Pepsi Logo History: Comparing Design Changes

Before you start

The Pepsi logo is a useful case study for anyone preparing a redesign comparison, a brand-history page, or a design exercise. You only need reference images that are clearly labeled by era and, where possible, a known publication date. The comparison can be done locally in any image viewer, presentation app, or vector editor. No online lookup tool is required for the visual comparison itself.

Keep in mind that older marks may appear in scans, photographs, packaging, or redrawn recreations with slightly different red and blue values. Treat the exact colors as version-dependent and check them against the specific source image you are using, not against a single assumed palette.

Step-by-step instructions

• Collect the main eras: the early script wordmark from the late 1890s and early 1900s; the bottle-cap-derived circle marks that developed through the mid-1900s; the simpler 1960s–1980s circle with red, white, and blue segments; and the 2008 version with the asymmetric white swoosh.
• Place the marks side by side at equal height, not equal width, so the comparison is not distorted by different wordmark lengths or badge shapes.
• Describe the same three properties for each mark: wordmark or symbol, dominant shapes and outline, and color arrangement.
• For closer study, crop the symbol alone from any version where the wordmark sits beside or below it. This removes the effect of different typography on the comparison.
• Convert all comparison images to the same color space and viewing size only if you are exporting a presentation. For simple observation, keep the original source images unchanged.

The most useful comparison is between widely separated marks rather than very similar versions. For example, the early script treatment and the 2008 badge differ in typography, symbol construction, and color application, so the changes are easier to explain clearly.

Check the output

After building the side-by-side view, check that every image is assigned to the correct period and that no reproduction has been stretched. A useful pass is to compare the overall silhouette first, then the internal curves and color breaks. If the comparison will be published or used in a client file, verify that the source images are suitable for the intended resolution and that no trademark is implied as original work.

For a clean layout, export the comparison at a consistent pixel height and keep a transparent or neutral background between the marks. Do not merge the images into one flattened file until the final crop and spacing are correct.

Common problems and next steps

The most common issue is using a modern redraw and calling it a historical logo. If the image is a remake, label it as a reproduction rather than presenting it as the original mark. Another common problem is comparing versions at different visual weights because one scan is low-resolution and the other is a sharp vector-like recreation. In that case, either compare silhouettes at the same width or replace the weak source image instead of over-sharpening it.

If the goal is a brand-history page, keep the written part focused on visible changes: script versus simple badge, outline versus flat composition, symmetrical versus asymmetric elements, and the relative role of the wordmark. Avoid personal brand commentary unless the project is explicitly a review.

Related comparison checks

The same method applies to comparing any logo family. For each version, check whether the core recognizability survives at small sizes, whether the redrawn colors drift from one source to another, and whether the design becomes simpler or more complex over time.