That’s the problem here though. And I’m trying to help.
I demonstrated already how your logo behaves in different colour workflows.
For example, you’ve handed your logo to your client with brand guidelines.
The client uses the logo in an online printing scenario - and just uploads the logo to the website.
They never see the brand guidelines.
What you’re getting is that the item could be printed in Japan - you don’t know. And using that specific profile you’re getting colour shifts.
The way I fixed it - it doesn’t shift in colour when changed to different colour profiles - you retain the colour breakdown.
This is a very good reason for building logos, as I’ve mentioned, in ways that minimize the chances of them being incompatible with various end uses and software. For a basic business logo, I wouldn’t include features that depend on them being opened only in one specific software application — they should be equally compatible with Illustrator, Designer, Inkscape, and other commonly used vector software. If it can be successfully saved to SVG, it’s almost certainly going to work with other vector apps.
As for Pantone, it’s turned into a universal standard for color consistency. I wouldn’t even consider handing off a logo to a client without a Pantone version. There are other standardized color systems (Toyo, for example), but Pantone is the big one for printing in most countries.
Instagram, Tinder, Firefox, BT (telecom) are all examples of logos that have gradients.
So it’s not really something I can say is a definite no-no in logo design.
It’s different when you know what you’re doing.
Anyway - I think we’ve gone in a different direction and split the conversation into a more esoterical discussion. Which is fine.
I enjoy our exchanges, and it makes me think long and hard - and even to rethink my position from time to time.
Yeah, that’s why I mentioned the blinged-out versions (for lack of a better term) and the exceptions.
All those logos also come in more basic and universally compatible versions. There’s this old rule of thumb in logo design saying to begin with the B&W version, but I think that’s largely outdated. Today we live in a color world and B&W is the exception, but there still needs to be those basic one- and two-color versions.
If I’m designing a logo for a Podcast, for example, 99-plus percent of the time, it’ll be used small in full color on a digital display, so that’s where I’d concentrate my efforts.
Even as the conversation has veered off in other directions, I’ve been mostly referring to the kinds of logos for miscellaneous clients that @Jakub_Trybowski seems to deal with — basic small business logos. There might be those blinged-out versions that require specific software, such as After Effects, but usually, it’s the standard stuff — basic, simple and compatible for every use imaginable.
What’s important, I guess, is knowing what you’re doing and understanding what the client needs (whether or not they know themselves), then designing something that’s right for them and in a way that minimizes any down-the-road problems they might have with them. As usual, simple and broadly compatible are usually (but not always) better.
