Logo design represents a unique challenge that differs significantly from my other scientific illustration work. While most of my projects involve visualization of complex scientific concepts, logo design requires you to distill sometimes complex ideas into their simplest, most recognizable form. In this case study, I’ll take you through my complete process for the Betof Lab logo – from initial concepts to final design.
1. The Brief
This logo design was created for Allison Betof, professor of medicine at the Stanford University School of Medicine.
Her lab studies resistance to immunotherapy and novel immunotherapy strategies including T-cell receptor, CART and Tumor infiltrating lymphocytes.
She suggested that the T-cell would be the best unifying theme, but anything antibody/TCR/cell therapy related would work. The logo should be simple, elegant and memorable while incorporating the T-cell receptor immunology theme.
Being given such a well-directed brief is a gift, not every client has such a clear vision of what they want.
2. Exploring Visual Possibilities
My brainstorming process involved balancing several key considerations:
- Scientific accuracy – ensuring the T-cell receptor was recognizable
- Visual simplicity – creating something that works at various sizes
- Uniqueness – avoiding too generic designs
To begin I first searched for reference images for the components that may be suitable to be depicted in the logo design: T-cell receptor, immune cell, antibody/antigen etc.
These have been depicted in endless variations in scientific diagrams but I what I was hoping to find were depictions that are easily recognizable, while simple and sleep in design as to be suitable for a logo.
I came up with a large variety of leads but as usual, many of those would eventually be found to be not suitable or good enough for a logo design. Still, I want to share them here because they give some insight into the process of selecting promising ideas and then refining those.
A great logo design is simple, iconic and yet uniquely characterizes the subject. It should not be simplified to a degree where it becomes a generic shape that could be the logo of anything.
Much of my brainstorming was trying to find ways to depict a T-cell receptor on an immune cell (possibly including the binding to an antigen) in a simple, iconic way without too much detail. Much easier said than done!
I started out with looking for various depictions of the T-cell receptor. The simpler ones are more suitable for a logo but may be too generic-looking. The more complex ones are more recognizable for this type of receptor but may be too detailed.
Next, I tried to add elements to give additional context: show the receptor located on the surface of an immune cell, show the binding of an antigen etc.
Here I came across some challenges: how to give visual clues that this is an immune cell? How do you depict a white blood cell on white background? Maybe an inversion might help? Or negative space? How about using a black outline for the white cell on white background?
Besides the “receptor-on-immune-cell” concept I was also exploring other ideas. Maybe a design with an easy to recognize antibody. Or some geometric designs? Credit goes to my intern Timothé Osele who had some nice ideas for concept brainstorming.
3. The Breakthrough Concept
Eventually we settled on the idea of depicting the receptor on a curved line (that depicts the cell surface) where the letter O from BETOF is the antigen binding to the receptor. This concept was the starting point of a whole new series of explorations.
My concern was that the design might end up too generic, so I was looking for ideas to still incorporate the notion of the immune cell. For the client however this was of less importance and simplicity and sleekness had main priority.
For a successful design process the ongoing communication with the client to discuss their thoughts on and priorities of the design are important. Here it helps to have a client that has a general sense for design. It also helps to communicate directly with the decision maker, not through intermediaries or of the design is decided by a committee (this is often a recipe for disaster and will end up settling with the most bland of choices).