I was first introduced to Jeff Pollard as a possible candidate for Brand A Brander 2. Jeff was recommended as a pro that may be overlooked (which he would have been) because of his non-existence on any form of social media – which is where I have formed most of my brand design connections.
It was just after this time that the whole Tiger Woods saga blew up to the epic thing that it was and I started to wonder if Tiger would need to re-brand himself. I then remembered that Jeff actually designed Tiger’s current logo and thought I’d have a chat to the man behind some high-profile brands.
—
Firstly, thanks so much for sparing the time in your busy week to fit me in.
Nathan: So Jeff, can you give us a bit of background about yourself?
Jeff: Mine is a pretty mundane (*yawn*), simple (*Zzzz*) life; I tend to be a homebody.
I migrated to Portland, OR from the Seattle area in 1996. Growing up I’ve lived in Texas and Montana as well as Washington and now Oregon but originally my family is from Washington.
I’m single (never married) so I guess “Princess Charming” and I must’ve passed each other by somewhere along the way.
As far as “hobbies” go, I don’t really have any. Again, I tend to be a homebody – or I guess I prefer a simple life – but I’m also a voice actor and am currently taking acting classes so where that’ll lead is anyone’s guess.
I also teach part-time (Icons & Symbol Design, Logo Design, and Branding & Packaging Design) at Chemeketa College in Salem, OR.
Nathan: What got you into designing initially, and how did you end up as a logo designer?
Jeff: I was always drawing from the time I was old enough to hold a pencil or crayon or anything that would make a mark so becoming an “artist” was pretty much a given, but if I had my way I would have become a professional athlete – specifically baseball – and from the time I was 9 years old, that was my goal.
I played all sports growing up, but at 14 I had to make a choice between Track or Baseball. My track coaches wanted me to train for the ‘80 and ‘84 Olympic trials which meant giving up all sports except track since training would become a full-time job. My dad and I sat down to talk about the future and since baseball was my passion, I chose to give up football, basketball and track and concentrate on baseball.
By high school I was getting some attention from some colleges and Major League scouts – mostly the Seattle Mariners and Baltimore Orioles – and in my senior year I got a tryout with the Cincinnati Reds.
Unfortunately, genetics weren’t on my side and I was considered too small to make the leap from Triple-A (the level just below the Major Leagues) to the Majors so I hung ‘em up and concentrated on a career in art… which, again, was always in my sights anyway.
I did two and-a-half years at Tacoma Community College to prep myself for application to The Burnley School in Seattle where I was accepted and studied for another two and-a-half years. From there I tried Advertising for a year before deciding this field was a quick way to an early death then migrated into Graphic Design.
I seemed to have a knack for logo design early on and once I struck out on my own, that discipline became the reason my phone rang; I’ve always said that clients will determine who you are and, in my case, they determined that I was a logo designer so I never set out to become “a logo designer”. It just worked out that way.
Nathan: What makes you different from the thousands of logo designers out there?
Jeff: I can only really speak about my own personal methodology as a possibility differentiation since I don’t know the process by which others work: I’m more interested in visually representing WHO a client is and not WHAT they do.
Telling a client’s or product’s story is paramount as is finding The Big Idea. I have no interest in creating “visual decoration” that is devoid of any relevant meaning and I think too often what I see is merely that – decoration – which is becoming more and more the norm unfortunately.
I think it’s too easy for some to rely solely on software as far as dictating the terms of the creative process and because there is no “logo” key on the keyboard I’m old school when it comes to fleshing out ideas; a computer’s hardware and software has limitations, a pencil and paper (and my brian) have no limitations.
Recently, I had to “audition” for a gig and was one of four or five designers being considered for a rebranding job and one of the partners basically asked the very question you pose of what makes me different and/or why they should choose POLLARDdesign. My response was pretty much this –
The work will answer better than I can; if the work sucked I wouldn’t be considered and so the decision is likely already made based solely on the quality of the work. However, beyond that I can guarantee I won’t bullshit a client. Ever. I am of no value to a client if I’m not completely honest with them every step of the way which is going to mean sometimes disagreeing with them, but if I feel a client is making a wrong choice I’m careful to point it out but to also explain WHY I feel that way.
Anyway, however this client I mention here ultimately made their choice, I got the gig.
Sometimes a client needs to be reminded that this image we’re creating isn’t exclusively for the people internally, but rather it is for that company’s demographic and so the image must speak to them and in such a way as to reflect who the company it represents is because what the company does should be handled in print and electronic collateral.
