Logos by Branch

Branch design

Branch is a new, independent design consultancy based in the heart of London. Branch believes the key to good design and communication is keeping things simple, and here’s a quick taster of their identity work.

BENGT

Bengt logo design

“The new online fashion retailer gave us the chance to create their identity. We decided it needed to be simple and versatile enough to reflect ever-moving trends.”

Bengt business card design

Polluted records

Polluted logo design

“Polluted Records wanted an identity that was strong, bold and contemporary. By using pause and stop symbols we created a marque that reflected the industrial name.”

Polluted bag design

Visit the Branch website for more.

Branch logo design

Via AisleOne.

Logo Design Love, the book

22 thoughts on “Logos by Branch

  1. Beautiful work. It is so good to see simple and effective design. Should be used more often. The concept and implementation of the polluted logo is excellent.

  2. Yeah they could do with sorting that website out. It works just as well in windowed mode.

    However, the work itself is very pleasing on the eye. There’s plenty of similar work around in London, does anyone think it’s beginning to become a little saturated?

  3. Simplicity. I like it.
    I’m not entirely sure what it is about it, but I really like the Bengt logo.
    The one for polluted I think I like… there’s just something about the balance of the two symbols that felt slightly off…. but perhaps that’s just me. It’s already grown on me while looking back to write this post.
    Good work

  4. I am always a fan of breaking an idea down to the simplest of forms. Their work is very refreshing. A simple mark also allows for great adaptability in various applications!

  5. I hate to break the mold of praise here, but am I completely alone in not thinking these logos to be that great?

    Let me start by saying that I in no way feel that I am better than Branch (far from it, I’m sure), but IMHO these logos are a bit bland, not overly creative and in all honesty can best be summed up as “meh”.

    Sorry guys, but I guess design is subjective, and at the end of the day, beauty is in the eye of the beholder and as long as the client was happy, then job well done.

  6. I really like the simplicity, not only for that fact in itself but it really does allow for great levels of adaptability. When you start to think outside of the Illustrator file your working on or the business card you know the logo is going to go on, the logo needs to be able to be used on a variety of mediums and not cause any challenges. What’s the point of having a logo if it’s next to impossible to put it on things and get the brand out there? The Polluted Records logo is a good example as you can see it on a bag up top, that was probably a pretty inexpensive print job as it is one solid color, and not too detailed so there’s no crazy complex color separations needed (save the brand of the bag, which I don’t know).

  7. The Polluted one is my favourite. Century Gothic is a gem, isn’t it. I like it so much I used it for my own. Note also that LLU in polluted create the smokestack imagery above.

    As for their take on simplicity, couldn’t agree more!

  8. I enjoy the simplicity of the logos, but I have to stand on the side of Ross here.

    The polluted logo to me doesn’t scream polluted. My perception as a designer is that the pause and the stop symbols are overly-obvious solutions that could apply to any record label really.

    The Branch logo itself makes me think of the “Baby Teeth” article in this month’s Print magazine. Nothing wrong here, just wickedly apparent of riding the trend wave.

  9. Couldn’t agree more about the website loading in “full screen”. There’s also no need for a splash page, and ditching both those features would make for a big improvement.

    Ross, no need to apologise. Your opinion is very welcome. I disagree with your statement that design is subjective. It isn’t. Unless you’re looking at a piece of design from a purely aesthetic viewpoint (i.e. as art), then it must fulfill the design brief. So it works, or it doesn’t.

  10. Thanks Dave.

    hmmm… I do agree but (always a but) I think talking in absolutes like that is not always going to work out.

    At the end of the day, you can have a program… lets take an email client for instance. It sends email, great, it receives email, great. In other words, it works.

    Now you take a logo design. Sure you could be way off the mark, and you could be spot on, but to get an absolute optimal result where everybody loves it, no exceptions… thats another story. One what lives in the world of dragons and faeries.

    See where I’m getting to? Whether or not it “worked” in your eyes, and the client’s eyes is whether it performed to solve a problem (sometimes just the lack of it’s mere existance), but thats not to say it couldn’t have been done better, and solved the problem better, or more problems.

    Thats my definition of things being subjective. There is always room for improvement.

  11. Good of you to reply, Ross.

    This is actually a topic I’m looking into at the minute (the subjectivity / objectivity of design). There is indeed always room for improvement. I couldn’t agree more. It’s one reason I never use the phrase, “Practice makes perfect”, preferring, “Practice makes better” (excuse the poor English). I’m sure there are plenty of different takes around this one, and I never profess to have the right answer.

To help prevent spam, comments are closed on posts older than one year.