Final - Chilly Philly

Final Business Card - Chilly Philly

Final Letterhead - Chilly Philly

 Letterhead:

With text:

Final Logo - Chilly Philly

Color:

Black and White:

Mission Statement - The Evening Star

The Evening Star is a bar that celebrates science fiction and fantasy. Classic movie nights feature films like Alien, Back to the Future, and Star Wars. Commemorate the birthdays of Jules Verne, H.G. Wells, and Frank Herbert or take part in a themed Quizzo competition. The Evening Star isn’t just a bar with a gimmick, though. It’s a cozy place where you can drink from a great beer selection, eat greasy pub food, and enjoy a diverse group of people. The Evening Star embraces cult classic themes without becoming ostentatious or tacky. This is your neighborhood bar, but with a stylish, pop-culture twist.

Tutorial - A Rainy Window Background

I completed the tutorial found here.

Logo Redesign and Process

Finished design:

Black and white:




I started this project knowing that I wanted to redesign the Red Rose tea logo. I've always found it to be old-fashioned, and I knew I wanted it to look more modern.

Here's the original:

My process started by trying to work with pictures of roses and teapots, but they really weren't an improvement on the original.

Then I found an interesting picture of three teacups online. I adjusted the colors in Photoshop, then I created outlines in Illustrator, abstracted the image and adjusted the colors even more. Then I tilted the last cup, so the handle is in a different direction.

It took awhile, but I finally found a font that I like. It's more modern and interesting because it's so disjointed. The logo doesn't immediately look like three teacups, but I think it would recognizable to consumers of the brand.

Finally, I enlarged the staff of the "d" so it touches the middle teacup to try and create more unity between the text and the image.


This logo is my second favorite:


Here are two other fonts I tried:

In Class Exercise

Logo Design Love - Article Response

10 successful logo redesigns

This article found on Logo Design Love examines logo redesigns that are considered successful. The redesigns shown feature subtle changes. They refresh the logo without changing them enough to make them unrecognizable. With each example shown, there is also a written blurb of why the redesign works and even what could still be improved.

I found this to be a very informative and helpful article. It is great to see the before and after logos side by side, so the little differences stand out. The MSNBC logo has primarily just the font changed, but it's a huge difference. The Qantas logo changes the form of the kangaroo slightly, but again - huge difference. I found the Hunter logo to be the most interesting and drastic, since the redesign consists of simplifying the design elements and creates a much stronger, but simpler design.

Overall, this was a very interesting article. It's great as a student to see subtle differences next to each other, explained expertly and succinctly.

Starbucks Logo Makeover Response

The changing of the Starbucks logo is an interesting topic. I've seen the logo before but never examined it, or its previous versions. I laughed at the line at the end of the article, "The new minimalist form is crisper, but without the circle of type, the mermaid appears naked." The mermaid IS naked in every other version. That of all things doesn't seem to be a concern of Starbucks, so why is it brought up in the article like a negative point?

The fact that people feel such ownership over the logo must be a good thing, even if it means people are less likely to accept the new logo at first. I like that Howard Schultz explained the reasons behind the change, regardless of whether it is not usually done that way.

The funny projection of where the Starbucks logo will be in thirty years at the beginning of the article made me laugh, but the truth is that the logo is still recognizable today without the circle of text around it, and it does capture the same feelings as the older one to me. It doesn't seem to be a case of the previous article where things are re-designed for no good reason, Mr. Schultz's explanation makes sense, and no Starbucks customer will see the logo and not know that it's Starbucks. It also doesn't seem to be like the Gap logo debacle. That was a case of a logo being seriously under-designed and underwhelming, but again, the Starbucks logo, while pared down, still has an interesting design.

Movie Poster Project - Revised!

In class tutorial - Movie Poster

I may or may not be interested in watching this movie.

Smoke Type Tutorial

So, I did this tutorial. It was a lot harder than I thought it would be, but I definitely learned some new skills. I found the comments to be incredibly helpful, they really elaborate on steps that are probably considered basic but were still hard for me. I ended up with two images.

This is the second to last step, but I think it looks pretty cool:




And this is the final product:

A Non-Functional Product

This product is inspired by a larger than usual lip balm product I had a couple years ago. People always stopped me and asked if I was putting glue on my lips. It was funny when it was a stranger asking, but it hurt when it was my friends. No glue sticks on these lips, weirdos!

A Functional Product

A car that has an adjustable trunk - perfect for parking in tight spaces!

Learning Photoshop

Response - NY Times Article

The phrase "crimes against design" goes beyond a poorly conceived image. It is a response to changing designs when there is no need to. New marketing when the old marketing worked, new road signs because a significant time had passed since the originals' conception. I understand the confusion and even outrage that "crimes against design" invoke. I've felt the annoyance. I think the road sign example is perfect because it's a situation where the confusion has immediate impact. If a road sign is confusing, it screws you up. You miss a turn, have to reroute, possibly have an accident. I like the examples of Citroen and UPS because it stresses how important designs can be to a company's history, and that by changing a design you can impact the history you have with consumers. It's not just "how to ruin a design," it's how to ruin a "great" design. The article stresses this distinction, and it makes the point that much more interesting to me.