I received a letter yesterday from Birdlife Australia showcasing the new logo. I have no idea what it is but I think I can see a waterbird of some description. I assume that considerable time has gone into considering, consulting and designing something new, but I am underwhelmed. I think this is a retrograde step from the previous Emus of BA. I believe this should have been put to a vote of the membership. Regards Alastair ===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) to: birding-aus-request@vicnet.net.au
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
g’Day All
Seriously though, for such an important step in the establishment and evolution of the newly merged organisation; the creation of “an identity logo”, the process should have been much more inclusive and the result more ID focused.
To be accepted by the majority, the design for a new logo probably should have been put to all members, probably by way of a design competition; the entrants judged by a combined panel of committe members from both previous clubs.
My first thought/impression/emotion of this new logo was amusement. Is it a cynical representation of something plastic. With no legs and its head turned back, it is reminiscent of a beachwashed bird carcass tangled up in a blue towel or a shot duck with its legs blown off. As others have stated, an Emu Wren would have been a clever and appropriate nomination
In any case this new logo does not look Australian but appears very Euro. Perhaps to remind us of the old BA, at the very least it needs legs with bright orange flags attached.
Regards
Ian May St Helens, Tasmania
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
I would have thought that in a land abundant in parrots a Galah would have been appropriate symbol to represent the new organisation. Ive often been described as one myself,and as a member of both BOCA and Birds Australia am now a member of Birblife Australia.
David Richardson
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
See the flippers?
Isn’t it time to finish this trivial chitter chatter about — duh ! – a logo? My poor old inbox is bursting at the seams and I’m wearing out my delete button.
OK, Birdlife have their new logo, let’s just leave it there.
Tony (fed up).
The more I look at it … the more I like it. But for the life of me, I can’t see a penguin lying on it’s back behind one wave.
Jude
I have watched this thread over the last few days and would like to say.
The reality is that there nothing wrong with it. Apart from perhaps the COST of it, which we may never know.
A group spent time on our behalves to achieve this logo, as such I thank them.
As for a change of the logo. Why would anybody want to waste more of the limited funds we need for real problems.
Let us all get on with the main game.
I rest my opinion.
Regards to you all.
Trevor Cowie. Adelaide Birds SA BirdLife Australia (BOCA & Birding Aust) 2020 Shorebirds IBA
Lets get on with working for the birds
I have been holding back on commenting on the logo as I don’t really mind it and I am sure that I will get more fond of it with time but I do agree with a number of other comments made. It does look like a logo of a cosmetic company and it doesn’t represent what I would like to see in a logo. I am a bit old fashioned. I am not a great lover of stylised art. I like the real thing. As stylised art goes it is good but as representing a ‘real’ bird it is not.
I think that as long as the brandmark statement accompanies every use of the logo we will all know what it is supposed to represent.
Greg Dr Greg. P. Clancy Ecologist and Wildlife Guide Coutts Crossing NSW
My husband noticed the logo on the envelope and asked if it was from the power company. On closer inspection he said the logo looks like it could be from a gas (flames) or water company and looks just like any other bland corporate logo. He is certainly not a fan.
Regards, Tania
I agree Greg. Imagine the mess you’d get if everyone had and input. The only way it could work is if there was a shortlist of possibles which could be voted on. I’ve worked for an number of different organisations that have rebranded (mainly airlines) and you rarely get anything that gets general approval. As for the logio in question…I think it’s quite good, simple and expressive. I’m just surprised having something recognisably Australian wasn’t part of the brief. Steve Murray ________________________________________ Sent: Friday, 20 January 2012 4:57 PM
Hi all,
I have read with interest some of the comments regarding the new Birdlife Australia logo, and as someone who has worked in the branding/design industry for a long time, I thought I’d throw in my 2 cents worth!
Firstly, In regard to the (non) consultation process, in my experience it is highly counter-productive to have “open-consultation”, the main reason being that design is intrinsically opinion-based and a consensus with any clarity is nearly impossible when put in front of more than a handful of people.
