Dynamobel logo design

Dynamobel is a Spanish manufacturer of office furniture, founded in 1959 in Navarra. The company grew thanks to the initiative and perseverance of two brothers: an electrician and a metalworker, who devoted their ingeniousness and youth to this endeavor. They managed to turn a small workshop into a vibrant multinational business, while keeping the spirit of a family-run business alive. Tenacity and know-how have fueled the company as years have gone by helping them grow and challenge industry conventions. Saffron Brand Consultants

Dynamobel logo design

Dynamobel logo design

Dynamobel logo design

Dynamobel logo design

The Dynamobel pictographic language

Dynamobel logo design

The mark morphs into these pictograms in this animated intro, and you can read more info about the project on the Saffron website.

Distinctive, contemporary, and adaptable. This is my kind of design.

Hat tip, Blair Thomson.

# # #

September 10, 2009


I kind of like it although I’m not blown away, (no problem that’s a rare event anyway). I agree with Armin it does look familiar but perhaps that’s down to it’s simplicity.

There certainly are logos out there which have a similair approach (www.themill.com – it’s so hard to be original) but it’s the wider brand applications that will set this apart. I really like the animations and the way they incorporate the concept of space planning.

Armin, David, there’s no denying the similarities we can pitch with other companies, but this is one that coincides nicely with the title of my previous post, and that great quote from Paul Rand, “Don’t try to be original. Just try to be good.”

David, that’s a great quote by Paul Rand. It was one of those designs that made me stop and look at it for a good amount of time before I had that “aha!” moment. I agree it reminded me of the “mill” logo but I think the consideration put into the spacing between the bars and the circle of the “d” help set it apart from others with the same concept.

The spacing between the circle and the first bar could have been closer to help identify the “d” more easily but by making the spacing equal between all the shapes the design becomes more interesting and makes the viewer take more time evaluating the logo. It is very well executed.

David Airey & David Buchanan: themill certainly, but I was mainly thinking about markenpersonal.de as an example. Also very elementary, but it is witty.

This is plain boring. As if they did the pictographic language and then the logo/symbol. The application is nice though.

good, but not great!

I’m all for simplicity but i’m with Armin on this one. It’s good, but it’s not grabbing me in the right places.

I just think it should be one or the other really.

Paul Rand comes off with some pearls, Jeremy. No doubt.

Armin, I like that markenpersonal logo, too. And certainly it’s the context that makes designs more than what they are in isolation. The adaption of this one across various media is what compelled the post.

Tthat logo also has some similarity traits towards the MIT logo.

Mies Van der Rohe was the one who originated the quote “Don’t try to be original. Just try to be good”. Paul believed in Van der Rohe’s ideology.

There is a great youtube video of a conversation with Paul Rand and some students that many have probably seen hence the 230 views it has received on youtube.

Check it out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51z-t7T0_6E

It reminds me of the ‘Pollution Records’ logo that you showcased here a while back in someone’s portfolio (I forget who) because of the simple rectangles. Personally, I see a pointing finger on the right 2/3rds of the image and a circle floating off to the left that seems a little disconnected because it curves away. It works much better at a distance (i.e. in that product display photo) than it does up close. The animation is nice though.

if you put rectangles, circles and squares together of course they are going to look similar to other logos. you can’t stop agencies from using shapes, we have been arranging and playing with shapes before we could walk.

on another note, i think the pictorial representation is quite clever. i think they could have gone with one of those arrangements over the one they chose.

The “logos” looks similar, but the “identities” are very different in my opinion.

They appear in different categories, viewed by different audiences, and the chances are nobody will only ever see them side by side except us.

It really doesn’t matter that they look similar.

Share a thought