Our last project is about simplicity and we try to find alternate simple versions for some package samples of the international brands. We think almost every product needs some review for minimal feeling.
What is your choice in these 3 different variations?
1. Original variation
2. Simple variation
3. More simple variation
4. Please click for updated second edition
External Source:
Microsoft Ipod Package
LOST labels for your DHARMA Initiative needs
Derek Stroup, Unbranded Project
Josef Schulz, Sign Out
Andreas Gursky, 99 cent
Starbucks' Move to Brand Minimalism
Target, Starbucks logos: Out with the words
Why Simple Is Good: Jonathan Ive
P.S. This project is only a design practice for showing minimal feeling of some international samples. It is an article about unnecessary items on the global brands, any of them, second or third variations are not new packaging proposals!
High Resolution Images
Minimalist effect in the maximalist market
Labels:
Products
gipoco.com
is neither affiliated with the authors of this page or responsible
for its contents. This is a safe-cache copy of the original web site.
for its contents. This is a safe-cache copy of the original web site.
gipoco.com
is neither affiliated with the authors of this page nor responsible
for its contents. This is a safe-cache copy of the original web site.
95 comments:
Love what you guys have done here. I wish more people understood how simple things can make an impact too. But I guess the whole experience lies in making it simple yet beautiful and emphatic.
Good job..
Cheers
VIPIN NAIR
While the purist in me loves the most minimal designs, I feel in most cases (to my taste anyway) there would be an optimal design somewhere between the two simplified designs. Something very minimal, that still retains some of the coloured branding (eg the blue of the Lindt, the red sun on the Red Bull and red lettering on Nutella).
Still - beautiful work.
so the idea is to make everything as unappealing as possible? These look generic and have no personality.
I find that I pretty much always like minimalist as long as it has some sort of hip color to it. Some logos look out of place with no image. Cornflakes, Nutella Toffifee are less appealing to me because of the lack of substance. I also feel the Pringles labels need more contrast. As long as one knows what's inside the product, simplification is a great idea. It gives more play to the creative brain, and clearer mind for those who live in Media Mecca.
Athena
AHHHH i love the minimalist idea sooo much, would definitely be drawn to these designs. Less is definitely more.
Nikki xx
pinkandolive.blogspot.com
Great idea.
Somtimes the color might stay in the minimalist proposal, it's somehow distrubing on redBull, Pringles and Nutella where color is a part of the original logo.
Great work anyway
Products nowadays are plagued with information overload, but as some of the comments already suggested above, without some of the information (e.g. for food, the illustration of the food sold) or difference in colour, the products don't stand out as much and becomes generic. But out of the 3 choices, I'd probably go for the simple variations (middle).
Love the work though.
WIN!
wow, very cool to see it put out like a science project. I liked the simple one almost everytime except for the cereal box, it looked generic.
I've always liked the saying 'simplicity is quality' and the 'Keep It Simple Stupid - KISS'.
I think the point here is that so often we resort to trying to sell things by shoving everything but the kitchen sink down consumers' throats. Executives often think that just because they say something on packaging that it's communicated, when normally the exact opposite is true. If you have a great product, you don't need to tell people that it's "Fresh!" or "Delicious!". It's assumed by the consumer that your product is of higher quality the less you need to tell them so. Take the "Toffifee" for example. Get rid of that ridiculous typeface and cartoonish illustration and replace it with something simple and I might actually think that it's a quality product. As is, I look at it and think "These people clearly not only don't make a quality product, they wouldn't know it if they did".
Some of these designs would probably
a) save the companies vast amounts of cash (less labels/printing)
b) help the environment by substantially reducing the amount of labels/materials used in production
nice work!
minimal is a style. Like any style, it's not an all purpose solution to every situation. On some of these examples it works great. On most, I like the middle option. On a few, the original is still best.
Oh, how I love minimalism. This is brilliant.