This isn’t just designers being arrogant I have seen many a logo go through an open consultation process where there have been so many different opinions that the whole process gets bogged down and eventually grinds to a halt, with the result of nothing successfully achieved!
Having said that, however, a brand design should always go through an exhaustive process with a panel of designated people to ensure the best result.
My opinion of the logo? As a design image it’s certainly not a disaster.
But from a Branding perspective I just don’t think its in the right territory. It doesn’t invoke birds and birding to me but perhaps being an addicted bird-nerd, I’m biased! When I showed some of my design colleagues the logo, all concurred that it would look more at home on cosmetics packaging! Also that it seems to lack feeling and emotion, that its a little cold and distantŠ And just a bit disappointingŠ.
I’m in no way attacking the designer/s I know only too well how difficult the whole process of arriving at a solution is they may even have presented multiple options which were superior, but were “voted” outŠ
And I certainly have no “sour grapes” because I personally didn’t get a crack at it! The design business is highly competitive and we all live day to day winning and losing jobs (I actually emailed BA over 8 months ago registering interest in the logo and never received a reply!)
Open, free opinion and discussion, however, is what design is all about, and its just my opinionŠ
Carl mentioned that if you can achieve a 50% positive response with a branding exercise your’e doing well. I totally agree and very soon everyone will get used to the image and accept it. It takes time for a brand image to become familiar.
Sorry for the rant I hope some of this makes sense,
Cheers, Greg
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Greg, As the person who initiated this discussion, I specifically didn’t mention consultation because I know how problematic that would be. What I was suggesting was that the Birdlife should have provided the membership with two or three final designs (and explanations of what they mean) put that to a plebiscite. That way members feel they have buy in with the new organisation.
We should not be having this discussion when it is a fait accompli!
For what it is worth, my wife loves it.
Regards Alastair
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
I read the letter yesterday, and didn’t even notice the logo. It can’t be too bad if it wasn’t so horrible that it couldn’t be ignored.
I like it it better on paper than I did when I looked at it on http://boca.org.au this afternoon. I thought it looked too acqua or something on the screen, but on paper it’s shades of blue.
In it I can see: – a flying bird looking over its shoulder – a penguin lying on its back behind one wave – if I turn it sideways, it’s half an owl and some gum leaves.
You couldn’t do that with the old logos.
Peter Shute
________________________________________ Sent: Friday, 20 January 2012 4:58 PM
Hi all
I am happy to leave others to ‘argue’ about the choice of colours, bird species, how appropriate the logo is or why werent BOCA/BA/Birdlife members involved in the process.
But I would like to say that I think the design is simple and effective, and in the design world this can be a very important thing.
Also, I don’t know about anyone else but the first thing I saw was not a bird…but a lone feather being blown around in the breeze.
Looking forward to seeing a hard copy.
regards
Cheryl Ridge ===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org =============================== ===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Hi all,
I have read with interest some of the comments regarding the new Birdlife Australia logo, and as someone who has worked in the branding/design industry for a long time, I thought I’d throw in my 2 cents worth!
Firstly, In regard to the (non) consultation process, in my experience it is highly counter-productive to have “open-consultation”, the main reason being that design is intrinsically opinion-based and a consensus with any clarity is nearly impossible when put in front of more than a handful of people.
This isn’t just designers being arrogant I have seen many a logo go through an open consultation process where there have been so many different opinions that the whole process gets bogged down and eventually grinds to a halt, with the result of nothing successfully achieved!
Having said that, however, a brand design should always go through an exhaustive process with a panel of designated people to ensure the best result.
My opinion of the logo? As a design image it’s certainly not a disaster.
But from a Branding perspective I just don’t think its in the right territory. It doesn’t invoke birds and birding to me but perhaps being an addicted bird-nerd, I’m biased! When I showed some of my design colleagues the logo, all concurred that it would look more at home on cosmetics packaging! Also that it seems to lack feeling and emotion, that its a little cold and distant And just a bit disappointing.
