ITV Discussion Thread

Probably because it is still used as the symbol for National Rail (the public-facing...er...face of ATOC) and is used on tickets, train station signage and road signs. As such it's gone from being a corporate logo to a recognisable symbol in the vein of the No Entry sign or the Red Cross.

But surely you agree that, regardless of whether it would have been replaced or not, it's a logo that has aged quite well?

Again, I agree.
I suppose back in 1998, it was becoming a design trend to use lowercase lettering, but now it works well.

I'm still not sure whether I would like to see a new logo, or for this one to continue.
The current logo is not striking through design, nor is it a terrible typeface.
It works well when tiny, as much as when large. It does not work well on an ITV2 style angle.

Maybe a progressive design, focussing more on the logo, and doing animations & designs based purely on this would be the better way to take it.

After all, one of the solid American TV Logo's is abc's, who also have lowercase lettering in a shape, take away the typeface, and unlike CBS & NBC, you would just be left with a circle.

I think the 3D Cake as it stood was dated, but remember by the end it rarely appeared in full-colour and the last batches of idents were just as nice (and had a similar feel to) the Carlton identity which came in 1999.

I think if the cake had survived they might have had to take it back to its roots and go for something less sectional and more gradient'y.

Well that was sort of my point - it's evolved from being simply a logo designed to promote and sell a service to now being a universally accepted symbol for a particular part of day to day life. It's all to do with semiotics rather than aesthetics - the design of the logo is irrelevant, it's the meaning in the public consciousness that's more important.

The LRT / London Underground roundel is a similar, if more corporately b astardized, example, given that the roundel shape now appears on everything from bikes to boats.

http://www.actionsigns.net/articles/images/iconic_roundels.jpg

You know it's London, you know it's public transport.... it's just been a bit devalued by TFL I think.

surely, Michael, that's b.astardised

http://home.vis-is.co.uk/data/mocks/baroundel.png
... surely!

Now now! Either Z or S are acceptable in English; and in many cases, the Z predates the S. Collins' English Dictionary 2003 lists the Z spelling.

Either way, it's going to be a while until we know more if the rebranding will take place as late as September.

I'm really intrigued with what they come up with; I think the current ITV logo will stay but the channel logos will be completely redesigned and all-new pres packages will launch on the digital channels.

For a while though, and possibly a long one, we can only speculate!

Dictionaries are often quite prescriptive in their decisions between spellings. "-ise" is the norm in British English - something the BBC recognises and puts into practice. The Americans ended up keeping "-ize" - rather unusual considering the feeling at the time was that English should be more phonetic, and "-ise" is more accurate to the phonetics than "-ize".

Please, spell how you like - but be prepared to accept the consequences of your choices.



I have to agree - I think that changing again so soon would be seen as damaging to their brand. Quite how they would rebrand the channels is a different matter. They may do well to change from numerals to spelt-out numbers to differentiate the new look.

I agree. I think we're going to see an evolution using the current corporate logo, rather than something completely different. There's plently more they can do with the individual channel identities, although going for words rather than numerals would make them too similar to the BBC channels.

Furthermore, if they changed the corporate logo they would have to change the signage on all their buildings. Presumably, when they were sold the current logo they were convinced that it could be adapted sufficiently in the future without being seen to be constantly changing the core brand.

Let's remember that Rufus Radcliffe made a mark at channel 4 without altering the main 4, or E4 logo (I'm not sure whether he was related to the FILM4 rebrand, an if the upcoming MORE4 was planned was he was at channel 4).

I suppose the difference is that the '4' channels identities are all completely different, logo & presentation wise, where as with ITV, whatever concept they create will have to contain the 'ITV' brand.