Does it make sense to put a brand with white background on a black site?

Question

My CEO and his client demanded me to put his partner's red brand with white background on a site which is black. They (not the partner) forbad the white or red brand with black background.

I explained them it doesn't make sense and it is bad design. They argued me that their partner head office in UK (where the partner's CEO is) could approve my suggestion, but the same partner's another head office in Brazil wouldn't allow. I argued them who bosses any head offices anywhere is the partner's CEO in UK and not Brazilian managers.

I searched brand guidelines at the partner site and they do not have any brand guidelines like Facebook and Twitter do. Twitter allows to paint any color in the background only if the brand is white.

Does it make sense to put a red brand with white background on a black site? Does it violate the design principles?

I intend to contact the partner's British site about the brand guidelines.

I need your critiques and judgements to show to my CEO, his client and the partner.

Answer 1

The problem with using a white background on a black site is that the contrast will attract a lot of attention to that white square which will stick out like a sore thumb. You might want to attract attention to your brand, but not in a way that looks amateurish. My reaction if I saw the logo on the white background would be to think that no one bothered to fix it or provide an appropriate file.

One more thing to consider, is that like in the example you've provided, chances are the logo will be bigger if you skip the white background, simply because it is what will make it look more balanced with the other logos.

I know of Royal Canin and I'm quite surprised there are no brand guidelines for this case.

In the brands I've created and worked with throughout my career, it was not uncommon that I needed to use an inverted logo (white brand on no background), especially when I needed to integrate a brand in a context that was not my clients' and where I could not dictate the look. Have you considered this? (using the logo in white with no background)

Answer 2

If the white background is an artifact of bitmapping (white background was included with the logo image) then the white background should be removed.

If the white background is there on purpose as part of the logo then leave it.

Many bitmapped or rastered images have their white background attached. Removing them is a big part of my work.

If the white background is square or rectangle thats a clue that its an artifact and should be removed.

Company branding guidelines over-ride anyone's preferences so see what they say.

If you have a white background problem you probably have a fuzzy/blurry logo problem too.

Regardless of company brand guidelines or peoples preferences you should have a vector version of your logo with transparent background so you can place it over any background you wish.

Having said that, and not seen your brand, let me add that a red logo with a white background can look nice on a black page and does not immediately break any design or branding rules.

Response to OP comments******************************************

Red on black is very dark and brooding:

Royal Canin, from that site, looks to be branded very light, clean and healthy. Your CEO and partner may have a point that the red on black is not best scheme for your brand.

Agreed you shouldn't use their bitmapped white background of poor quality. So your challenge is to make your red logo stand out on a black background using white. Maybe a rounded white rectangle?