Sephora logo redesign: comparing the old and updated identity
A focused comparison of the old Sephora logo and the updated identity, covering typography, spacing, color, scalability and which version suits specific uses.
What is the essential answer to my logo design question?
The old Sephora logo is a wordmark set in a bold, wide, uppercase sans-serif typeface, usually shown in black on a white ground or reversed in white on black. The updated identity keeps the same basic wordmark structure but refines the letterforms, tightens the spacing and introduces a cleaner, more standardized color treatment. In short, this is not a symbolic overhaul: Sephora retained the recognizable name-first approach and modernized the execution.
A scope distinction matters here. Older retail signage and packaging often show the wordmark with slight variations in weight, tracking or finish because of different production methods. The core old logo under discussion is the plain uppercase Sephora wordmark without an icon. The updated identity generally refers to the current flat black-and-white wordmark, sometimes accompanied by the flame-shaped Sephora symbol, but the symbol itself is a separate asset and is not the primary focus of this comparison.
What meaningful differences separate these options?
The differences are most visible in typography, spacing, weight and finish. When comparable specimens are placed side by side at the same display size, the old version tends to feel heavier and slightly wider, while the updated version appears more controlled and even.
| Design criterion|Old Sephora wordmark|Updated Sephora wordmark |
| Typography|Bold, wide, uppercase sans-serif with slightly uneven internal counters|Refined uppercase sans-serif with more consistent stroke contrast and cleaner terminal cuts |
| Letter spacing|Looser tracking, especially between the E, P and H|Tighter, more optically balanced tracking across all seven letters |
| Weight|Heavier overall presence|Slightly lighter but more uniform in stroke weight |
| Scalability|Strong at large sizes; smaller reproductions can feel dense|More even spacing improves legibility at small display sizes |
| Color|Commonly black, white or metallic print treatments|Standardized flat black and white for digital and packaging systems |
| Asset editability|Varies with source; older files may be outlines or scans|Current vector assets are cleaner and easier to resize without visual noise |
The geometric comparison does not indicate a change in the basic letter construction. Sephora still uses a near-geometric sans-serif structure, but the updated version reduces some of the visual tension caused by the old wide spacing. For example, in the old mark, the gap after the final A can make the wordmark feel slightly open-ended. The updated spacing pulls the letters into a tighter block, which helps the name read as a single unit.
Color is another practical difference. The old identity was frequently reproduced in black, white or metallic treatments depending on the surface. The updated system standardizes flat black and white, which removes finish inconsistencies across packaging, signage and screens. That does not mean Sephora never uses other colors, but the core wordmark works from a simpler two-color rule.
For scalability, the updated spacing gives the logo an advantage. At small sizes, tightly tracked uppercase letters remain more legible and create fewer uneven gaps. The old version can still work at large sizes, but its looser tracking becomes more noticeable in compact applications such as mobile navigation, social media avatars or small product labels.
For asset editability, the updated vector wordmark is generally easier to work with because it is produced as a clean, consistent outline set. The practical recommendation depends on intended use. If you need a historical reference or a deliberately heavier retail look, the old wordmark may suit archival, editorial or nostalgia-driven design work. If you need a flexible logo for digital interfaces, small print or a brand-compliant reproduction, the updated wordmark is the stronger choice.
These judgments are based on observable design features in comparable black-on-white presentations. Performance at extreme sizes or on unusual materials has not been independently tested here, so any claim about very small reproduction should be treated as a qualified observation rather than a measured result.