Jan 8, 200933 appreciated comments
Logos from why not associates
why not associates is a British graphic design company, established two decades ago. Here’s a taste of their identity design work.
London Arts logo
Corporate identity for arts funding organisation.
The Reel logo
Corporate identity for xtreme information’s media resource service showcasing commercials and promos.
futurelab logo
Corporate identity for bristol based not-for-profit organisation.
ENVY logo
Corporate identity, website and signage for london based post production facility.
You can view more projects here on the why not associates website.
Hosted by the excellent 
33 appreciated comments, click here to add one
Abbas Arezoo
Now THAT’S what I call branding.
It would be a dream to endlessly churn out work like that on a regular basis for willing and accepting clients.
Abbas Arezoo’s last blog post…2009 and Design Sheffield are finally here!
Jan 8th, 2009
Kyle Reddoch
Those are great logo designs!
Kyle Reddoch’s last blog post…Guest Post – “How I learned how to choose color for websites from a 10yr old”
Jan 8th, 2009
Alex Charchar
The implementation of The Reel and futurelab is fantastic, thanks for sharing
Alex Charchar’s last blog post…The Typographic Scale
Jan 9th, 2009
Euan
Great work. I have been subscribed to thier email newsletter for quite a while now.
Euan’s last blog post…Big Visible, Boston – Logo design
Jan 9th, 2009
pat taylor
Why Not indeed! Thanks for showing their wonderful work.
Jan 9th, 2009
David Airey
I completely agree, Abbas.
Kyle, Alex, Euan, Pat,
I’m glad you all enjoy their work too. Why not associate yourself with them? *groan*
Jan 9th, 2009
Mokokoma Mokhonoana
THE REEL logo’s application to stationery is out of this world!
Thanks for sharing.
Jan 9th, 2009
Al Woods
HUGE fan of the Reel identity. The logo doesn’t communicate too loudly if I’m honest, but I love how they make it work throughout the whole spectrum of applications.
Simple ideas work.
And colour rocks my world.
Al Woods’s last blog post…happy new year.
Jan 9th, 2009
Jacob Cass
Instant WOW on the LA logo! Nice work!
Jan 9th, 2009
Brian Hoff
I second the WOW from Jacob. I enjoy seeing the variations in size throughout the circles in LA… it gives it movement and a sense of ‘popping’ out. The Reel is a strong image on its own also. Nice post David.
Jan 9th, 2009
Abbas Arezoo
How old is The Reel stuff? I wonder if the new iPod was ‘inspired’ by that work.
Jan 9th, 2009
Dorothy Wolden
These are really fabulous. I love the simplicity of them. Don’t know if the iPod was inspired but I am.
Jan 9th, 2009
Armin
hmmm. What do you (David and you readers) think, how recognizable and/or self-explanatory should a logo be?
I’m talking about “The Reel” logo in particular. While I certainly agree it is a good design, I don’t think it is great.
And on the stationary, sometimes it is almost invisible (e.g. 2nd from left) and other times it is smack in your face (e.g. black on bright yellow). That doesn’t say diversity to me, it says inconsistency.
Then again, imho they overuse the symbol on the website. Doesn’t this devalue a logo?
Please excuse my ignorance. I’m a novice.
Jan 9th, 2009
Niki Brown | The Design O'Blog
Great post! Its those clever simple logos that always take the longest to design. Everything that is there is essential – no fluff!
Jan 9th, 2009
Kevin Burr
Simplicity at it’s finest. I completely agree with Abbas’ first comment. Now, that would be a perfect world. :-) Nice post, David.
Jan 9th, 2009
Capslock
Is this a joke? I know there are plenty of designers who read this post and disagree with the popular opinion but are afraid to say anything because others seem to be loving it (suspiciously some of the comments show their love for these a little way too much).
I will admit that the usage of the logos are well executed, but the logo design themselves are all horrible. Imagine yourself being a professor and students hand these corporate identities in to you. Unless you are bias toward the students, you cannot in good conscious give more than 65 out of 100 for any of them.
Look to the right side, the links to the previous posts such as The 30 favorites, or the 15 Wonderfully Simple logo designs. And try to put these logos among them. They will be spotted right away as bad logos. Bad is too vague, how about, lazy and irrelevant. Fail to communicate effectively in anyway, unoriginal, and extremely unbalanced.
I can even review each logo one by one, and I will only be using basic design principle to criticize too. But I have a feeling I will get flame for this so I will stop here.
Jan 10th, 2009
pat taylor
Boo Capslock!
Jan 10th, 2009
Garth
Definitely some fun stuff…they kinda have a circle fetish—except of course for ENVY, which kinda makes sense :)
Garth’s last blog post…Creative Feature on TIAL
Jan 10th, 2009
Lawrence Anderson
I am not a huge fan of the logos when they are taken out of context. However, I think that when these logos are used within the identity design they function very well.
Lawrence Anderson’s last blog post…11 Effective Law and Medical Logo Designs
Jan 10th, 2009
Al Woods
Some good points raised here!!
Thinking about it, as much as I like the Reel identity I don’t actually like it because of the logo. I’m sucked in by the bold simplicity of it and its use across a colour palette, not necessarily whether or not it does its job very well.
Which begs a question, can good application really save a weak logo?
I think yes when considering logos that don’t really shout the point across. As I initially said, I don’t think the Reel logo communicates what they are very well, but the clean, simple, colourful application formula lifts it.
