FIRST Logo Redesign?

[bEdhEd]

So I know most of you have seen the 2016 game hint for "Stronghold." This has nothing to do with the game, and it seems like it may be an exciting one!

This is about the little changes in the logo that I noticed, which is actually the thing that stood out most to me. To those with less attention to graphic design details, they look alike at a glance. Upon further inspection there are quite a few differences from the balance in composition, the difference in the triangle and square layering, the thickness of the shapes, and the font of the text.

I am a mixed media illustrator and a graphic design amateur (I've worked a lot on 701's branding), this is my personal opinion as a visual artist:

The second logo (2) is my choice right now for the best looking one. Now, I'm not holding an "older is better" bias, because I think logo (2) was a great improvement from the very first logo (1) from a graphic design perspective. Maybe it will grow on me, but logo (3) seems a bit too "cartoony" for my taste, if that makes any sense. I absolutely love the sleek design of logo (2) and it fits the whole high tech image that comes with a program like FIRST. Logo (3), while not much different, has a bit too much balance in the shapes to have an interesting and pleasing composition. Note how the triangle in (2) is placed higher than the one in (3), giving logo (2) a bit more character than the flatter arrangement in logo (3).

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying logo (3) is a bad design, It's actually alright, but I just think logo (2) has a more pleasing composition and should stay.

With all this analysis that some may think is overboard, we need to realize that all these changes are made for a reason, and this is what graphic designers have to consider when creating images for branding. If this new logo is what FIRST is going to stick with, then I will have to get used to it, because I think that logo (2) was absolutely perfect, and fit FIRST's image and vision better than logo (3). Although FIRST is about fun, I think the new logo looks a little too "playful," while logo (2) looks sleek and timeless.

These are my views only, not of anyone on my team, and I would like others to share what they think. Do you like it or not? Was it a necessary change, or was the then current logo just fine?

I know the logo holds no ground on the ultimate goal of FIRST as a program for inspiring young minds, but I just wanted to know if anyone else has put any thought into this like I have. Branding and graphic design are very important to me.

[hectorcastillo]

Yeah, I like the second one better, too.

[bEdhEd]

Originally Posted by hectorcastillo

Yeah, I like the second one better, too.

Also, the second logo is what's on the front of my custom autographed FIRST hat that I wear to every event. The second logo text is on the back, as you can see in my WAI pic. I've had plans for a while to make a second one that isn't autographed by Dean and Woodie so that precious piece of memorabilia won't get ruined. If this logo sticks I'll have to opt to have the new logo on it. This isn't bad though. My two hats just wouldn't be identical. I never expected the second logo to change anytime soon since it seemed so perfect.

[asid61]

The only difference that really strikes me is the larger lettering in FIRST. Apart from that, I don't see it having a huge impact on how I live my life.
Interesting find though. I didn't notice it.

[cadandcookies]

Considering how little respect FIRST seems to have for its own branding guidelines, I also wouldn't be surprised if they let Disney do a slightly different version just for the trailer.

[bEdhEd]

Originally Posted by cadandcookies

Considering how little respect FIRST seems to have for its own branding guidelines, I also wouldn't be surprised if they let Disney do a slightly different version just for the trailer.

Did Disney actually have a part in this, like a corporate partnership/sponsorship? I was reading the other thread about the game, and Disney was mentioned in that thread as well.

[Rachel Lim]

I didn't notice the change in the logo as quickly as the change in the font. Maybe it's just me, but they seemed to have gone from a fairly timeless font similar to Helvetica to something more like Arial.* The change in the R was the first thing that struck me (which was why I thought of those two fonts), but the difference in the S is also similar, although Arial doesn't end that way. My first thought was that it's almost more childish looking (for lack of a better phrase). Ending the S stroke vertically instead of horizontally seems to imply that you didn't take the time to finish it, as does the straight R tail.

I guess I don't really see the point in trying to oversimplify logo fonts, but if Google did it, FIRST could too...


About the logo itself though, I did notice the change in the square overlapping the triangle instead of the other way around. It seems to make the logo point backwards instead of forwards. I wouldn't see it if they weren't next to each other, but having something point forwards seems more in line with the "change the future" message.


All that said, I don't have a strong opinion either way and am honestly fine with the new one if they choose that. Although I am curious why they'd change it since there doesn't seem to be anything major to improve on.


*I believe the old font was something similar to Univers Pro 85 ExtraBlack Oblique or the Univers Con and the new one more like Extension RR ExtraBold Italic

[StevenB]

Yeah, I noticed the logo right away too. I don't think they're actually changing it - they'd make a big announcement to that effect if they were, and it would be integrated into the new beta site.

[bEdhEd]

Originally Posted by StevenB

Yeah, I noticed the logo right away too. I don't think they're actually changing it - they'd make a big announcement to that effect if they were, and it would be integrated into the new beta site.

This is what I'm hoping is the case. I've looked through the beta site and the logo is still the same, but maybe the beta site was constructed before the logo change in the video? Like you, I also speculate that this logo could just be for the video, but with big changes recently, I wouldn't be surprised if it were the new one permanently (until another re-design). I just noticed it actually looks like what logo 1 and 2 would be combined into one design.

[Brian Sherman]

From what I heard, the logo is still being finalized with new branding coming in mid-November. I saw that logo on previous non-public material but was surprised it was included publicly for the first time in the teaser.

[Jon Stratis]

Originally Posted by Brian Sherman

From what I heard, the logo is still being finalized with new branding coming in mid-November. I saw that logo on previous non-public material but was surprised it was included publicly for the first time in the teaser.

Same here - I've heard that there is new branding coming with an updated logo, that it's been in work at HQ for a while. Unfortunately, I haven't been in a position to see if myself yet . It's probably safe to say that the changes to the logo in the video reflect the new Branding direction.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by cadandcookies

Considering how little respect FIRST seems to have for its own branding guidelines, I also wouldn't be surprised if they let Disney do a slightly different version just for the trailer.

FIRST doesn't have to follow the Logo Use guidelines. Those are just for those of us outside of FIRST who want to use it.

[natejo99]

I'm really interested to see this new direction from FIRST. I'm not a fan of the new logo, but I'm open to see what they come up with.

[dag0620]

It's clear the logo is different. What isn't clear is the intent. It could be a shift in logo for rebranding, it could be a shift in logo just for game related materials to match the art style of the game, or it could be a simple oversight in the production of materials.

I hope that is the second or third possibility, and not the first. The current official logo (#2 in the OP) is still the cleanest and sharpest. #3 really doesn't do anything to further advance the brand, unlike the shift from #1 to #2.

Also, the #2 logo is on EVERYTHING. Yes logos can be changed, but rebranding is typically expensive. This is especially true with the amount of reusable branded items FIRST, the districts, and teams have.

Here's to hoping FIRST Marketing reveals more about the situation soon.

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

FIRST doesn't have to follow the Logo Use guidelines. Those are just for those of us outside of FIRST who want to use it.

Technically this is correct. However it is still good practice for any organization to follow it's own branding guidelines. It doesn't really help the brand when they release materials that go against that consistency.

[BlueLipstick]

For some reason it really bothers me that the blue square overlaps the triangle and is on top. That might just be me though.