New Bird Life logo

To: Greg Oakley <>
Subject: New Bird Life logo
From: Alastair Smith <>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 18:38:59 +1100
As the person who initiated this discussion, I specifically didn't mention 
consultation because I know how problematic that would be. What I was 
suggesting was that the Birdlife should have provided the membership with two 
or three final designs (and explanations of what they mean) put that to a 
plebiscite. That way members feel they have buy in with the new organisation.

We should not be having this discussion when it is a fait accompli!

For what it is worth, my wife loves it.


On 20/01/2012, at 5:57 PM, Greg Oakley wrote:

> Hi all,
> I have read with interest some of the comments regarding the new Birdlife
> Australia logo, and as someone who has worked in the branding/design
> industry for a long time, I thought I'd throw in my 2 cents worth!
> Firstly, In regard to the (non) consultation process, in my experience it is
> highly counter-productive to have "open-consultation", the main reason being
> that design is intrinsically opinion-based and a consensus with any clarity
> is nearly impossible when put in front of more than a handful of people.
> This isn't just designers being arrogant ­ I have seen many a logo go
> through an open consultation process where there have been so many different
> opinions that the whole process gets bogged down and eventually grinds to a
> halt, with the result of nothing successfully achieved!
> Having said that, however, a brand design should always go through an
> exhaustive process with a panel of designated people to ensure the best
> result.
> My opinion of the logo? As a design image it's certainly not a disaster.
> But from a Branding perspective I just don't think its in the right
> territory. It doesn't invoke birds and birding to me ­ but perhaps being an
> addicted bird-nerd, I'm biased!
> When I showed some of my design colleagues the logo, all concurred that it
> would look more at home on cosmetics packaging!
> Also that it seems to lack feeling and emotion, that its a little cold and
> distantŠ And just a bit disappointingŠ.
> I'm in no way attacking the designer/s ­ I know only too well how difficult
> the whole process of arriving at a solution is ­ they may even have
> presented multiple options which were superior, but were "voted" outŠ
> And I certainly have no "sour grapes" because I personally didn't get a
> crack at it! The design business is highly competitive and we all live day
> to day winning and losing jobs (I actually emailed BA over 8 months ago
> registering interest in the logo and never received a reply!)
> Open, free opinion and discussion, however, is what design is all about, and
> its just my opinionŠ
> Carl mentioned that if you can achieve a 50% positive response with a
> branding exercise your'e doing well.
> I totally agree ­ and very soon everyone will get used to the image and
> accept it. It takes time for a brand image to become familiar.
> Sorry for the rant ­ I hope some of this makes sense,
> Cheers,
> Greg
> ===============================
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> send the message:
> unsubscribe
> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> to: 
> ===============================


To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the birding-aus mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU