Old vs. New Logo: A Practical Redesign Audit
How to compare an old logo with its redesign: which visual details to check, how to separate documented claims from interpretation, and what to verify before using vector files.
Contents
The short answer
Deciding whether a new logo improves on the old one depends on comparing specific, visible design details side by side. General impressions are not enough. This guide does not judge any particular brand's redesign, because no specific logo, version history or design documentation was supplied. Instead, it gives you a method you can apply to whichever pair of logos you are researching. That way your conclusion rests on what you can actually see and verify.
Scope matters before you start. A "logo" can mean several things: the symbol or icon on its own, the wordmark (the brand name set in a particular typeface), the combined lockup of symbol and wordmark, or the wider identity system of colours, spacing rules and secondary versions. Many redesigns change only one of these layers. Confirm which layer you are comparing so you do not attribute a change to the whole identity when it applies to just one part.
Three kinds of evidence to keep separate
A reliable comparison keeps three categories of information apart. Each carries a different level of certainty.
- Observable design features: anything you can confirm by looking at the two versions together, such as letterform shapes, stroke weight, colour count, proportions and negative space.
- Documented claims: statements from the brand owner or the design agency about why the change was made or what it is meant to communicate. Report these as claims and attribute them. Do not present them as established facts.
- Editorial interpretation: your own or a commentator's judgement about whether the redesign works. Label it clearly as opinion.
What to compare side by side
Place both versions at the same size on a neutral background, then work through the dimensions below. Note what changed, what stayed the same, and the practical effect of each difference.
| Dimension | What to look for | Practical implication |
| Typography | Serif vs. sans-serif, custom vs. off-the-shelf lettering, letter spacing (tracking), case | Affects legibility at small sizes and how distinctive the wordmark is |
| Geometry and detail | Number of shapes, gradients, outlines, shadows, fine lines | Simpler forms usually reproduce more reliably on screens, embroidery and single-colour print |
| Colour | Number of colours, shifts in hue, flat colour vs. gradients | Fewer flat colours simplify printing and contrast checks |
| Proportion and layout | Horizontal vs. stacked lockup, symbol-to-text ratio | Determines fit in narrow spaces such as app icons or social avatars |
| Scalability | How recognisable the mark stays when reduced to a very small size | Indicates whether a separate small-size version is needed |
| Continuity | Elements carried over from the old version | Helps existing audiences recognise the brand after the change |
Checking vector assets before you rely on them
If you are working with logo files rather than just viewing images, open each file and inspect it before drawing conclusions. A file extension does not reveal how the artwork was built. A file labelled as vector may contain an embedded raster image (a pixel-based picture) and no editable paths. A file that looks clean may also contain unexpanded effects, stray points or text that has not been converted to outlines.
- Zoom in well beyond normal size: true vector paths stay sharp, while embedded pixels blur or turn blocky.
- Use an outline or wireframe view to see the actual anchor points and paths.
- Check whether text is live type (which depends on the font being installed) or converted to shapes.
- Confirm the colour definitions inside the file and compare them with any published brand specifications.
Being able to find or download a logo file does not mean you may reuse it. Logos are typically protected as trademarks and may carry copyright as well. Check the brand owner's usage guidelines or obtain permission before using either the old or the new version in your own work.
Reaching a conclusion
Once you have compared each dimension, summarise the redesign in three parts. First, state what visibly changed. Second, state what the brand or agency says the change was meant to achieve, attributed to them. Third, give your own assessment of whether the observable changes support that stated goal. If you cannot find documentation for the second part, say so plainly. An honest gap in the record is more useful than an assumed rationale.