AND DOES THE
DISTINCTION EVEN MATTER? EXPERTS MICHAEL BIERUT OF PENTAGRAM AND BRETT WICKENS
OF AMMUNITION WEIGH IN.
The misuse of the word
"logo" is one of those things that gets many design-minded people
practically purple-faced with anger (a sibling to debate over "fonts"
v. "typefaces"). A logo, they say, is not the same as a symbol, which in
turn is not the same as a combination mark.
So what's the difference? In brief: A logo is a
word, a symbol is a picture, and a combination mark is a PB&J mashing up the
two. But really, in most circumstances, using "logo" for everything
is just fine, say Pentagram's Michael Bierut andAmmunition Group's Brett Wickens. Just don't expect the pedants to like it.
Although most people call any emblem that has been
designed to visually represent a brand a logo, "logo" is usually
taken to be short for "logotype," which literally means "word
imprint" in Greek. This is why we sometimes call logotypes
"wordmarks." According to this line of thinking, the only true logos
are the ones that contain nothing but stylized letters, representing the
literal name of a company. In its curlicue cursive, the distinctive Coca-Cola
emblem is a logo. So is Paul Rand's Venetian Blind IBM wordmark . Other logos
include CNN, Sony, Samsung, Ray-Ban, Dell, NASA, Fed-Ex, and even Fast
Company. Basically, if you see something in a company's emblem that can't
be read, it's not strictly a logo. Or, at least, a logotype.
But logotypes have issues in a global economy.
Because they depend upon being read, logotypes for American companies might be
confusing to people who live in countries that don't use the Latin alphabet.
Sometimes, companies will modify their logotypes for different markets
accordingly: Coca-Cola, for example, maintains a stylistically consistent
logotype in many different alphabets. These days, though, many companies prefer
to take a more abstract approach, creating a universal symbol that abstractly
represents their brand. Apple's iconic fruit is such a symbol, as is Airbnb's new
sexual Rorschach test of an
symbol. Other examples of symbols include the Red Cross and Red Crescent emblems, the Shellgas station symbol, the Nike swoosh, and more.
Finally, there's the combination mark. These are
emblems that use a combination of both words and symbols to represent a company
or organization. McDonald's, Domino's Pizza, Starbucks, TiVo, AT&T: all
these companies use combination marks. Some companies use both logotypes and symbols,
depending on the context. Nike, for example, has both a logotype and a symbol,
which can be used to represent the company in different scenarios. The Nike
swoosh by itself might work on the side of a sneaker, whereas a combination of
the swoosh and the Nike logotype might look better on company letterhead, for
example.
Over the years, we here at Co.Design have had
plenty of commenters criticize us for using logo as a catchall term. But
really, the distinction is pedantic.
A symbol may not be the same thing as a logotype,
but abbreviating both logotypes and logomarks as "logos" is totally
logical, because both types of logo are meant to do the same thing. In fact,
symbols are often referred to logomarksfor just this reason. The distinction between a
symbol and a logomark might be useful to designers, who may want to pin down
what type of logo a client is looking for, or experts who are discussing the
distinction between logotypes and symbols academically. But 999 times out of
1,000, just saying "logo" is fine.
BUT 999 TIMES OUT OF 1,000, JUST SAYING "LOGO" IS FINE.
"I don’t think the distinction is that
important," Brett Wickens, partner and identity specialist atAmmunition Group told me. "Almost everyone refers to the
emblematic visualization of a brand as a "logo," even though it might
be a symbol, a stylized word, or a combination of both. For a designer, what
really matters is deciding what’s most useful, and what’s likely to convey the
right attitude and distinction for the brand."
Pentagram partner Michael Bierut agrees.
"Everyone seems to have come up with their own definitions for this,"
he says. "The distinction only matters when you’re in a situation where
you need to refer to these overall identity elements precisely."
Don't expect the people who want to distinguish
between logos and symbols to go away, though. Wickens says that while
"logo" is a perfectly fine catchall term for an emblematic
visualization of a brand, new techniques in identity design are creating even more
kinds of logos (and more names!), such as responsive
logosthat change depending upon
the ways they are used.
"With emblems that change based on
circumstance, we see new terms like 'fluid' or 'dynamic identity' starting to
emerge, and I’m sure a whole new lexicon will spring up around that," he
says. There's a new world of logo design right around the corner to be pedantic
about!
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario