Function and purpose
A logo’s foremost duty is as an identifier, facilitating recognition and recall. To be memorable in our visually chaotic environment, it must be direct and distinctive. It should convey meaning, either communicating what an organisation does, or serving as an expression of its philosophy. A logo isn’t an entire brand, but it is the simplest manifestation of those beliefs.
A logo denotes ownership, associating all branded material with the same entity. Perceived authority begins with quality of representation. Does it look cheap or well made? Trustworthy or ill-considered? To signal credibility, a logo must be visually imposing and mentally reassuring.
Correctly addressed, these considerations can help position a group within a chosen landscape, shaping perception before we ever encounter a product or service.
The art of reduction
Unlike language, symbols relay information instantly, and our reaction is immediate. Often the first point of contact with an organisation, the logo is the first to face judgement as we form an opinion.
Brands are built around values, offerings and how the two are delivered. A logo represents this entire system, responsible (in part) for influencing associations, shaping the way we perceive that organisation.
However, a logo can’t alter reality. Ultimately its meaning is derived from that which it represents - the real life actions and performance of that organisation. These truths define public opinion, and that opinion is projected onto its representatives.
Visually representing abstract qualities is difficult, as is distilling broad ideas, messages and meaning into one simple mark. But it is not impossible. With the necessary skill, consideration and powers of perception, we can fulfil both the cognitive and technical requirements of a successful logo, given even the most difficult of subject matter.
Graphic design is rarely about one to one representation. Instead we convey meaning through abstraction and association in order to induce a feeling or allude to an idea, quality or attachment.
Methods of representation a logo can employ include:
- using simplified depiction or representation
- using form to imply a quality or association (fast, rugged, gentle, luxurious)
- using associations of existing tropes (heraldry and authority, people and humanity, foliage and sustainability) to lend credibility and meaning.
A designer proves their skill in the execution of a concept. The ability to take something complex and represent it sparingly demonstrates intelligence; reducing an idea to its simplest expression is the most direct form of communication.
Symbols that are powerful, memorable and inspiring have presence, clarity and simplicity in common. They often demonstrate restraint, purity of form and economy of material. At their best, they satisfy both optically and mentally, deftly merging concepts to form one effortless icon, or elegantly using negative space to layer images. Rams’ tenet that good design is as little design as possible rings true here – logos that communicate with minimal added geometry are regarded as the most impressive.
Technical considerations
The importance of simplicity is frequently stressed. While this is true, the simplest logo doesn’t equate to the best. Too simple and we sacrifice distinction and expression, too complex and legibility suffers.
Controlling density and negative space determine the logo’s weight, and how striking it appears. This in turn impacts its clarity and performance at scale. Legibility must be maintained regardless of application, automatically condemning the use of overly complex or delicate geometry. A logo’s silhouette should be definitive in and of itself, without dependency on further embellishment. Hiding behind colour or animation is no recourse for lack of substance.
Quality of geometry is equally important – uniformity where appropriate, smooth transitions and intersections between forms, and due consideration when resolving convergent shapes and sharp edges.
Successful logos exist on a spectrum of acceptable complexity. Within that exists an optimal range, yielding maximal impact and articulation. Balancing areas of detail and simplicity is an important consideration when assessing a logo’s overall weight, expression and visual impact.
Logos and symbols don’t exist in isolation – they are often combined with text in a lockup or required to sit with other elements. The imbalanced distribution of solids should be avoided, as should particularly long, thin footprints. Both of these factors result in awkward spacing when positioning a logo, combining it with text or displaying it in sequence.
Interestingly, a logo can fulfil every criteria mentioned so far, yet still appear underwhelming. This relates to the way we perceive value - If geometry is too predictable or easily attained there is no challenge or ingenuity in its creation.
Conversely, we instantly feel the value where a symbol is unexpected, intriguing and technically impressive, particularly when the means of construction isn’t immediately obvious.
Value proposition
Undoubtedly one of the most important assets an organisation owns, the logo bears significant responsibility. Done correctly, it is capable of providing exponential value over years, even decades. Done poorly it can cost millions in lost revenue and alienate audiences.
We can evaluate a logo’s success by assessing its potency as an identifier, control of public perception and its potential for longevity.
Louis Vuitton’s monogram canvas is a prime example, ranking very highly across all three parameters. Distinctive, widely revered and unchanged since its inception in 1896, this piece of graphic design has helped the French malletier protect its intellectual property, distinguish its products and generate billions in revenue for over a century.
Like any business expenditure, investing in design is about increasing returns. The caveat is that we are buying something of subjective value, quantified by human perception. When commissioning a logo, an organisation is essentially buying desire, trust, credibility, and other necessary associations required to successfully position a business within a sector.
Achieving these results however isn’t subjective. Creating an appropriate, successful logo is a logical process of consideration and problem solving, requiring a professional level of judgement, imagination and expertise.
A logo is like a vessel brands pour value into over time. It is a representation of their values and track record, appreciating chronologically with continued exposure and recognition. This is why changing a logo is highly sensitive for established organisations – it inevitably triggers a change in perception, requiring meticulous evaluation to control. Even updating an existing logo can alter public opinion, resulting in the perceived loss of heritage and emotional equity, and risking the very real loss of revenue and recognition.
Here a designer’s role involves reducing risk and maximising reward, crafting a trademark that will amplify and protect the brand’s integrity over time. The logo should be seen as a tool to create value and credibility, and help ensure the two are preserved. Provided business practices are sound, the return on investment is monumental.