I like these, except the Nesquik and Corn Flakes. Those are marketed to kids, and it's obvious in their packaging. THe minimalist versions do nothing for children.
I like the super simple, but that's because I already know what the brans are and I simply want the products. So when I see Nutella, I am not really buying a chocolate butter, I am buying THE chocolate butter.
I think this could very well work with Milk, Eggs, and other common products - who cares what the brand is, just give me milk!
Less is more does not always apply to every product, the choice of color/ images/ typography can lead to attracting different audience. sometimes less can appear as high end. at the same time, not every shopper appreciate the high end appearance. I think understanding the target audience is important and apply graphic design according to their need is the key to sale.
images definitely helps consumer understand what they are purchasing, some idea like most people prefer to see images on the menu in a Chinese restaurant, unless a brand is so famous that everyone know, it could come out as confusing and scary for foreigner.
ex:Nesquik and cornflakes looks like chemical products with only the bright color.
The simplified versions are so much better, design wise! But this can only be done on already established products and then again you are running the risk of losing new customers.
Simple design in always better but this also needs to be informational so the most simplified version might not sell as much cause after all you need to know what your buying! Works great with nutella though cause the jar is see through so you actually get to see whats inside.
Very interesting approach!
I find some of the minimalist designs classier (the Mr Muscle, Schwepps and Lindt in particular) and others look cheaper (both cereals, the milkshake and, um, the condoms). I suspect this is due to the products at least as much as the designs - some are made for minimalism, others aren't. Perhaps the ones one can imagine Supermarket Own Brands versions are the ones that look cheap, as they often go quite plain on their designs, and the others look good?
Mr Muscle - 2 This kind of product can't be so minimal.
Durex - 3 Gives the product a sense of elegance, best choice for condoms.
Red Bull - 2 The product needs his original logo.
Corn Flakes - 1 The last looks so generic.
Nesquik - 1 I think that the bunny needs the redesign.
Lindt - 2 The drawing in the right on the first image sucks.
Toffifee - 1 Can't be "minimalized".
Nutella - 2,3 Both of them look good.
Schweppes - 3 Best choice.
Pringles - 2 The same reason that Corn Flakes.
Good designs!
Works well with the brands who have established an identity...not so much with the lesser fortunate.
Great designs though...my favorites: Durex & Nutella.
The others seem to take away the crux of the logo.
Love the last and simpliest Nutella one. I would choose between simple, or the simpliest for all the products!
To be honest, I think the nutella and Schweppes are the only ones I'd buy. The rest, as others have pointed out, look classy but lack personality. They're cold, and don't really scream "buy me!" While the minimalist works for sleek machines like Apple, I think that with food it just makes it look like bomb shelter rations.
the can of red bull is sexy and sleek with the minimalist look. kudos
The products in transparent containers, where the richness and color (or lack of) become a central design element, are the most successful. The Nutella looks delicious, the Schweppes bottles are gorgeous, and even Mr. Muscle looks enticing.
For "blind" packages, some products really benefit from some tasty illustration or photography. The old-skool Toffifay (not sure when they changed to the über-cute double-e) is a nice example of tasteful type and restrained photography, adding to the character of the brand.
img.photobucket.com/albums/v294/sincub/toffifay.jpg
Gotta love the most minimal of designs. Simplification is somethign everyone could use a little more of these days.
This is definitely part of the attraction of
"home brand" or generic products, better, simpler packaging.
These look very attractive, but in the end, if everything was designed that minimalistically, nothing would stand out. Everything would blind into one monotone blob. That is why we are where are today, because this is how package design started out in the early 1900's, and they all tried to differentiate themselves and one up each other. So maybe it is time for companies to scale back to somewhere in between, but not completely minimal as these are.
Also another fact after this article, many items on the package is not for inform us, it is for cheating us (illusion of marketing strategy), like some advertisin cliché, "fresh" "new" "power" etc. Why many medicine packages so simple?