Logo redesigns of 2017: evaluating before-and-after examples
A practical assessment of 2017 logo redesigns, focusing on vector artwork, editable structure, and what changes mean for file use.
Contents
What the 2017 redesign wave shows about vector logo artwork
The essential answer is that a 2017 redesign is not primarily a stylistic event; it is a change to the logo's editable vector structure, color model, and delivery files. When a brand simplified a mark that year, it often removed fine strokes, gradients, or embedded raster textures because those elements are harder to maintain as clean vector paths. The redesign therefore matters less as a trend and more as a signal that the logo's practical files may have changed: new artboards, renamed layers, different compound paths, and sometimes a new primary color defined in a specific document palette.
What changed in the before-and-after examples
Several visible 2017 changes altered vector usability. A brand might have reduced a detailed emblem to a single geometric outline, which simplifies anchor point structure and reduces file complexity. Another common move was replacing a wordmark set in a custom or licensed typeface with simpler lettering, but this does not automatically mean the letters became editable vector paths; some wordmarks remained converted to outlines while others stayed as live text depending on the source file.
A flat redesign often meant removing gradients and shadows. That removal can make a logo smaller and easier to reproduce, but flatness alone does not prove a file is fully vector. A PNG version of a flat logo is still raster. The vector benefit only exists when the flat shapes are stored as actual paths, such as SVG paths, AI-native objects, or EPS outlines, not as a flattened preview image.
Why the file extension is not enough
A file named with an AI, EPS, or SVG extension can still contain embedded raster images. In some 2017 rebrand packages, a logo presented as a vector file included a placed photographic element or a texture that was raster-only. You cannot infer editable paths from the filename or extension alone. The practical check is to open the file in a vector editor and inspect the layers and objects: if an element appears as an image object rather than editable anchor points, that element is not vector artwork even though it sits inside a vector container.
Permission to download is not permission to modify
A common gap in 2017 redesign discussions is the difference between access and license. A logo may be downloadable from a brand press page, but that download permission does not automatically grant the right to change the artwork, recolour it, or extract its fonts. The vector deliverable may be technically editable, but the trademark and font licenses remain separate. Before reworking a redesigned mark, confirm whether the brand guidelines allow reproduction only, or modification of the vector file.
What to evaluate in a before-and-after comparison
- Check whether detailed elements became simpler paths; simplification usually improves vector reliability.
- Look for removed gradients and shadows, but verify the flat result is stored as paths, not as a raster preview.
- Identify any wordmark change and ask whether the letters are outlined vector paths or live font objects.
- Separate access from license: a supplied vector file does not grant permission to alter or re-use its artwork.
The 2017 examples are useful because they show how a redesigned logo's practical value depends on what the source file contains. A visually flatter mark is not automatically more practical; it is practical only when its construction matches the reproduction needs of the project.