Logos, who doesn't love them? Probably you. Who does love them? Me. That's who.
From the branding on packaging, to the banners at building sites, to documents and certificates, a logo should be about communicating the organisation as quickly as possible. A logo is different to a wordmark, though the two might have very large overlaps. Ideally a logo should have no words at all and is a bit like a flag in that respect but a logo is not a flag, so the usual rules of flags do not apply.
I think that there are five questions that should be asked of a logo:
1 - is the thing distinctive?
2 - is it recognisable at a distance?
3 - it is relevant to the organisation?
4 - it is simple?
5 - is it able to be shown in colour or monochrome?
If a logo does all of those things, then it is probably a good logo.
However, Government logos are a special kind of breed. How do you represent a government department or an entire state or nation in a hurry? It is a vexed question. We have 8 sub-national governments in Australia; all of which have their own logos and branding. Some are successful; some are hideous. I will now give out grades according to whim and whimsy.
ACT - Australian Capital Territory - F
Disappointing.
Starting off this house of fun is the ACT Government with their shield in a black ring. Why? Yes, this is the same shield which appears on the flag but it also doesn't work there either. From a distance their flag looks like a unidentifiable blob on a yellow field. From a distance, the logo looks like an unidentifiable blob inside a ring. It looks like a giant zero; which is exactly the mark that this deserves. I guess that's prescient?
This logo is two swans flanking a shield with crossed swords and crown, with a castle, portcullis, and rose; topped with yet another portcullis and crown, with who knows what behind it. This is heraldry galore; which is likely excellent on official stationery and documents, but not as a logo. The rules for logos are similar to flags but not identical but still, this is not simple.
Heraldry works for official looking documents because you want it to lend an air of permanence and constance to the document. Usually heraldry comes with explanations for all of the elements but that matters not a jot for a logo. A logo is about being hard, fast, and mechanical, in getting a message across as quickly as possible. Mercedes-Benz, looks like a propellor on an aircraft because it was an aero engine company. Channel 9 has a big 9 and nine dots. ME Bank has two letters and a smiley mouth in a ring. One of the general tests of a good logo is it it can be used as an icon on a computer desktop because this does the same kind of thing as looking at it from far away. This fails that test. If you can't tell what it is, then it's bad. At thumbnail size, I can not tell what it is supposed to be at all.
What should the ACT Government have gone for? Personally I would have gone for a logo that looks like a Benzene Ring in Chemistry. Make use of the Hexagon of London Circuit and the big roundabout at the centre of the city. Maybe I would have doubled down on the word "act" and contracted the name of the government to GovACT.
Be distinctive - no
Be recognisable at a distance - no
Be relevant - no
Be simple - no
Be able to be shown in colour or monochrome - no
0/5
NSW - New South Wales - A
Dear NSW Government,
You have understood the assignment and have done well. This is an A grade.
Love, Rollo.
Dear Everyone Else,
Does it really matter that this doesn't actually look like a waratah? No. The purpose of a logo is that it can be seen at an instant and people instantly know what it is. The logo designers who made this, have made a thing which even at small scale looks like what it is, and at large scale still looks bold. This logo has appeared on stationery, on banners for infrastructure, on trains and buses, and it works on all of them from the very big to the very small.
The waratah as the NSW State Flower might not be an obvious thing to use a logo but yet again this proves that if you use a thing often enough and keep the branding consistent, it doesn't really matter what you use. If the English Rugby team can put a rose on their shirts, which serves the triple purpose of reminding us that the English Rose is a thing, that the House of Lancaster won the War of the Roses, and that flowers are the best way to show peace through violence, then the NSW Waratah is excellent. This should also serve as demonstration to New Zealand that their silver fern should be the national flag.
Be distinctive - tick
Be recognisable at a distance - tick
Be relevant - tick
Be simple - tick
Be able to be shown in colour or monochrome - tick
You don't have to like the way that this looks. I personally think that it looks wrong but as a logo it is excellent. This is objectively a good logo that does what it intends to do.
5/5
NT - Northern Territory - A+
Dear NT Government,
You have also understood the assignment and have done well. This is an A+ grade.
