<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: BBC Radio / Brand Portfolio Brought Into Line</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.attitudedesign.co.uk/bbc-radio-brand-portfolio-brought-into-line/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.attitudedesign.co.uk/bbc-radio-brand-portfolio-brought-into-line/</link>
	<description>Latest news and online thoughts of Graphic Designers Attitude Design</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 09:52:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Rivka</title>
		<link>http://www.attitudedesign.co.uk/bbc-radio-brand-portfolio-brought-into-line/comment-page-1/#comment-40416</link>
		<dc:creator>Rivka</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Oct 2008 18:10:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.attitudedesign.co.uk/journal/bbc-radio-brand-portfolio-brought-into-line/#comment-40416</guid>
		<description>Interesting to know.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting to know.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: andar909</title>
		<link>http://www.attitudedesign.co.uk/bbc-radio-brand-portfolio-brought-into-line/comment-page-1/#comment-36853</link>
		<dc:creator>andar909</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Aug 2008 06:05:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.attitudedesign.co.uk/journal/bbc-radio-brand-portfolio-brought-into-line/#comment-36853</guid>
		<description>hi, andar here, i just read your post.  i like very much.  agree to you, sir.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>hi, andar here, i just read your post.  i like very much.  agree to you, sir.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AJ</title>
		<link>http://www.attitudedesign.co.uk/bbc-radio-brand-portfolio-brought-into-line/comment-page-1/#comment-31673</link>
		<dc:creator>AJ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 11:43:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.attitudedesign.co.uk/journal/bbc-radio-brand-portfolio-brought-into-line/#comment-31673</guid>
		<description>With regards to the earlier BBC Radio brand identities, it&#039;s very easy to pass comment on something that was designed 6 years ago and was a complete success in terms of giving each radio station their own unique identity.

The original brief asked for individual identities without a common theme running through them that successfully lived within the BBC brand. Hence the consistent use of the BBC blocks. There is also consistency in the use of the size of each icon and use of a patch device framing the logo (Radio 1 and 3 can actually live outside a patch device as well).

If all the logos are placed next to each other they would obviously look different as this reflects the requirements in the original brief

I disagree that the earlier logos look a complete mess next to each other and in fact I would offer a counterclaim that the new icons and are actually executed clumsily and are badly crafted with scant regard for typographic standards. ie, what on earth is that small sloping curve at the top of the Radio 1 logo? Won&#039;t this dissappear when the logo is reduced? 

I think the revamp has actually taken the BBC Radio family brand backwards and has actually resulted in the loss of individuality and identity!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With regards to the earlier BBC Radio brand identities, it&#8217;s very easy to pass comment on something that was designed 6 years ago and was a complete success in terms of giving each radio station their own unique identity.</p>
<p>The original brief asked for individual identities without a common theme running through them that successfully lived within the BBC brand. Hence the consistent use of the BBC blocks. There is also consistency in the use of the size of each icon and use of a patch device framing the logo (Radio 1 and 3 can actually live outside a patch device as well).</p>
<p>If all the logos are placed next to each other they would obviously look different as this reflects the requirements in the original brief</p>
<p>I disagree that the earlier logos look a complete mess next to each other and in fact I would offer a counterclaim that the new icons and are actually executed clumsily and are badly crafted with scant regard for typographic standards. ie, what on earth is that small sloping curve at the top of the Radio 1 logo? Won&#8217;t this dissappear when the logo is reduced? </p>
<p>I think the revamp has actually taken the BBC Radio family brand backwards and has actually resulted in the loss of individuality and identity!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben Kippax</title>
		<link>http://www.attitudedesign.co.uk/bbc-radio-brand-portfolio-brought-into-line/comment-page-1/#comment-30996</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben Kippax</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Oct 2007 12:40:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.attitudedesign.co.uk/journal/bbc-radio-brand-portfolio-brought-into-line/#comment-30996</guid>
		<description>I agree with you in whole about this, The &#039;smile&#039; in the radio 7 needs to be much more obvious and I would like to add that the radio six logo also doesn&#039;t work for me. It doesn&#039;t fit in with the overall theme.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with you in whole about this, The &#8217;smile&#8217; in the radio 7 needs to be much more obvious and I would like to add that the radio six logo also doesn&#8217;t work for me. It doesn&#8217;t fit in with the overall theme.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
