Evernote’s New Logo: Before-and-After Evaluation

What changed in Evernote’s new logo

The direct answer is limited by the supplied brief: this assessment does not include authoritative artwork, construction guides, file exports or trademark terms from Evernote. The brief identifies the subject as Evernote’s new logo and requests a before-and-after evaluation, but no official measurements, source files or confirmed design rationale were supplied. For that reason, this article can only describe the general design condition a reviewer should look for and mark the missing technical details as gaps.

What a before-and-after evaluation should establish

A useful comparison separates visible identity changes from file-level claims. At the visible level, an evaluation normally checks whether the elephant symbol, wordmark, spacing, line weights and palette were simplified or redrawn. At the artwork level, it checks whether the deliverable is genuinely editable vector artwork or only a raster preview embedded in a container file.

• Symbol construction: whether the elephant mark was redrawn, flattened or cleaned up.
• Wordmark structure: whether the Evernote name changed in case, weight or letter spacing.
• Color system: whether the green and neutral tones were adjusted across light and dark use.
• Clear space and minimum size: whether the brand supplied practical sizing guidance.
• Deliverable type: whether the logo is provided as true vector paths or as an embedded image.

The vector artwork question

A filename or extension such as SVG or AI does not prove that the artwork contains editable vector paths. Some files are containers holding a raster preview, a linked image or flattened outlines. A practical check is to inspect the file structure directly or open it in a vector editor and confirm that the shapes remain scalable and selectable as actual paths.

The same caution applies before modification or redistribution. Permission to download a logo is not automatically permission to redraw it, replace its typeface or use the elephant mark in a new context. Vector editing ability and brand-use permission are separate issues, and the supplied evidence does not establish either one for Evernote’s new logo.

What the supplied evidence does not confirm

The brief gives the topic and title, but it does not include the official before and after images, the release date, the design agency, the brand rationale or the approved export formats. Without those materials, any claim about the precise shape of the elephant, the exact colors or the available file package would be invented.

Evidence status for the requested evaluation

item	status
Official before-and-after artwork	Not supplied
Confirmed vector or raster file structure	Not supplied
Approved color and typeface specifications	Not supplied
Modification or usage permission terms	Not supplied
Editorial comparison based on visible design condition	Possible only with source images

Practical takeaway

The most reliable path for a reader evaluating Evernote’s new logo is to inspect the official artwork itself and confirm whether the symbol and wordmark are delivered as usable vector files. The evaluation should then separate objective properties—outline count, embedded images, color values, size limits—from subjective judgments about whether the refresh is simpler or stronger. Because the required source assets are absent from this brief, a visual before-and-after verdict cannot be responsibly completed yet.