, does not make a great logo (see HSN)
Emily Charette’s comment is:
Brave. Brave designers and Braver clients.
This identity looks great and leaves something to the imagination -- so refreshing when print/digital technology allows us to spell everything out and our clients beg for layer upon layer of hit-you-over-the-head-messaging. Nice work.
On Jul.03.2008 at 08:32 PM
Mr Posen’s comment is:
I agree Emily, when I look at the mess above, I think it's a brave move, well done Open!
Stuart McCoy’s comment is:
Armin, perhaps you should read your own interview again:
"SS: We came up with that logo idea very quickly after we first heard from Planet Green. Serifcan Ozcan, one of the designers here at Open, first thought of the green dot right away. We spent a lot of time coming up with reasons why they had to pick it, but surprisingly they went for it without much hesitation. Once they did, we had a lot more work to do (see below)."
That tells me that while it might take some people 6 months to design, develop and cultivate a logo for a client such as this, Open did not take 6 months to design this one. They took a couple hours to execute the design and spent the rest of the time to bullshit the client into buying it. Looking through the Open web site I don't see it that much of a stretch for them to draw a circle and call it a day. Their work has a couple well designed logos (WNYC and Bravo) but there are others that fail in some of the same ways this logo does; their uncomfortable contrast of styles and shapes don't mix well for logos like Planet Green and the Lowell Historic Board. Many of their logos use typical sans serif typefaces slapped next to a logo mark and little more.
This, sadly, is the direction a lot of people seem to be taking towards logo design these days. The assumption seems to be that sans serif and all lowercase is all it takes to make a logo. The craft of working with type faces and working the logo mark into the mix are all taking a backseat to making the logo as flat as possible so they don;t have to think too hard on how to make a good logo work in multiple mediums. It's a cop-out, nothing more. Logo designers such as Doyald Young (www.doyaldyoung.com) are a dying breed and it’s really sad to see.
There is one good thing I’ll say about the Planet Green logo. At least they didn’t make the green circle a sphere. Thank God for small miracles I suppose.
On Jul.03.2008 at 09:47 PM
Ampersanderson’s comment is:
I guess that using a green circle as a simplistic pseudo identity won't work anymore will it?
Or maybe I should just work at Open...
On Jul.03.2008 at 10:03 PM
Dale’s comment is:
I love Open's work on GOOD Magazine, but, sorry, no. This seems to be going for "daringly simplistic," but ends up as "banal." It animates well, but then, bouncing dots have a storied history as animation motifs, don't they? Bores the shit out of me as a print logo.
The chances of this becoming a classic logo? Slim.
And, typographically, the relationship between the lowercase p and g strikes me as really awkward.
On Jul.04.2008 at 01:06 AM
rahadian prajna paramita’s comment is:
hmm... simple and... just can not find the right words...
I agree with Mr. Posen's comment, he explain it better.
Frank’s comment is:
A green circle is a green circle is a green circle.
This is as ridiculous as can be.
It's generic, it's not unique, the mark can not stand on its own -> this is not even a logo.
It's just a green circle.
Yeah, a green circle might be a good symbol for "green globe" but that alone doesn't make it a good logo.Like someone else said earlier, simple logos are great but only when they're simple AND clever AND unique AND can stand on their own.Simplicity itself means nothing when not executed in a proper manner.
It seems people lately worship logos like this because they think it's somehow "radical" and "new" for an agency to deliver work like that; what most seem to forget is that while sometimes a certain approach by an agency might indeed be radical this doesn't mean anything for the actual quality of the logo.The only question all boils down to at the end of the day is:
Does this logo work as logos should ?
This one clearly doesn't.
Geez, i hope the Emperor's New Clothes era on here soon comes to an end.It's beyond me why so many on here are so willing to buy into any rationale that is thrown at them, no matter how ridiculous it may be.
On Jul.04.2008 at 08:49 AM
kristen’s comment is:
Yes, there are plenty of logos that use simple geometric shapes. And yes, there is often a fine line between simplicity (or minimalism) and banality, but I do think Open nailed this logo. I've watched the tv station several times now, and the logo fits the overall branding and direction of the channel very well. Anything more complicated would have seemed extraneous. Extraneous + eco-friendly don't mix.