I have a saying I use to clarify the goals of a corporate identity: A logo can’t cure cancer and it can’t make toast.
What I mean by that is that a logo is a very necessary and, in many ways, the most important, asset of any company… but it can’t do everything. It can’t supplant a good, cohesive marketing strategy so for those clients who think a killer logo is suddenly going to create instant success, well, I’m not afraid to set them straight while also pointing out what their ongoing responsibilities are as far as helping to establish and further the brand once I hand them Final Art.
Nathan: What is the favorite logo in your portfolio? Why?
Jeff: I can honestly say I don’t have a specific favorite – isn’t that like having a “favorite” child? – lol
Of course I have some that I feel resonate better than others – for varying reasons – but by and large I don’t categorize my work as favorites or non-favorites inasmuch as all of them were successful in one way or the other.
Nathan: Do you have a defining project in your career?
Jeff: I suppose it’s safe to say I’m best known for having created Tiger Woods’ logo (designed through Nike) which is to say that’s how most people introduce me; “This is Jeff Pollard. He designed Tiger Woods’ logo!” – lol
Nathan: What is the highest profile logo?
Jeff: Probably the other “famous” or at least highest profile logo outside of the Tiger Woods’ logo would be the Pro Football Hall of Fame logo (designed through the NFL) which, like most of the logos I’ve created, has an interesting story –
I was visiting family in the mid-west and they were curious about what, exactly, I did for a living – which I think is probably the case for most of us in that our friends and family aren’t really sure about what it is we do – and so in the process of trying to explain what a “logo” is and who buys them, the annual Pro Football Hall of Fame game was on TV and at that exact moment of my trying to explain what I do and for whom I do it, the broadcast zoomed in on the Hall of Fame logo painted at midfield so I pointed to the image on the TV and said “There! I did that!”.
My aunt, uncle and cousins looked at the TV screen, looked at me, looked back at the TV screen then someone asked: “Oh! You painted that logo on the field?!”
Now, had I simply painted a logo on the field of the globally televised NFL Pro Football Hall of Fame game they would have been impressed and proud as hell of me, but once I clarified that no, I designed the actual logo that was painted on the field, well they just went crazy – lol
Nathan: How did you manage to land those jobs?
Jeff: As for the Tiger Woods logo – which, of course, has just as interesting a story behind it – I guess it was a case of being in the right place at the right time… and not sucking at what I do.
Nike had signed Tiger Woods in 1996 after he announced he was turning pro and so Nike wanted to make a big splash by creating an identity and brand for Tiger just as they had for Michael Jordan some ten years earlier so they set to work on it internally.
They arrived at Tiger’s new mark and invited him to see his new logo and the products it was being produced on and… Tiger hated it. In fact, he was pissed that he wasn’t part of the creative process as far as being involved with the actual development and selection.
Meanwhile, Tommy Hilfiger apparently was whispering in Tiger’s ear that if Tiger left Nike and signed with Hilfiger, well, they’d do it right.
Nike rightfully panicked.
In response they assured Tiger they’d fix everything and that he could be right there monitoring the process all along the way and so Nike hired a big-name west coast studio, a big-name east coast studio, and little ol’ me to come up with Tiger’s new mark along with 33 internal Nike designers!
Nike assured Tiger that he could personally review every thumbnail, every chicken-scratch and every bar napkin that had any sort of image on it related to his logo and that he alone would make the selection.
As I understood it, the presentation/selection process took two weeks as there were literally hundreds if not thousands of designs to review. But Tiger plowed through them all and made his choice. Mine wasn’t The One even though Nike wanted it for Tiger but was careful not to steer him lest they piss him off again – as it was, my design was apparently Tiger’s fourth favorite – so in 1997, Nike presented Tiger Woods’ (second) identity to the world and almost immediately there were issues and concerns with it not the least of which had to do with it bearing a striking resemblance to Hyundai’s logo to the point where Nike’s legal department was weighing their options for when, not if, Hyundai raised hell; one of the considerations was that Nike would simply buyout Hyundai for the logo.
Now, jump ahead to 2000 –
I’m sitting at home watching the 2000 US Open and Tiger tees off. Of course, the camera zoomed in on Tiger and there on the front of his cap was… my logo! The one I created in 1997! There! On Tiger Woods’ cap! And shirt!
What. The. HELL?!
On the following Monday I tried to contact the art directors I had worked with on the project, neither of whom were still with Nike by this time, but eventually I tracked one of them down who confirmed that yes, Nike had revisited Tiger’s logo so the art director referred me to the head of Nike Golf whom I had worked with in the past before going out on my own.