I’m in no way attacking the designer/s I know only too well how difficult the whole process of arriving at a solution is they may even have presented multiple options which were superior, but were “voted” out
And I certainly have no “sour grapes” because I personally didn’t get a crack at it! The design business is highly competitive and we all live day to day winning and losing jobs (I actually emailed BA over 8 months ago registering interest in the logo and never received a reply!)
Open, free opinion and discussion, however, is what design is all about, and its just my opinion
Carl mentioned that if you can achieve a 50% positive response with a branding exercise your’e doing well. I totally agree and very soon everyone will get used to the image and accept it. It takes time for a brand image to become familiar.
Sorry for the rant I hope some of this makes sense,
Cheers, Greg
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
I didn’t want to, but I will for the sake of changing the topic. BA = Birds Australia and BOCA = Bird Observation and Conservation Australia….
While most have commented on the bird component of the logo (which is very much in keeping with the design of BirdLife International’s logo), it is interesting to see that ‘birdlife’ is written in lower case perhaps in a continued effort to ensure the acronym BLA doesn’t take flight 😉
Looks like Aladdin’s Lamp to me.
Sis ===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
I guess Sean Dooley (Editor of the magazine) vetoed the Grey Falcon on the grounds that it does not exist?
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
David,
I concur about the non-consultation. I have been receiving plenty of info on the amalgamation via direct mail, email and Wingspan. None of it mentioned being able to give input into the new logo design.
As for the logo, I think it is a bit bland and is not easily identifiable as representing Australia. I have sent the logo to several non-birding friends and asked them what type of organisation they thought the logo represented. Two thought it was for a chicken shop and one, a poultry fanciers club.
With acceptance of new logos, if you can get an approval rate of more than 50% of members, you are doingwell.
I can live with the new logo, but would have to mark it as a B-
Carl Clifford
Hi Peter, I agree with John and Alastair – the first I saw was a letter I received this week which essentially “unveiled” the new logo. So I don’t think its correct to have a go at people for expressing their opinion about it. The fact that people feel strongly about it is a good thing I think, in that they obviously care about the identity of their organisation. I do think that a public debate about various logos would have no doubt been painful and too drawn out so can certainly understand why it wasn’t the case. I think the new logo will grow on people and the fact it that it is different to the old one is enough to make it a difficult job and difficult for many to immediately like. I confess that i find it a bit bland and lacking in punch but I’m sure that I will get used to it over time. Whatever i think of it won’t have any bearing on my membership, support or involvement of Birdlife Australia (as I’m sure is the same for all those that don’t love it), but we can all have an opinion on it.
Cheers David Stowe
Hi Peter, I was not aware of any consultation meetings about design on this side of the country – the first meeting I was aware of in WA was the one at which the new logo was unveiled to various BAWA stakeholders (if anyone would like to correct me on that, feel free). Most of the members I’ve talked to hadn’t seen it until the beginning of this month and some still hadn’t seen it as of a week ago. I’m glad you were able to attend meetings and be involved in the design process and express your opinions then, but those who weren’t able to do that should be free to express an opinion now they’ve had the opportunity to see the logo (albeit too late to change anything) As for the logo itself, for the record I agree with Mark Carter’s comments for the most part John
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Hi Peter, I agree with John and Alastair – the first I saw was a letter I received this week which essentially “unveiled” the new logo. So I don’t think its correct to have a go at people for expressing their opinion about it. The fact that people feel strongly about it is a good thing I think, in that they obviously care about the identity of their organisation. I do think that a public debate about various logos would have no doubt been painful and too drawn out so can certainly understand why it wasn’t the case. I think the new logo will grow on people and the fact it that it is different to the old one is enough to make it a difficult job and difficult for many to immediately like. I confess that i find it a bit bland and lacking in punch but I’m sure that I will get used to it over time. Whatever i think of it won’t have any bearing on my membership, support or involvement of Birdlife Australia (as I’m sure is the same for all those that don’t love it), but we can all have an opinion on it.
