• Forum has been upgraded, all links, images, etc are as they were. Please see Official Announcements for more information

Pre-Proposal - Visual Identity

Status
Not open for further replies.
I was looking at all of those 3 logos for a while with a lot of different emotions.
I like the innovation which Ogilvy brings but not sure if it speaks for what we want to hear behind Dash.
I appreciate that Tharp & Clark stayed on the old fashion way type of logo.
If I have to be honest I really like the actual one best!
 
technoir said:
I wouldn't say we own blue, Ripple and Cardano are both using blues similar to ours and sadly they have higher CMC rankings.
Click to expand...
Cardano's use of the blue is not as strong or noticeable as the new proposed Dash logo. I agree Ripple does have blue there, but very different logotypes regardless.
 
DAOMN said:
Thank you. Just coming to post this. It was strange seeing all the comments about "Double Ds"....whaaaat? I saw D - C, Digital Cash. I don't have a vote yet, but if I did, I'd vote for O&M's logo.
Click to expand...
Now I dislike both. Either stick with the current one or have a contest like GMDash suggested. My 2 duffs.
 
DAOMN said:
Now I dislike both. Either stick with the current one or have a contest like GMDash suggested. My 2 duffs.
Click to expand...

Would be good for publicity, a nice big prize, but I'm not entirely sure how we can confirm the votes as real.
 
Our original seems to carry more meaning. It has the Dash in the D the italics make it look like it's Dashing, it doubled as a C so it's both Dash and Cash. I don't see what they have added here. The double D is a definate no imo, I mean why?

The softer more rounded and lower case font of the second could be good because it's more feminine and that is the direction of things for the next 2000 years.

As someone else said none really convey money at first glance.

Amanda nailed it also the first one just screams that we are a company, we are not.
 
Last edited:
Both the pink color and the gradient scream unserious, unprofessional and outdated to me.
Also, the word "DASH" below the DD doesn't fit in well with the DD and the gap in the upper left of the D of DASH is ugly and unrelated. Why isn't it in the middle to reflect the logo? Or no gap at all. The whole DASH word looks wrong. I don't know if it's the kerning or what but something is really bad.

The old logo is still the best IMO. I look forward to see what O&M do with that, if that's indeed included in the contract.
 
I will refrain from commenting on my preferred option, but I would like to comment on how I think about the process and other comments I am reading here.

Changing a visual identity is a difficult process and gaining full alignment is impossible because much of this is opinion-based. I would encourage the masternodes to heed the advice in the original post... this is best approached through the lens of which visual identity will serve our mission best. I have seen many constructive comments and the debate here is generally healthy. That said, many of the commenters focus on which set of designs they "like", rather than discussing the attributes of each design and how those attributes would support or detract from our goals. Keep in mind that we as individuals are NOT representative of the general population. There is something to be said for appealing to existing crypto enthusiasts and something to be said for appealing to a general audience (as well as how readily we believe we can access each demographic in the short and long term).

I am personally much more interested in what is best for Dash rather than what option individuals like better. I think all of us want what is best for Dash first, even if we disagree on the answer, and that is what I will cast my votes based upon. What I like will be irrelevant. In the end, 1,000 heads will be better than one, especially if we all approach this with a view that discounts your personal preferences. Just my 2-duffs!
 
Ryan Taylor said:
I will refrain from commenting on my preferred option, but I would like to comment on how I think about the process and other comments I am reading here.

Changing a visual identity is a difficult process and gaining full alignment is impossible because much of this is opinion-based. I would encourage the masternodes to heed the advice in the original post... this is best approached through the lens of which visual identity will serve our mission best. I have seen many constructive comments and the debate here is generally healthy. That said, many of the commenters focus on which set of designs they "like", rather than discussing the attributes of each design and how those attributes would support or detract from our goals. Keep in mind that we as individuals are NOT representative of the general population. There is something to be said for appealing to existing crypto enthusiasts and something to be said for appealing to a general audience (as well as how readily we believe we can access each demographic in the short and long term).

I am personally much more interested in what is best for Dash rather than what option individuals like better. I think all of us want what is best for Dash first, even if we disagree on the answer, and that is what I will cast my votes based upon. What I like will be irrelevant. In the end, 1,000 heads will be better than one, especially if we all approach this with a view that discounts your personal preferences. Just my 2-duffs!
Click to expand...

What you like cannot be totally irrelevant because you also are part of the demographic.
 
Suggestion.. can the O&M logo proposal be worded something like this... "Vote Yes if you approve of the original O&M logo as it is ("DD"). Vote no if you reject the O&M logo, and vote abstain if you approve the "DC" version of O&M's logo".
 
GrandMasterDash said:
If you want the evolution of a logo, using the new brighter blue...View attachment 6661
Click to expand...

GrandMasterDash showing some great artistic talent! :) I like how the "D" and "C" can read "Dash" or "Cash"! I also like Mark Mason's tripartite logo. I love how there are so many talented graphic designers in this thread!

At the same time, I'd like to highlight Fernando's comment: "Our recommendation is to review all the materials presented in this proposal. Let it marinate for a while. This is not an art contest (which logo you like more), but a strategic decision (which logo will help us achieve our goals)."

Here are the links again:

Ogilvy: https://drive.google.com/file/d/19mdlsRqmhUYdBvxtRwgbwiBm51FLm43L/view?usp=sharing

Tharp & Clark: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1pTq9WtRGXfvOvK5qcwlbx45a_yrmZqHL/view?usp=sharing

At first, my gut reaction was to overwhelmingly prefer Tharp & Clark's simpler, softer, "evolution" of design instead of Ogilvy's radical change. Like most, I'm also fond of the "dash" mark. And the lower-case lettering is preferable, Dash being more like a word/verb and not an acronym (as pointed out in their documents). I agree with Amanda - we're not a corporation/company. And I don't give much weight to Ogilvy's "scientific" research. I don't think that kind of data is very informative, and often misleading (what people say doesn't always match how they behave).

But reading Ogilvy's FAQ, I'm warming up to the idea of a radical departure. I don't really like the idea of becoming a Fortune 500 "company" but... realistically that seems to be the direction we're headed (something like Ripple?) - is everyone on board for that idea? I'm not sure that I am, but willing to be open to see where this goes.

I like what Ogilvy says here: "They key is to find the brand image that builds brand equity faster at every stage of the brand ́s evolution and adopt it boldly and implement it fast. Dash current logo and branding is great, but it doesn’t maximize the opportunity to be distinctive in the cryptocurrency category as the challenger it should be. If your brand is not noticed, it is far more difficult to be relevant. Let’s build a real challenger brand until we lead them all."

So, we could have a radical/crazy/strange/noticeable logo now, and it can change over time. Also the idea of Double D's logos is kind of fun if not ridiculous. And they could represent blocks chained, or the two-tier mining and masternode layer, which is sorta cool.

So really I wouldn't mind either logo. To put it in perspective, whichever logo we choose, the more important thing is the successful delivery and continuous improvement of the technology ("Evolution") and its pleasure-to-use for the end user. That's what I'm most looking forward to and interested in seeing.
 
Last edited:
@amanda_b_johnson nailed it in her previous post.

Ogilvy's logo is for a Dash company (maybe for Dash Core Group?).
Tharp & Clark's logo is for a protocol (if http had a logo), a currency (euro, yen etc).

And between what we have right now and T&C, I would go with T&C because it feels friendlier and more polished.
 
Santi said:
Hi Max. This is Santi, MD at Ogilvy Madrid. Thank you for participating in the logo debate! I answer you at each point:

In our opinión, Dash should have an image that reflect that it is a challenger brand in a challenging category. Per our research, 83% of people that are familiar to cryptocurrencies dont even know that Dash exist, while only 9% dont recognize Bitcoin.
Changing our logo and branding is an opportunity to stand out faster in the category. Dash should shout out that it is the next big thing in crypto, not only make an evolution of the current logo.

There is a huge opportunity to stand out and to present ourselves as a brand that aims to lead the change in the cryptocurrency world and this was the goal of this exercise when Dash board contacted us.
Click to expand...

First mover advantage, so what? Challenger brand?


Santi said:
Our logo and branding proposal tries to turn Dash current image into a challenger. We have merged Dash ́s “D” with the core of the technology – the blockchain – so we reflect that “Dash is THE blockchain” with a modern and sharpy design.
Click to expand...


