Comments on: Google Cleans Up Their Logo Design

By: Graham Smith

Graham Smith — Fri, 29 May 2009 21:08:06 +0000

There is no before and after as such. The point of these posts has been to talk about the addition of the brand extensions to the main logo. In this case, the sans serif blue and grey text, added to the end of the original Google logo.

There is no change with the main logo.

By: Graham Smith

Graham Smith — Fri, 29 May 2009 21:06:34 +0000

I have seen an ‘official’ flat colour version using the same typeface and it looks pretty good. They use it on Google tee-shirts.

So im not even sure a typeface change would be required. Just getting rid of all the effects and making it flat colour, possibly bolder would make a world of difference.

By: miko

miko — Fri, 29 May 2009 16:49:36 +0000

I guess there is something to be said for sticking to an original and now retro look, but I think the Google treatment will always look dorky and doesn’t bring (me for one) brand comfort. I’d like to see it go flat with a confident angular post-modern serif font and keep the rainbow of colors.

By: Philippe Gauthier

Philippe Gauthier — Wed, 27 May 2009 19:19:43 +0000

I have to agree that I really like what they did by simplifying it all! Of course like everyone else that left a comment i would get rid of the shitty photoshop effects but, they’re going into the good direction. Plus, i like that they used blue and grey, more modern!

By: Alfredo

Alfredo — Mon, 25 May 2009 22:02:36 +0000

I’ve seen this posted a couple of times elsewhere, why isn’t there isn’t a before and after? What is it they did there?

By: JWG

JWG — Mon, 25 May 2009 18:34:32 +0000

Agreed. I do like the cleanliness of the extensions. And, your right. Along with Shell, Delta, Apple, and a few others have also made minor changes over the years while maintaining the original integrity of the design. I just would have thought that because the google logo uses different colors, there really isn’t a need for the 3D effect and they would have dropped it when making this change. 2 birds at the same time you know?

By: Graham Smith

Graham Smith — Mon, 25 May 2009 13:50:55 +0000

Marc, JWG, Jorde : Thanks for adding you’re thoughts here. Just wanted to add that the the main focus of this post was more to credit them for keeping the ‘extensions’ of the logo ’safe’. Not falling victim to hideous designs, such as some of the previous favicons.

I agree that the main Google logo could do without the ‘photoshop’ effects, but it has been like this I think for some time. And in my eyes, is not overly disagreeable.

They have done well to keep the ‘extensions’ simple and stylish which is the main focus here. I’m sure in time, they may discover they could just ‘drop’ the photoshop effects, so that it’s pure flat colour and there would be no major loss of brand cohesion in doing so.

Possibly they have this up their sleeve. Shell for example are famous for making continuous and subtle logo changes over the years, without any fanfare. Rather than the whole instant BIg BANG logo design change.

By: jorde

jorde — Mon, 25 May 2009 08:46:59 +0000

I couldn’t agree more with the posts made above, I’ve always found the google logo both beautiful and at the same time awful for the bloody drop and drag photoshop effects on it!

By: JWG

JWG — Sun, 24 May 2009 16:41:08 +0000

MARC – I completely agree. You would think that a company like google would realize that the drag and drop effects look like garbage. The best way to make a logo look dated would be to throw a Photoshop 3D effect on it. Nope, never liked it, and still don’t!

By: Marc Elmlund

Marc Elmlund — Sun, 24 May 2009 11:39:54 +0000

Now if they only could loose that cheap and tacky 3D effect it would be even better.
It looks like their design team just discovered bevels and drop-shadows in Photoshop…