Sherwin-Williams is not subtle.

The Sherwin-Williams logo might be the worst logo ever. Not because it’s ugly or accidently looks like something it isn’t. No it’s horrible because I suspect it looks exactly like they meant it to look. Here, this is the original logo:

Yeah. They sell paint. And they want to cover the Earth. You know, with paint. By selling, I suppose, a lot of paint. See, they’re gonna be the best paint sellers of all… doesn’t that look like blood to you?

I mean it is horrible. That isn’t “we’re gonna sell all the paint” that’s more “buy our paint or the streets will run red with your blood as we correct your purchasing mistakes, fool.”

And so I was inspired to make them a few new slogans:

There are, of course, a few million more that could be used. I mean, keee-rist, guys, who not only thought this was a good logo but then kept using it all this time. They’ve never changed it. This is just their corporate image.

It’s a warning. It really is.

7 Comments

  1. el fro August 7, 2011 at 8:27 pm #

    Here’s the problem I see here. The concept of the logo is a good one – covering the earth with paint. It’s simple yet evocative. You’re dead right in that the color choice is unfortunate. But, what WOULD be a good color? Any derivative of red will look like blood (as you pointed out) so that’s out. Blue will look like water and not paint, so that’s out. Yellow looks like piss, and that’s almost as bad as blood.

    Neither black nor grey work well, save for a b/w print add – if you’re selling COLOR PAINT, your logo should be in color. Orange looks too much like red, unless you go the other way with it, then it looks like yellow, and we’re back to the those issues again. So we’ve knock out the primary colors, we’ve knocked out the shades, and we’ve knock out one secondary color, leaving purple and green. If you want to hit the rainbow for some tertiary colors, you have violet and teal as possible colors to choose from. Green suggests eco-friendliness now, which could be misleading, otherwise I would say that’s their best bet for a single color choice. Purple might be considered too feminine by enough people for it to be a problem. I kind of like teal, except it isn’t a color people would use often. Maybe the answer is to use multiple colors, but that’s own headache, as the second you put in too many colors everyone in America will associate the paint with homosexuality, which could be divisive.

    There’s also the chance that I’m way, way overthinking this.

  2. Maureen August 7, 2011 at 10:07 pm #

    Why not have a brush painting a streak of color across a gray scale earth and change the catch phrase to “Color the world.”

    Greens and blues = eco-friendly and it looks like paint is bringing life to the planet.

    What’s that? Did I just hear my calling?

  3. APK August 7, 2011 at 10:14 pm #

    El: You are. And really I think it’s because you’re starting from a place o f”Yeah a globe drowning in our product is a good idea” to begin with. You want to sell paint, fine. You want to be number one, fine. But “WE WILL BLANKET THE EARTH WITH OUR PRODUCT” is a bit… strange.

    Maureen: Sure, that might work. But I dunno. Maybe I think too small. But… it’s PAINT. Coat the globe, color the world… maybe just paint the damned walls and go home? It’s PAINT. Am I missing something? Probably.

  4. Maureen August 7, 2011 at 10:27 pm #

    Adam, this is much bigger than paint – this is CAPITALISM we are talking about….

    Color the globe.

    With Paint.

  5. APK August 7, 2011 at 10:28 pm #

    It’s HOUSE PAINT!

  6. Maureen August 7, 2011 at 10:31 pm #

    Right. So, we should build houses for the homeless and then PAINT THEM with SWP.

    I can actually see a huge humanitarian campaign brewing here….

  7. APK August 7, 2011 at 10:34 pm #

    I thought I read something about them donating to one of the build houses for the homeless projects.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: