Jupiterimages

by mishdogg • Uploaded: Jan. 15 '08

c3160e9929c7568c5c37de2a5ad0d9ef.png

Add to Pad (In 2 Pad s )

Description: New branding for Jupiterimages Corporation
As seen on: Jupiterimages
Status: Nothing set
Viewed: 2212
Share:  

Lets Discuss

artboy Jan. 15 '08

When was this done - I'm sure this has been their logo for quite a while or is it slightly tweaked??

Reply
mishdogg Jan. 15 '08

No, this is the way it's been since my team rebranded the company in 2006. Before that, their logo used to be red and black and had been set in bold, blocky Interstate since their inception almost a decade ago.

Reply
artboy Jan. 15 '08

Ah, yep that would make sense! I've been using Jupiter since around then and didn't see the earlier version!

Reply
Flant Jan. 15 '08

is this a custom font??

Reply
mishdogg Jan. 15 '08

Nope, it's called %22Hei.%22 The version I had only came with one weight though, so we chose Akzidenz Grotesk for the official corporate font in the collateral materials.

Reply
ryantoyota Jan. 15 '08

I think it's good that you ended up with a different font for the corporate font. I don't like when companies use the same font as that of their logo. A logo should have a unique font so that it stands out, in my opinion.

Reply
Respiro Jan. 16 '08

With all the respect, I am not sure why this %22logo%22 is listed on this site...

Reply
OcularInk Jan. 16 '08

Am I missing something?

Reply
rfrusso Jan. 16 '08

I'm with Respiro. No offense to mishdogg or anyone else who had their hands on this redesign as I believe it is very nice ... but it doesn't seem like it deserves a LP Gallery spot. Perhaps because it is a familiar name among designers?**No hard feelings, but I doubt a logo of mine -- or any with an unknown name -- would appear there if I picked a nice font, typed two words, put them together and made them two different colors.

Reply
dache Jan. 16 '08

What is the concept?

Reply
Lawrence Anderson Jan. 16 '08

Sometimes you don't need a mark. When you choose a type-only logo it can force the audience to gather meaning from the name and thus remember the company more than the mark.

Reply
KGB Jan. 16 '08

I agree with Lawrence. It's a nice logotype. It's a stock photo site, for those that don't know. This allows a lot of room for usage. I don't mind it at all.

Reply
webreforms Jan. 16 '08

It looks nice, but nothing more to me.*There is no brand identity or visual concept, and I'm sure text of two colors has been tried once before...**Lawrence, maybe you are right, but I never remember buy.com for their logo.

Reply
chungdha Jan. 16 '08

Text only with no special made costum font. These kind of logo are just missing too much to inspire or to attract people. Woud like it better with an illustration.

Reply
Lawrence Anderson Jan. 16 '08

Chungdha, a logo doesn't need to inspire people. Sometimes the company itself delivers a product that can be inspiring and attractive. In these instances a company may not want to distract from its message with a mark. With companies that have many competitors doing seemingly the same thing it often becomes more important to brand the name, not the mark. This has become especially important with internet businesses that cannot be accessed without remembering their name, and thus the web address. Branding the name instantly makes the address accessible and memorable. On the other hand, if you have a tangible product like Apple, you may want a mark that makes your laptop instantly stand out from all others. **There's a reason why countless fortune 500s have chosen to avoid a mark in favor of merely branding their name. Granted, Jupiter could have done something more creative with their typeface, but I agree with the decision to keep the focus on the name. **Many designers thinking that every logo needs some image or illustration is the kind of attitude that makes companies pay Interbrand %242M for a logo that is nothing but a stylized typeface. **My two cents from a communications stand point. **-Cheers

Reply
mishdogg Jan. 16 '08

You guys are absolutely correct. We all know a logo is usually made up one of three ways: a) letterform mark (Adobe, YouTube) b) mark only (Apple, Warner Bros.), or c) letterform only (microsoft, gettyimages). This one just happens to be the latter. **We also know that a logo is just one part of the whole brand experience. I would say it's the most important part, but a logo by itself is nothing. It's a shame that on this site we can't display the rest of the collateral materials that accompany our logos, because it's in them that a brand comes alive. When my team rebranded Jupiter, we were tasked with changing the visual personality of the company. It had been stuck with a very masculine red black bold type and poor design, and since they were growing rapidly (inevitably into the 3rd largest stock photo retailer), they desperately needed new visuals to match their new, mature position in the image market. They wanted a softer look, more current and %22gender neutral%22 (whatever that means) and we came through for them. This logo came with a whole new %22360 degree%22 branding campaign that really made the company come alive and to the awareness of, well, all of us designers who need images for our work. I mean, think back to early 2006%3B had you ever heard of Jupiterimages at that point?

Reply

Please login/signup to make a comment, registration is easy