Although the blanking bombing approach of a wide colour palette can often be used to disguise a thin initial idea.
Al Woods’s last blog post…CJ Photography update.
Jan 11th, 2009
Scott Burns
Fantastic! Particularly London Arts and ENVY.
I love the simplicity, but primarily that they work well in use, too many logos look great in isolation but just donut work in use.
Scott Burns’s last blog post…Creating a brand…
Jan 12th, 2009
George Ryan
Those are all logos that I don’t think look very special at all – and then you see them in use and it’s like: “wow”! Great list, thanks for sharing.
Jan 13th, 2009
David Airey
Al,
For me, it’s most definitely the contextual images that make these designs special. Logos in isolation are rarely as strong.
Armin,
How recognisable the logos are is important. Good question. The industry behind each company is also relevant. For instance, whilst The Reel icon may be viewed as generic, is there a competitor with the same identity?
Capslock,
All opinions are appreciated. Providing discussions are kept civil, I welcome your input.
Thanks very much to everyone who commented.
Jan 13th, 2009
Steve Brown
To achieve such strong and recognisable logos consistently is amazing. Good article, and as I am writing I have noticed the crucial web hosting logo in the bottom corner of the page, it seems there is no escaping good logo design on this site.
Steve Brown’s last blog post…5 reasons a screen printer should not be without water.
Jan 13th, 2009
Idiotica
These don’t do much for me. Well, the London Arts one is OK. It’s visually clever but I don’t know how it reflects the organization that it’s representing. It just leaves me wondering if they specialize in Braille art or something.
The Reel logo… awful. The circle looks like the letter “o” to me. At first I wondered if the company was called “O, the Reel!” But “o” isn’t part of the name at all, so why is it in there? Then I wondered if they have anything to do with iPods. And finally, I thought, OK, it’s just pure laziness. It doesn’t matter how much time they actually spent designing the logo, the average person is going to think they spent 10 seconds on it because it’s just a circle and some words. Lazy logo means lazy company.
The futurelab logo is OK, but the font doesn’t seem very futuristic. Not that it has to be. But then it really doesn’t make sense to go the other way. Labs shouldn’t be thought of as old-fashioned, right? And what’s with the circles? Are they supposed to be molecules? I guess that’s clever. Or are they just arbitrary circles arbitrarily mobbing the “e”?
The Envy logo. Hm. Sparseness doesn’t represent something I’d envy. Oh wait, I see “NY” in there. Are they based in New York? Cool! No, they’re based in London. Aww.
Jan 14th, 2009
Jared
These are raw simplicity at it’s best. I love the style and the applications of the all of the logos except futurelab. I thought that one was just “ok”.
Jan 15th, 2009
Fred Campbell
Some nice stuff here, but “The Reel” is a classic which will stand the test of time, whatever the trends.
Jan 16th, 2009
Frank
I always thought and still think that the icon part of a logo should be able to stand on its own i.e. should be recognizable and identifiable even without the wordmark.
Now someone please tell me how’s that possible with the Reel logo ?
The icon itself is just a circle.Does anyone really think the circle on its own would be identifiable at all ?!
Seems the “but it looks great in the greater context of the identity program” is the latest excuse for lazy work and absent ideas, see NY Phiharmonic, London 2012 etc.
Sorry but there still are situations where a logo has to work in “unfriendly” environments and that’s why “old” rules (has to work in b/w, must be able to stand on its own etc) still apply when it comes to logo principles no matter how 2.0 our world is turning.
Jan 29th, 2009
David Airey
Frank,
It’s interesting that you think an icon must be able to stand-alone. I’m not of the same opinion, but I don’t profess to have your experience in the field.
Regardless, thanks to you, Steve, idiotica, Jared and Fred for your differing opinions. Always healthy.
Feb 3rd, 2009
Anders Haig
With the ENVY logo, I really see how well it fits with a ‘post production company’. I’m assuming fence posts and not something else I’m unaware of. All these logos are great however.
Feb 19th, 2009
Sherrie
The London Arts and Reel logos work off of associations too etched in my mind to stand for something else, less known.
With the standout “LA” I am reminded of Los Angeles, and the circle for the Reel of the thick circle on an ipod. While ipod is with Apple, the standout look of an ipod is that circle controller.
Really liking the square that the ENVY text creates. I like the FutureLab logo up close, but from a distance only the two blue circles stand out to me, but not their differing blues, and the yellow is sort of hidden like a stain. I like the circles clustered, but perhaps a manipulation of colors would represent from a distance the appeal that is actually there.
Mar 14th, 2009
The Baldchemist
You know what I like about you David? You have a humility sadly lacking these days. I like your views and your style of putting them over.
Now logo’s, and I hate the term, are often unnecessary.
When discussing a company and its properties the logo isnt visable. Its like music… fleeting.
To brand a logo takes years and often becomes outdated and needs revamping ( good for those who make a living out of logo design) . I’m a believer in the name itself being created and designed and supporting , good corporate governance.
Thanks again for a wonderful contribution to the design business. I hope you are making a fortune.
Take good care
The Baldchemist
Apr 5th, 2009
David Airey
That’s very kind of you, Ray (The Baldchemist).
Making my fortune is on hold for now, whilst I focus on writing a book, but maybe someday. I’m living comfortably, with family close-by and in scenic surroundings, so I certainly can’t complain.
I hope you’re having a good weekend.
Apr 5th, 2009
Reply to “Logos from why not associates”
All comments are subject to the Logo Design Love comment policy.