rjssigns said:
Look at it from the client perspective. They may have spent hours on the design, gotten the family and friends involved and love the look. Now you're going to point out flaws telling them in not so few words that their work is crap. That's the point where things get quiet and they decide you're an idiot and won't do business with you.
That angle doesn't really work when it comes to a national brand, such as Century 21. The brand is 100% the property of the national company. It doesn't belong to franchise operators at all. The national company has its own brand guidelines that have to be followed. An individual shop owner can't just do his own DIY design, often changing fonts, colors, distorting elements and other alterations then expect that to fly.
Usually major companies are expected to cover some or even all of the sign costs at any franchise location. The home office isn't going to pay squat if they see something that disregards their branding standards. I've personally seen national companies come and force the franchise owner to remove goofed up, non-compliant signs and replace them at their own cost. Other major companies force franchise operators to order signs directly from them and/or their approved vendors.
Even when it's a small business with no national brand affiliation, a responsible sign company has to at least advise the business owner about what works and what does not on signs. Wannabe designers almost always have no clue. Lots of experienced graphic designers working in other fields make lots of mistakes when they try designing signs.
If a sign company takes a client's DIY design and reproduces it
as is and doesn't say a word, the client may end up angry at the sign company anyway when it turns out their home-brewed design really sucks when put into use on a building or by the street.
myront said:
Clear misuse of the branding according to the guidelines. Epic fail in my book!
I agree. The examples visual800 posted don't comply with the C21 Masterbrand Guidelines rules regarding white space around the C21 icon. Then there's all the required letter size ratios between the "Century 21" letters, the C21 icon and other lettering in the design. It can be quite a puzzle to put together. It sure doesn't work in that extremely rectangular space. And the "Brandt White Realty" lettering is set in a typeface that doesn't conform to the brand guidelines.
rjssigns said:
Client approved, Visual got paid. Win!
It might be a win for now. I doubt if the client ran the design up the chain for approval by corporate.
By the way, that is one really really $#!tty multi-listing monument sign to have tenant spaces designed that small and extreme rectangular. Logos can't work well in those confined spaces, just basic text. I've grown to hate a lot of those kinds of signs for all badly designed clutter that eventually infects them. And that really happens a lot when multiple sign companies start swapping out faces on the same structure.