Cheers David Stowe
Hi Peter, I was not aware of any consultation meetings about design on this side of the country – the first meeting I was aware of in WA was the one at which the new logo was unveiled to various BAWA stakeholders (if anyone would like to correct me on that, feel free). Most of the members I’ve talked to hadn’t seen it until the beginning of this month and some still hadn’t seen it as of a week ago. I’m glad you were able to attend meetings and be involved in the design process and express your opinions then, but those who weren’t able to do that should be free to express an opinion now they’ve had the opportunity to see the logo (albeit too late to change anything) As for the logo itself, for the record I agree with Mark Carter’s comments for the most part John
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Hi Peter, I was not aware of any consultation meetings about design on this side of the country – the first meeting I was aware of in WA was the one at which the new logo was unveiled to various BAWA stakeholders (if anyone would like to correct me on that, feel free). Most of the members I’ve talked to hadn’t seen it until the beginning of this month and some still hadn’t seen it as of a week ago. I’m glad you were able to attend meetings and be involved in the design process and express your opinions then, but those who weren’t able to do that should be free to express an opinion now they’ve had the opportunity to see the logo (albeit too late to change anything) As for the logo itself, for the record I agree with Mark Carter’s comments for the most part John
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Peter, If your comment is a dig at me raising this issue, then can you please advise when members of BA (and BOCA) were invited to have an input? As a BA member I can answer only answer if for myself; never. Regards Alastair
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Afternoon All As a member of [ Boca] I also attended meetings re process and design, where these issues were discussed.I am led to believe all BA and BOCA members were advised over many months, and I am a little annoyed that Some People have taken this long to winge instead of using due process. yours Peter Baitz
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Tony,
I think the person who wrote that would probably be more suited to a career as a merchant banker.
Carl Clifford
Having seen a few rebrandings of late in the academic sector, I’m always somewhat skeptical about the results compared to the payment. F’instance a certain university rebranded recently at a cost of $7 million and basically got a lot of colourful squares to daub on every bit of university output and a badge redesign that made it look like a 3rd division football team, not to mention written guidelines on how we should talk to each other:
“Tone of Voice Setting the scene: Imagine a conversation between the University’s most brilliant minds, past and present. The exchanges are inspiring and engaging, intense and energetic. What people say is informed and authoritative, but also crackling with intellect and, occasionally, a show of wit. People ask questions, share opinions and discuss new insights. They are not afraid to be controversial or provocative. Sentences tend to be short, sharp and well thought out, prompting a lively exchange. The vocabulary is evocative and rich, but never alienating or elite. This is our tone of voice, which reflects and brings to life who and what we are, as people, and ultimately, as an institution.”
Quite how I was supposed to include that lot into “Hey Mike, can I have a bottle of acetone from stores?” I don’t know… As things go, the BirdLife logo in question isn’t terrible, but it would be interesting to see what it cost and whether that represents value for money. Cheers,
Tony
Photos, paintings and drawings of Australian, NZ, Swiss and British Birds http://www.tonykeenebirds.co.uk ===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Your “tone of voice” guidelines seem to fit exactly with the postings I read on birding-aus!
Peter Shute
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Having seen a few rebrandings of late in the academic sector, I’m always somewhat skeptical about the results compared to the payment. F’instance a certain university rebranded recently at a cost of $7 million and basically got a lot of colourful squares to daub on every bit of university output and a badge redesign that made it look like a 3rd division football team, not to mention written guidelines on how we should talk to each other:
“Tone of Voice Setting the scene: Imagine a conversation between the University’s most brilliant minds, past and present. The exchanges are inspiring and engaging, intense and energetic. What people say is informed and authoritative, but also crackling with intellect and, occasionally, a show of wit. People ask questions, share opinions and discuss new insights. They are not afraid to be controversial or provocative. Sentences tend to be short, sharp and well thought out, prompting a lively exchange. The vocabulary is evocative and rich, but never alienating or elite. This is our tone of voice, which reflects and brings to life who and what we are, as people, and ultimately, as an institution.”
