Logo redesigns, and the rebranding efforts around them, often go horribly wrong. But sometimes, the right designer and the right attitude gets results. Jessica Hische describes for Co.Design’s Belinda Lanks how she gave Mailchimp a new lick of paint. READ THE REST
… and I imagine
Co.Design Hische got paid 6 or 7 figures to sell Mail Chimp this slight font variation.
That being said, she charges appropriately for her skill level (this change was probably high 4 - low 5 figures). When it comes to lettering, specifically hand lettering, there’s probably not a better person for the job out there. Her work is consistently fantastic.
The point of the post was to really just show that there’s actually thought going into design, even when it comes down to the small details.
Here’s a similarly detailed story over at Redfin from a few months back when they redesigned their logo. If you liked the Mail Chimp post you might also enjoy this.
If you want your mind to really be blown by corporate marketing bullshit when it comes to a logo redesign — take a look at this actual document explaining Pepsi’s redesign from a few years back. These folks very likely got paid 6 figures from Pepsi for this, and it’s absolutely serious.
If I worked at Pepsi and someone tried to show me this with a straight face I would fire them on the spot.
This is fantastic.
She does fantastic work.
I have to admit that I sort of like the old, quirky “M” they used, though. It’s unique and fun, and looks a little more like “MailChimp” than “NailChimp” to my eyes.
I appreciate your point.
The point of my post was to express my opinion about how I think designers are overpaid.
I understand, but I’d argue that both your assessment of how much they probably commissioned the designer for, and the extent of the work (or lack thereof) are both based on intentional naivety versus actual fact. What, in your mind, makes designers overpaid (median US salary is $68,000) moreso than any other skilled profession?
I’m not trying to be hostile here, I really want to understand what causes you to think that designers are overpaid. Is it that you’re viewing the skill as fraudulent, or that the position itself is unnecessary?
Maybe the fact that the tools are so accessible means that anyone and everyone can call themselves a designer? Though, carpenters don’t seem to have the same issue…
I am a web developer. (Other web devs will understand and can stop reading now.)
Here’s a true story about a designer I worked with who produced meager deliverables while reaping a significant percentage of the contract. The designer spends a few hours fiddling around a bit in photoshop or indesign or whatever; emails over a jpeg; then flies to Europe for a 2-week vacation. Meanwhile, The Design ignores information architecture, conflicts with wireframes, and explodes the contract’s original scope. As developer and project lead, I’m left holding the bag and explaining to the client why the end product doesn’t match The Design, while the designer has stopped responding to emails. Further, I’m left to do the actual work of implementing the design: you know, translating the designers pretty pictures into a website that actually does something.
I relay this story as illustrative, and of course I understand that many designers are much more considered and responsible. Heck, some designers can even deliver a working prototype, or better yet a pluggable theme. Further, I don’t begrudge The Artist getting paid. As an artist, that’s probably the number one hardest thing to do.
More power to Hische for her well-considered design and acute attention to detail. At the end of the day though, all she’s done is bend a few lines this way and that, and written up a fancy explanation for the bends. I’ll hazard a guess that Mail Chimp was willing to pay handsomely in proportion to the amount of actual hours spent on this project.
Then again, maybe I’m just jealous. I don’t have a design bone in my body, and I don’t mean to pick on Hische. Of course I have no idea how much she got paid, or what other deliverables were involved. But from the general field of people I’ve worked with who call themselves designers, I’ve been underwhelmed.
oh, this thing. a wack logo sold via a slick-looking proposal that makes absolutely no sense. it’s like no one at Pepsi wanted to believe they wasted their money on the oh-so prestigious Arnell group, so they just went ahead and drank the kool-aid. The Emperor’s New Clothes redux. the more interesting question becomes: did Arnell cook up this whole thing as a troll to compensate because they knew their logo sucked, or were they so gassed on themselves that they were serious?
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.