A lot of established companies have undertaken major identity changes recently. Changing a logo, especially for a company or brand recognized around the world, is no small decision. This small symbol acts as the core of any sort of recognition, and once it’s firmly in the public’s mind, changing it changes everything.

Three specific new logos have caught my eye, and I want to put my amateur critique out there. I’m a graphic designer by passion, and not training. I don’t even claim to be good at it. That said, I feel I have some good points to make. So, let’s take a look at the new logos recently unveiled by Intel, AT&T, and Kodak.

Intel faces some interesting changes these days. Apple recently released new Macintosh computers powered by their processors, but AMD, Intel’s biggest competitor, has been gaining more and more marketshare. Should major PC vendors start switching, Intel’s business will change significantly. Let me start out by saying, I like this new logo. It has a hip, techy look that looks simple and feels very professional too. Unfortunately, it’s the rest of the imagery that just isn’t cutting it for me, and that’s exactly what the public will see on every computer with an Intel processor.

First, we have a big, fat bevel. As any designer knows, someone new to Photoshop will always add bevels and glows, and other obnoxious wow factors. They have their places, if used simply and effectively, but I just can’t help but think of the thousands of over-beveled nightmares I’ve seen online. It doesn’t look bad, but I’m struggling to forget the bad bevels I’ve seen in the past. That’s not the only problem, though. The typography choices are killing me. On the bottom of this tiny little emblem, we have three seperate font styles. The text would have flowed more smoothly if the words “Core Solo” appeared on one line and in the same font style. The biggest problem seems to be crossing from “Solo” to “inside.” It’s a rough transition, especially with the negative space sitting above the “inside” trademark.

In telecommunications land, we have mergers up the wazoo. SBC just became AT&T, and dropped a a few instantly-forgettable letters to become another set that just about anyone recognizes. Once again, it’s time to insult some hot-shot designer who gets paid millions more than me.

Right away, I see something I love. The famous AT&T globe symbol got a great makeover. I can still recognize where it came from, and now it looks like it belongs to a 21st century company. It’s too bad the font hurts my eyes. You can see in the original logo, the text is bold, strong, solid. It flows from letter to letter, and the ampersand doesn’t confuse the viewer’s eye with all it’s winding curves. The T’s contain it nicely. In the new logo, every single letter makes me feel like I’m getting lost in an ampersand. It’s all just floating there in a big knot of typography. What’s worse, the text just doesn’t flow with the globe symbol. My eyes won’t move from one to the other without getting caught in a big net of letters.

Now, I place the final nail in my big-time-designer-bashing coffin by taking on photography giant Kodak. This company faces the some of the worst marketplace changes these days. They’ve stopped producing their traditional film photography items. Everyone is going digital, and if Kodak wants to survive, they have to go there too.

Honestly, Kodak just seems stuck in the seventies and eighties. Both the new and old logos look badly dated. The fonts look old, and the color scheme could definitely use an update. The newer logo looks even worse than the older one. First of all, while many big companies can get away with a simple text logo, this one doesn’t cut it at all. Take out the yellow lines, and it might work a little better. I imagine the designer felt they made the logo appear to be a photo, but I have to strain to imagine that. Even if the lines are missing, the text just isn’t unique. I want to see a strong symbol that shows me that Kodak is a company firmly commited to photography. I only see a no-name brand.

Of course, my opinions are just that… my opinions. I’m not even claiming that I could create better logos for these three companies, but when I saw each new logo, I instantly had thoughts and ideas running through my head, and I had to share them with someone. Comment away! Let me know why you think these logos are great, and why I’m just plain wrong.