On Jul.04.2008 at 10:46 AM
Frank’s comment is:
One addition:
Of what use is a logos' icon/mark if it's not distinctive ?
Why not losing it altogether and just keep the wordmark?
You see, the purpose of a logo is not just to work in its familiar brand environment (tv station in this case) but to work in a whole bunch of situations.So what is left if you take away the wordmark for some reason ? Just a green circle.
Sorry but again, this "logo" is so not working as a logo, no matter how nice it might look on the channel.
On Jul.04.2008 at 11:01 AM
I want my Circle back!’s comment is:
I annoys me that Planet Green can TM a green circle, who said it's theirs to take.
Arrogant.
On Jul.04.2008 at 11:03 AM
damon’s comment is:
I like it ok, but it needs something more.
just something unique and definitive that would make it more unique....it's clean and ultra simple, which is good, but in clean and ultra simple there is still room for unique.
not 100% sold.
Von Glitschka’s comment is:
I bought a pack of these logos at Office Depot.
On Jul.05.2008 at 05:22 AM
Matheus’s comment is:
This is not even close to a real logotype
it's text with a circle, that's not branding, Im sorry but this just isn't.
And they cannot trademark circles.
On Jul.05.2008 at 04:19 PM
Goffredo Puccetti’s comment is:
I loved the way designer Matthew Anderson uses the green dot on its material.That is clever and nice.
On the other hand, taking a green dot and claim it's a logomark is nonsense as Von Glitschka’s example brilliantly demonstrates.
Just my two cents.
felix sockwell’s comment is:
And they (clients) cannot trademark circles.
Good logic. And Apple can't trademark apples. Do you think this client would delete the type?
Context people, context! Oh, I mean context... and lawyers.
On Jul.05.2008 at 07:38 PM
Jenuesse’s comment is:
Well Felix there is a huge difference between an Apple and a circle.
One is a singular, customized and unique form, the other is a circle.
And yes, PG have already used the symbol without logotype, see video above.
On Jul.05.2008 at 09:12 PM
Gm’s comment is:
The only thing I'm not 100% sold on is the typography. I have no problems whatsoever about them using a green circle as a graphic mark, just as I had no problems with the white circle a few weeks back.
I find the P and G butting into one another quite unpleasant. I'd love to see/hear their reasoning as to why this type is range left ragged right. It's practically BEGGING to be just the opposite!?
On Jul.07.2008 at 05:18 AM
Frank’s comment is:
Hmm, i wonder what european news channel "Euronews" thinks of the PG logo:
See, this happens when agencies think they act "radical" by using generic symbols...
On Jul.07.2008 at 09:03 AM
Jw’s comment is:
I like the logo, but actually dislike the channel. Apparently "green" design means you build a million-dollar second home using recycled materials. At least, that's what I'm getting from their programming line-up.
On Jul.07.2008 at 09:06 AM
Patrick Sénécal’s comment is:
My thoughts would best be expressed by this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9nkyHg-i_Q
Anonymous’s comment is:
My snide "nice, but needs one more tweak" image:
My snide "OMG IT REMINDES OF OF:" image:
Darrel’s comment is:
My snide "nice, but needs one more tweak" image:
Jon Dascola’s comment is:
Love the simplicity of the mark. What I admire more than the lock up itself is the fact that they sold it to the network. Very MadMen I hope.
On Jul.07.2008 at 05:23 PM
Stuart McCoy’s comment is:
I want to retract one of my comments concerning the 3D aspect of the logo. I saw a spot this weekend or Planet Green and they DID create a 3D on-air logo for some advertising.
On Jul.07.2008 at 06:31 PM
Ampersanderson’s comment is:
I should clarify my comment from earlier…
I agree with Christian when he calls attention to the difference between simple and simplistic. This is a case of the prior and I honestly appreciate the clarity of this logo.
On Jul.07.2008 at 10:35 PM
Dale’s comment is:
Thanks, Darrel, for demonstrating so persuasively that Open's typography sucks. After the simple change you made (a few posts up-thread), the wordmark suddenly feels less awkward and amateurish.
I even feel less hostile towards the dot.