Love, Rollo.
Dear Everyone Else,
Few people outside of the Northern Territory will know what the X is but they will recognise it because it is used both as the state corporate logo as well as the device on the away field on the Northern Territory flag. By the way, I'm also handing out an A+ to the flag as well. Exactly how many logos and flags in the world can get away with using brown as the main colour? Not many. Yet not only is this reflective of the red dust which is literally everywhere in the state, but it is so very obviously Northerny Territoryey that it can not help but yell what it is.
Yet again we have another flower on the flag and the logo but in this case, we have a Commonwealth Star hidden in the interspace. I do not know if this is going to change should the Northern Territory ever become a state but I hope that it does not.
The logo is bold and clean, works well at a distance, appears on stationery and buses. Yet again we prove that for a logo to work, it needs to communicate its design language in a hurry and this does so excellently. Well done.
Be distinctive - tick
Be recognisable at a distance - tick
Be relevant - tick
Be simple - tick
Be able to be shown in colour or monochrome - tick
5/5
QLD - Queensland - D
This is different to the ACT's logo in that it is in fact a logo but beyond that, this is a real head-scratcher.
Queensland generally doubles down on the letter Q as much as possible. Queensland Rugby League and Union both use derivations of Qs in their logos. I think that this is supposed to be a kind of stylised Q but why it has four tails , I do not know. Are the wiggles supposed to be rivers? Are they supposed to be rays from the sun? What exactly?
This logo looks like it is a corporate leftover from the 1990s when this was both trendy and unnecessary. This logo is soulless and lifeless. Take away the word mark and this could very easily be the logo for Origin Energy. I can see this very much being used by an electricity company who wants to promote themselves as harnessing solar energy. In that instance, this could be an O.
The other major question that I have here, is why is this predominantly blue? Queensland Rugby League, Rugby Union, the cricket team, all sport maroon as their colour. Quite rightly the number plates are now maroon letters on a white field too. Even Castlemaine XXXX Breweries succumbed to the proper order of things, when they changed the colour on the labels of XXXX Bitter from yellow to maroon to support the Rugby League State of Origin team and never ever went back. Why is this blue?
If you have a logo which looks like the wrong letter, looks like it could be for the wrong thing, and is the wrong colour, then you've got something which is triple wrong and overflowing with wrongability. Yes, logos can be anything they like but if they look wrong, then they fail. This logo fails at communicating Queensland but as a logo, it is certainly one. D-grade. This is a pass mark but it is not good. Please see me after class.
Be distinctive - tick
Be recognisable at a distance - no
Be relevant - no
Be simple - tick
Be able to be shown in colour or monochrome - no
2/5
SA - South Australia - B
South Australia appears to have seen the assignment and done as little work as they possibly could. They have taken the normal device from the field of their state flag, put some fancy words around it; then put a decorative ring around that. This roundel has made the mistake that it wants to be heraldry and can not take 'no' for an answer. This is a pity because it should have. This logo is forgettable but in a different way to Queensland.
The Piping Shrike is the official bird of South Australia and while this the logical step, it's just not particularly exciting. In the icon that appears on my screen, although it is small it is still recognisable as what it is. The Piping Shrike with its two wings raised, even at small sizes, is still obvious.
If you saw this on stationery, you would know instantly who this was from. In that respect, it does an excellent job at communicating South Australia in a hurry.
I totally get that South Australia wants to lean into its tricolor of Blue, Red, and Yellow (and indeed this is why the Adelaide Crows picked this as their jersey) but at thumbnail size, this is lost. In monochrome, this is just a ring like the ACTs logo.
This logo works, just in a rolling boredom way. Maybe that's what they are going for. It has been said that if you only have six months to live then move to Adelaide, because every day is like an eternity. I guess that's dependable?
Be distinctive - tick
Be recognisable at a distance - tick
Be relevant - tick
Be simple - no
Be able to be shown in colour or monochrome - tick
4/5
SA 2 - South Australia - A
This is from the South Australia Tourism Board and although it probably isn't used as a state logo, it could be and be used very very well.
This uses a stylised map of Australia, then highlights South Australia by using a series of devices that look like doorways. At very small sizes, and in monochrome, this works. It is very clever.