The O&M design does not scream out blockchain at all, it screams WTF!

Santi said:
Regardless of our personal opinions, we have compared Dash current logo with our new proposal and the facts show (current Dash logo vs. Proposed O&M Logo)
1. “Grabs your attention the most”: +46 pp. (11,8% vs. 57.8%) 

2. “You like the most”: +35,2 pp. (17,5% vs. 52,7) 

3. “Technological company, innovative, forward-thinking and modern”: +18,6 pp. (26,7 
vs. 45,3%)
“Solid company, trustworthy and that inspires confidence”: +18,6 pp. (26,7% vs. 45,3%) 

4. “Global company, with international presence, a leader”: +12,2 pp. (24,9% vs. 37,1%) 


And over all:

“Which one do you like the most?”: +32,1pp. (12,8% vs. 44,9%)

You can see all the results in the documents attached to this proposal.
Click to expand...

Leading questions lead to pre-selected answers.

Overall I hate the O&M design from start to finish.
 
While I personally prefer the current dash logo, I think the T&C logo speaks as clearly, but looks more approachable, more inviting to all. I vote T&C.
 
Every new marketing project begins with an objective question:

"What has the brand got that we can use?" DASH has many existing elements for Ogilvy to build upon:

- Broadly descriptive brand name that conveys energy, momentum, impulse
- Alliterative single syllable word with a strong mouth-sound
- Name longevity that will stand the test of time as business grows
- Culturally appropriate in global markets with no negative connotations
- Forward-leaning logo moves with the eye/page, not against it
- Primary color that's both conservative and solid, a palette used by the world's leading financial institutions from Barclays to Citibank

Given this brand DNA, there is much to commend with the new design Ogilvy have proposed:

Logo
The two 'D' locking together presents a strong and eye-catching design. This design is something of an optical illusion, a 'padlock-and-key' almost. You see it once, you remember it. That’s no small victory in design terms. Plaudits to the designer(s). It immediately transmits a sense of security and strength, imperative in a financial services brand. Also, acknowledging the gaps and negative space around the current logo lock-up is a well-considered evolution.

Font
The upright in the 'D' is a optically heavier in weight compared to the rest of the letter––it reads as an overprint and should be adjusted.
The 'S' has a lazy flow to it, and the terminals end somewhat undefined.
The rounded 'A' apex hearkens back to the current font, but feels dated already. We need a modern, clean break here.

Secondary Font
Din has very good legibility down to smaller point sizes, however this is a very over-used font and may not stand the test of time. To be called 'Dash’ and use a forward-leaning font (and at such an acute angle) always seemed too ‘on-the-nose’ for us, so we applaud this non-italic font.

Color palette
The ‘old’ blue was anemic and we support a stronger, ownable blue, although this particular hue is a little hard on the eyes. We advise against the color fading (or any color shift) as this weakens the overall design, and may well read as a printing error in newsprint. Also consider 5% of the population are colorblind and this presents something of a Color Vision Test for them. (Mark Zuckerberg is colorblind, hence Facebook blue).

Next Steps
We would like to see a comparative page with the new design set against the top 100 cryptos.

That said, we fully support the direction of this design, with minor adjustments.
 
Last edited:
My 2 cents here: (I prefer the current one, but If I have to select one new, I select the TC one )
nuevoss.jpg
 
The tharp n clark logo wins!!!!

why:
the logo is immediately recognizable, there is no need to interpret what the double chains mean like on ogilvy logo.
the logo is friendly and positive, which appears to be human focus (ogilvy's logo is dry and clinical, technology focus hence the double chains)
the new blue is more sky blue, positive, which is nice, new beginnings.
the logo works well in different sizes, while the 's ogilvy does not because of the placement of the double chains, the font also looks weak.
 
chinmi said:
Both logo's shocked me at first sight. But within the hour, I really warmed up to the O&M one, whereas I still dislike the T&C one. I do like @Stealth923 's suggestion to get rid of all capital letters. I also would prefer to have our iconic dashed 'D' be retained somehow. Anyway, since everybody is a designer here :) something like this

View attachment 6660
Click to expand...

Totally agree the lower case looks more accessible and contemporary than all upper case. It also creates a better holding shape for the logo icon to rest in.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top