What's sad about this "logo" is that it's only satisfying as an animation motif. Useless as a static logo...and I find the shift in graphic-design priorities that it represents depressing.
On Jul.08.2008 at 12:09 AM
rico’s comment is:
Ditto on Darrel's revised type lockup. The flush right/ragged left version feels so much more natural and less forced. It also anchors the dot and makes the entire logo feel more like a solid unit.
I can't add anything more to the general sentiments that the dot is very uninspired and too simplistic. Feels like a punt more than a groundbreaking mark. Just my 2 cents....
On Jul.08.2008 at 02:00 AM
Armin’s comment is:
> What's sad about this "logo" is that it's only satisfying as an animation motif. Useless as a static logo...
Good thing that, you know, this logo lives on TV where, you know, it can animate and stuff.
On Jul.08.2008 at 05:48 AM
Gm’s comment is:
a) When did the logotype / symbol relationship start being referred to as a lockup? What gives? One person uses it and now it's a universal term? Or is it an American term?
b) When I said I would love to hear the reasons that they DIDN'T right align the type, it's because I'm not a presumptuous twit who is stupid enough to think that Designing consists of making aesthetically pleasing shapes and colours on a blog. Wake up people.
On Jul.08.2008 at 06:53 AM
Darrel’s comment is:
"Or is it an American term?"
It's a printer's term.
On Jul.08.2008 at 10:45 AM
Rico’s comment is:
Use whatever term you like Gm. Is there a graphic designer's dictionary that I'm not aware of? Perhaps we should all go back to using the term "font" in it's original meaning as well, ie. a specific size and weight of a specific typeface. I think when you say type lockup or word mark, most designers know what you're referring to.
I think it's a presumptuous twit who thinks that any logo is above reproach and criticism by fellow designers. We all learn what works and what perhaps doesn't work as well by discussing the process and options that might have been explored. I don't think anyone here thinks that their blog entry is going to change the outcome, it's merely an exercise in learning from, and discussing, the mistakes (and triumphs) of others.
On Jul.08.2008 at 02:49 PM
Mark’s comment is:
Von Glitschka’s comment is:
I bought a pack of these logos at Office Depot.
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha, damn that's a good one! spot on comment, SPOT ON!
theres something that's missing in this logo, the typeface is just blah, doesn't stick out, and the placement next to the circle? unoriginal, seriously it needs fixing, it just looks awkward, and the color choice? I've seen better green.
It's not like it needs something to be added on, more like, the arrangement of the elements, needs a bit more tweaking, it doesn't look like a whole logo more like two separate elements trying to fit together.
On Jul.08.2008 at 03:28 PM
Mark’s comment is:
on the other hand, the mic flag is simply brilliant, simplicity at it's best. :)
On Jul.08.2008 at 03:31 PM
Frank’s comment is:
Good thing that, you know, this logo lives on TV where, you know, it can animate and stuff.
Too bad that, you know, it also lives somewhere else like, you know, on their website for instance where in its static glory it looks just like the logo from a competitor within the same industry.
PG:
http://planetgreen.discovery.com/
EN:
On Jul.08.2008 at 03:32 PM
Mark’s comment is:
hmmm it seems I'm leaning toward liking the top placement of the logo better, it seems more unexpected. (In My Opinion)
On Jul.08.2008 at 03:37 PM
Anonymous’s comment is:
It has to reproduce on their WEBSITE!? Shit, they're screwed...
On Jul.08.2008 at 06:20 PM
Ronny’s comment is:
Well the world wide web has animation capabilities as well...der
On Jul.09.2008 at 11:47 AM
Bruce’s comment is:
Seems to be a hotly contested debate on whether this is good work or not. I personally don't care for it, but the fact that it has fired up so many, I have to say its doing something right. I don't care for the font, and wish the TM was tucked in with the word next to the 'n' in green.
On Jul.09.2008 at 08:02 PM
Edward’s comment is:
Darrel's tweak is spot on. Get it? "Spot" on? *cricket chirping* Thank you, Thank you, I'll be here all week.
On Jul.15.2008 at 11:27 AM
Jane’s comment is:
It's...well...a little boring.
On Aug.26.2008 at 01:36 PM
Comments in Brand New, V1.0 have been closed.