Why couldn't you use this as the government logo? This is ace.
Be distinctive - tick
Be recognisable at a distance - tick
Be relevant - tick
Be simple - tick
Be able to be shown in colour or monochrome - tick
5/5
Tas - Tasmania - B
This is clever; too clever.
This logo tries to convey a Tasmanian Tiger in the negative space; which I also suppose is to resemble the shape of the island itself. This is not quite as simple as New South Wales' logo or Victoria's but it is still quite quite good. I even like the hints of the Tasmanian Tiger's eyes and nose in black; as well as its ears in the negative space of the plants.
If someone turned this in as a term paper, you'd award them a Credit for a good effort but not necessarily a Distinction.
Be distinctive - tick
Be recognisable at a distance - tick
Be relevant - tick
Be simple - tick
Be able to be shown in colour or monochrome - tick
5/5
Vic - Victoria - A+
Dear Victorian Government,
You have also understood the assignment and have done well. This is an A+ grade.
Love, Rollo.
It kind of helps that Victoria has already been leaning into the "Big V" now for a very long time. The Victorian State of Origin Australian Rules Football team is called the "Big V"; the Melbourne Victory uses a "Big V" on its kit and was named "Victory" because it leans into the name of the state.
It kind of helps that the "Big V" as the capital letter of Victoria, looks like a triangle. Victoria has for a very long time, used a triangle V device on its number plates as the separator between the first and last three characters on the plates. They started out using the Southern Cross as device, and that is likely why this logo exists.
It kind of helps that the state of Victoria, also looks like a triangle. Kind of? Not really? Maybe?
This logo borrowed from the past, by using cloth that was already fit for purpose. The word mark "VIC" in the negative space is also excellent. As a flat matt device, it coverts to monochrome excellently. It can be used with or without the extension of the name; so also wins in that regard too.
The logo wins and wins and wins and wins. It is very rare that you can catch lightning in a bottle and sometimes the circumstances are such that what it obvious is what must be done. This logo is so excellent that it looks like it could have just fallen out of the sky because it is so so obvious. That is the point of a logo and why A is not enough.
Be distinctive - tick
Be recognisable at a distance - tick
Be relevant - tick
Be simple - tick
Be able to be shown in colour or monochrome - tick
5/5
WA - Western Australia - B
Western Australia started out as the "Swan River Colony". The colony was then granted the whole entire western part of the continent, when the colony of New South Wales was granted the whole entire eastern part of the continent. Almost since its inception, the colony and then the state of Western Australia has used derivations of the black swan as its branding. As a device, it is very very strong indeed. As a logo it is a wee bit complex.
As a logo, this is not nice. Heraldry looks impressive but as before, the more complex a thing is, the more it will be lost when made smaller. I am sure that the kangaroos as supporters, holding boomerangs; with a crown and whatever that floral flourish is, means something to someone but again, this is a logo. We do not need lots of stuff communicated.
However, there is a second part to this story.
Be distinctive - tick
Be recognisable at a distance - tick
Be relevant - tick
Be simple - no
Be able to be shown in colour or monochrome - tick
4/5
WA 2 - Western Australia - A+
The word mark here is much of a muchness but the sans-serif font is bold. The logo which is the same device as the centre of the standard government logo, is still very bold but even more so. Even as a tiny tiny thumbnail, this is so distinctive that you can still tell what it is. It helps that the device already was in black and white because the transition to monochrome is a fait accompli.
Be distinctive - tick
Be recognisable at a distance - tick
Be relevant - tick
Be simple - tick
Be able to be shown in colour or monochrome - tick
5/5
The undisputed winner of the logo competition here is the Northern Territory. Their seven petal flower and star is best in show. Victoria's derivation of a triangle/V is so simple as to be laughable and yet so very bold that it is excellent. The ACT's logo is objectively terrible and Queensland's while it is in fact a logo, is downright ugly. The one that I see the most, being the NSW Waratah thing, has been criticised because it doesn't look like a Waratah but I think that it is good enough. This is a logo, not a piece of fine art.
No comments:
Post a Comment