Over at Rebrand Tasmania we’ve just released three creative options, which have been informed by the input we have received so far in the first 3 months of the project. Check it out and tell us what you think.
Comments
Leave a Reply
Post Categories
Post Archives
- May 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- November 2010
- October 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
Follow Us
Posted by Paul Davis / 24.03.2010
I’m fascinated by what you guys are trying to do. It’s almost as if the very act of trying to come up with something definitive is a work in itself (which you guys no doubt think).
My question around brand-creation always comes back to two words: projection and perception, ie: what do WE want to project? And what do we want OTHERS to perceive? Your concept here, I reckon, are weighed heavily in the ‘perception’ side of things: people across Australia and the world will look at, and like, the use of our unique island shape and animals, past and present, in your designs. (I am happy with the maple leaf as an icon for Canada – but I am not sure if locals there, who live in the ice away from tress, care too much about it.)
But if we take these concepts from a ‘what do we want to project’ perspective, are we, as Tasmanians happy with animals and state-shape icons? Is that what we think of ourselves as we work and live on this island?
Maybe you guys have articulated these brands’ future use (internal? external? both 50/50?) but that, I think, will be one of the best judges of the power and usefulness of these logos.
pd