PDA

View Full Version : A new and improved logo???



Business Attorney
03-01-2010, 11:01 PM
I just got an email from Caribou Coffee touting their new logo. I have a strong reaction but I'd be interested to hear what the designers on the forum think before I voice my opinion.

The new logo (as well as the old logo which can be seen in the header) is announced here (http://www.cariboucoffee.com/page/1/newbou.jsp).

rezzy
03-01-2010, 11:51 PM
For me the new logo, has lost its identity. For instance, the animal isnt nearly as clear as it was before, and I assume that was their intention.

I also noticed something else, its facing the opposite direction and their is a color change to the word coffee. This might show an change in focus, not sure what caribou sells, as I rarely buy coffee of those sorts. But its interesting to see what they are highlighting.

I think the previous logo expressed more of an out doorsy feel, then this new one. I believe it was the combination of font type, the animal and color scheming.

Steve B
03-02-2010, 06:07 AM
I'm not a designer, but I like the new one a bit better. The ''o" in the font style of the first logo didn't look like an "o" to me.

I can't imagine it's going to sell them a single additional coffee bean however. Or, whatever they sell, I've never heard of them before.

Spider
03-02-2010, 08:57 AM
The new one looks more modern to me, and I like it. However, the image has lost its caribou qualities. The only recognizable piece is the horn, which indicates that the "animal" is jumping downwards and to the left (instead of upwards, as before.) Whereas, the image looks to me more like a man with an Andean headdress jumping upwards to the right.

I really like the way the two spoons have created the body and the legs, no matter which way the image is facing.

vangogh
03-02-2010, 11:42 AM
I like the new one better. I've never been big on literal images in logos, which is what the old caribou image is. I like the more abstract of the new one. I don't think it's important that people can absolutely recognize the imagery as a caribou. It's pretty obvious when you see it next to the word caribou anyone.

What I really like better about the new one is the font choices. With the old logo the letter 'o' looks like a 9 and I just don't like the old font. I think the softer edges of the new font work better than the harder edges of the old font.

Business Attorney
03-02-2010, 02:12 PM
Well, I see I am outnumbered here. I don't like it. I think if they didn't want a caribou at all, that would have been fine. Or if they simply wanted an abstract caribou. But this one, forced around a coffee bean body, does nothing for me.

KristineS
03-02-2010, 03:04 PM
I'm not fond of the old logo, which I think is kind of old fashioned, but I'm not big on the new logo either. The new one is just too abstract. If you weren't familiar with the old logo, I don't think you'd be able to make any connection to the new logo at all.

vangogh
03-02-2010, 03:21 PM
David how familiar are people with the old logo? If you only saw the image of the caribou would people think of the brand?

What might actually work best is taking the old image of the caribou/crest and use it with the new font. The font is the main reason I like the newer logo.

Business Attorney
03-02-2010, 06:53 PM
David how familiar are people with the old logo?

According to the company's website, Caribou Coffee was founded in 1992, is headquartered in Minneapolis, and has over 500 stores in 16 states.

They have probably been in Chicago about 5 years. There is one on the first floor of my office building, one in the train station and another one that I walk by on my way to and from the train, so I see the old logo a lot.

I would guess that the company is planning to expand to more southern climes and thought the "North Woods" look was too restrictive. Of course, the word "Caribou" in the company's name doesn't exactly convey palm trees and sunny beaches, so they can only escape the North Woods to a limited extent.

I agree that the font is an improvement, though I think that the "u" on the end of the word "Caribou" may look like an "n" or even an "re" to someone who isn't familiar with the brand and is seeing the name for the first time.

I also liked the shape of the old "shield" (which wasn't really a shield at all) with the new shield. The new shape just seems so ordinary, while the lopsided old shield was very distinctive.

vangogh
03-02-2010, 07:14 PM
I can understand why they think moving away from a north woods look is a good idea, though like you suggest the name is going to permanently keep them there. I like the old shield better too. I guess what they're trying to do is move toward something a little more abstract with image to get away from their northern roots, but again like you said that's not going to happen given the name.

The more I look at the logos, the more I think the new font with the old image would work the best.

cbscreative
03-03-2010, 11:54 AM
I didn't like the old font at all, so that needed a change, but I don't think the new script is all that great either. I think the coffee bean graphic worked into the new design was clever, but I didn't notice that until it was pointed out. Overall, my initial reaction was not favorable. I can't really claim to like the new design. And I also agree that the name pretty much binds them to a "nothern" image no matter what they do with the graphic.

The write up sounded like ad agency snob speak to me too. I guess that sells, or sells the execs, but I find it rather stuffy. When I read something like that, I can't help but think, "Yeah right, I'm sure everybody who sees it will be thinking exactly the same thing" (sarcasm). I can't help but conjur up unflattering mental images of the people who write like that. Maybe I'm just cruel, but I have to wonder how the general public responds to that kind of ad speak.

Paul Elliott
04-07-2010, 08:46 PM
I'm too late to see the old style, so I can only comment on the new one in a general sense.

I agree with David that the typeface is too stylized to be instantly "readable." Until someone pointed out that it was a leaping Caribou with the spoons forming the body, I didn't get the picture. (Didn't read the blurb, either.) That just proves I'm no artist. <weak smile>

<SET SOAPBOX MODE = ON>
Logos should be elegantly simple to identify and serve as a visual anchor. Look at the IBM, Nike, and Adidas, for examples. They should not attempt to "convey" a message. They should not call studied attention to themselves, such as this new one. If the reader studies the logo, the artist has lost the subliminal battle to get the reader to anchor, identify, and move on in a single fluid movement.

Instead the "artwork" becomes the focus--game over. Well, not necessarily over, but the effect is to "fork" the readers attention in a way that is NOT desirable for the fluid flow to the desired action.

True, there are times you want to interrupt that flow, but at the logo is not one of them.

We, as marketers, want to control the subliminal flow and response. A "logo stutter" is not helpful to that process.
<SET SOAPBOX MODE = OFF>

Paul

vangogh
04-08-2010, 10:51 AM
On the other hand if someone takes extra time to study your logo and think about it, then it's much more likely they'll remember it later. If they haven't attached the brand to the logo then remembering it won't mean anything, but if they have made that association, it's not necessarily bad for them to take extra time with your logo.

huggytree
04-08-2010, 11:25 AM
hard to read...i wouldnt have any font in my logo which i couldnt clearly read in less than 1 second...i wouldnt use this logo