Quite how I was supposed to include that lot into “Hey Mike, can I have a bottle of acetone from stores?” I don’t know… As things go, the BirdLife logo in question isn’t terrible, but it would be interesting to see what it cost and whether that represents value for money. Cheers,
Tony
Photos, paintings and drawings of Australian, NZ, Swiss and British Birds http://www.tonykeenebirds.co.uk ===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
On a recent overseas trip I was fortunate to be with a Board Member of the new organisation and to work through all the material and rationale on logo selection, colour palette, how it will be adapted and adopted for Regional Groups etc – and as a Life Member of BA and one time member of BOCA I have to say I found it compelling logic, professional work and a very satisfactory outcome.For me, the real issue is one organisation for cost effective use of resources, local touch with a National voice.Sure there are challenges in meeting everyone’s preferences, but may it mark a truly positive direction for our birds and their habitat.I’m in.Graeme StevensSydney
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Personally I quite like the new logo. It does what it has to do, which is distance itself from BOCA and BA logos, tie in with the Birdlife International logo, and be recognizable as a bird. In the end, its main job is to be a recognizable symbol of the organisation, not some artistic tour de force!
Cheers, Chris
try here:
http://www.boca.org.au/
Peter Valentine
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
I’m not sure what I think of it, it seems quite plain compared to previous logos, but then again, it’s just a logo – it doesn’t have a massive impact on my life.
For a while there I thought maybe it was meant to resemble both a bird and a human hand, but there are only 3 ‘fingers’.
Looking forward to the first magazine.
Belinda Stirling W.A.
I don’t normally like to carp, but I’ll make an exception for this. I hope they haven’t paid the branding consultant too much for this new Birdlife Aus logo. It looks more like something I’d expect to see on a brand of dishwasher tablets. Why pick a waterbird when 80% of our landmass is arid-zone? And why is it looking backwards? And why isn’t it an actual real bird instead of some vague cartoon birdy-shape?
Were I asked I’d have suggested something a bit more evocative and Australian like a Grasswren or a Parrot. Or how about a Grey Falcon- that would look equally good in monochrome, saving in printing costs…
Mark ===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
The new logo is fine, though I can understand why some don’t like it. The stylised grebe/moorhen is quite elegant; the three brushstrokes and blue/grey colour scheme echo BirdLife International’s trisected tern (which I think is a clumsier design.)
Links for those that haven’t seen it yet: http://biby.gaiaresources.com.au/about/BirdLife-Australia http://www.birdlife.org/
As Birdlife Aus is a merge of Birds Australia and BOCA, I always thought that the new bird logo should have been an Emu-Wren.
I do admit, it’s not found all over the continent and I used not to believe in its existence till I actually found some at Croajingalong…
Anthea Fleming
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Hi Elizabeth, I totally agree with you. It’s a beautiful and simple design. I love it. Cheers, Merrilyn
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
So where can it be seen? Or is it a secret just for members ?
Tony
As Alistair guessed, considerable time, consultation and money went into researching and preparation of the new logo. I have been to at least three meetings where the process and the reasons for the design were explained.
The new logo has grown on me and where I was pleased with it originally I am now enthusiastic about it as it delivers what a logo needs to deliver. At a glace it stands out as a generic bird – its not meant to be a specific species. Choosing a single species to represent all Australian birds would be impossible. To me the shape symbolises hope, life, movement and love. The colour is calming and fresh.
I was thrilled to finally get my first official communication from BirdLife Australia – the new era has begun! Elizabeth Shaw Phillip Island Victoria
Alastair,
I think the new logo is meant to depict the spiritual essence of birds. Or perhaps it is an Australasian Grebe that has just had its feathers washed and blow-dried.
Cheers,
Carl Clifford
I received a letter yesterday from Birdlife Australia showcasing the new logo. I have no idea what it is but I think I can see a waterbird of some description. I assume that considerable time has gone into considering, consulting and designing something new, but I am underwhelmed. I think this is a retrograde step from the previous Emus of BA. I believe this should have been put to a vote of the membership. Regards Alastair ===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================