This is how I feel about this new Twitter bird.
almost 2 years ago
Not a fan I take it?
Haha, this couldn't take too long
I agree @Justin Edmund. I'm not sure I like the new version at all. I guess it's just interesting at the moment for me.
by Alex Pankratov
I say this new Twitter thing got some potential :)
almost 2 years ago
Glad to see I'm not the only one
I think the new mark is great, it cleans up the the wings that once were jagged and not consistent. Killed the weird hair on the old bird. The new bird is happy and speaking upward towards the sky, communication with the world (like the brand). Don't really see much of anything that is going wrong in this revision of the mark. I think its a bold move of Twitter to kill the type, but also a big step forward. Ya Nike and Twitter. Screw the type no one read anyways. There is always critics tho!
by Arsenije Catic
@Nick Franchi: I have no problem with the ideology behind the mark—it is quite sound.
The execution, however, falls very flat.
1) For starters, the proportions are very awkward to me; why is the bird's head so big?
2) Geometry is great, but Twitter is a platform around conversation between people and humanism—why is this new mark so much less playful and so much more structured?
3) It also does not strike me as different enough from the old mark to really warrant change.
4) The mark isn't nearly as flexible in its application—look at how awkward it looks in less than 48px variants (on the Twitter.com topbar and Follow buttons). Maybe they just didn't pay attention to the details, but it looks like a blob, not a bird.
5) How do they expect to build a brand if they change the mark every two years? Think of the TV commercials, printed materials, and iconsets that employ the old bird. Those things aren't going to just disappear.
6) I don't think that Twitter is a recognizable enough brand to warrant killing the type. As much as I love Twitter, they're still minor league when compared to the best brands in the world that can pull this off (Apple, Nike, etc).
So like I said, the ideology is sound. It makes total sense. I just think they were a little too overeager with a solution that is a tad under-executed.
I agree with some of the things you've listed here.
If you truly think this was only a tad under-executed, can you really lump it in with that terrible GAP redesign? I mean, that was the epitome of purposely under-executed design.
At first I thought you were just hating, but I stand corrected: you make some good points. I don't agree with #6, but #2, #3, and #4 all resonate with me.
by Josua Leonard
This is one happy birdie
@Nick Franchi I agree. I think they've nailed every aspect of the new logo.
Love the way you made your complaint visually. I totally agree with your opinions. I feel like Twitter is losing some characteristics. The bird mark may look all right some day, but abandoning such a highly recognised logotype is not a good idea...
I agree with Justin, especially on front that while geometry is great, Twitter is a platform based around hand-crafted humanism. The old bird had more personality to it. It's "flaws" were it's perfections.
Dude I forgot all about that! For those out of the loop, this happened once in real life: http://5.mshcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/gap-logo.jpg
over 1 year ago
keyboard shortcuts: ← previous shot → next shot L or F like
Show and tell for designers
What are you working on? Dribbble is a community of designers sharing screenshots of their work, process, and projects.
Copyright © 2009–2014 Dribbble LLC. All screenshots © their respective owners. Shipped from Salem, Mass. USA.