I left him a voice mail and sent an email to find out what happened. I even sent him some of my electronic files plus the original design rationale I included in my presentation to Nike (which Nike used virtually verbatim on their website to announce Tiger Woods’ new logo!) to support my claim.
Ron called me back the next day. I think the first words he said were: “Looks like we owe you some more money!” which, of course, I wasn’t adverse to, but my primary goal was to be able to put the Tiger Woods logo in my portfolio.
Nike took care of me of course, I didn’t doubt that they would, so what happened between 1997 and 2000 was that once Tiger made his selection in ‘97, all of those hundreds or thousands of thumbnails, chicken-scratches and bar napkins were boxed up and stored away and when Nike approached Tiger about a rebrand, he agreed, so all of the original designs generated in ‘97 were brought out of storage and the whole selection process was done over again and this time, Tiger selected my design which he and Nike remembered – Nike pointing out that this was their favorite mark all along. The problem was, that because everything was boxed up together, no one could remember who did what design but fortunately, I just happened to be watching the 2000 US Open.
And that’s my Tiger Woods logo story.
Nathan: Did that defining job make you nervous or feel that you were maybe unqualified for such a project?
Jef: That’s a very good question. The answer is ‘no’.
I didn’t feel nervous or under-qualified or un-deserving at all. It was definitely exciting and an honor to be asked to participate but I absolutely looked at it realistically. That one of my designs would be the one chosen for Tiger Woods would be like winning the lottery and so I looked at the opportunity as simply being “It’s nice to be asked.” but I had no illusions or expectation that my design would be selected simply because the odds were against it given how many designers were involved in the exploration process with all of us generating as many idea as it was physically possible to create.
Nervous or unqualified? No. Honored and appreciative? Yes.
Nathan: Did the exposure of the high profile logo change anything about your business – and/or did you change anything as a result of that project?
Jeff: I think for some clients, seeing an armload of design trophies or a logo or client they recognize creates instant credibility in their minds so I’d be naive to think that my having created Tiger Woods’ logo didn’t benefit me professionally… of course it hasn’t done a damn thing for me personally – lol
Nathan: Are there any of your logos in circulation that you would like to change now, or wish you could have designed them differently?
Jeff: It’s normal for any designer to look at something they created six years or six weeks or even six minutes ago that they’d like to tweak or massage or love ‘n snuggle on some more to try and improve it, but I try very hard to create images that don’t encourage those types of responses. We all do the very best we can with whatever time is given and the more experience we have, the less likely we are to want to go back and change something already accepted and produced by a client.
However… There is something I created recently that I would absolutely change if allowed and I definitely fought like hell to get the client to go in a different direction.
I was part of a hand-picked contingent that rebranded the school where I teach part-time: Chemeketa Community College. Two of us are part-time instructors and all of us are on the Advisory Board of which I’m the current President, but we had to audition, by law, just like the other design firms but we got the gig.
In any event, despite having to deal with a committee (anything over 3 people is a committee and committees kill creative by the way), the project went fairly smoothly and ultimately the committee selected one of my designs.
But as seems typical, despite the project going fairly smoothly, the wheels came off when it came to color exploration and despite having no parameters going into the color exploration, somewhere along the way someone established parameters yet didn’t tell us and despite their being one clearly preferred color palette by all but two committee members, the final palette became a compromise that I think is ill-suited for the school as far as representing an institution of higher learning and despite my best efforts to talk the two members of the committee off the proverbial ledge, I couldn’t and so this logo is one that I would definitely change. Not the concept or composition, but rather the palette.
It’s grown on me somewhat but I’ll always see it for it could have been color-wise.
Nathan: If you could land any ‘rebrand’ job right now what would it be?
Jeff: There are too many to name – particularly in the world of sports team logos and uniforms.
Unfortunately, I see too many marks that are devoid of any relevant concept and instead seem to be more special effects or “Hey! Me too!” imagery whereby they all begin to look alike.
I’m definitely not a fan of 3D spherical logos. These illuminated marble logos are like the “swoosh” marks of the 80s/90s; overdone to the point of rendering them virtually meaningless as far as design goes.
Personally, I find the whole 3D lozenge effect beaten to death and played out – which didn’t take long. Too many logos seem more about visual trickery than actual substance.
Nathan: I guess having a somewhat ‘known’ portfolio helps to attract business, but how do you market yourself?
Jeff: I’m terrible about marketing myself. The worst. Most of my work comes via word-of-mouth to be honest. I send out periodic e-promos but I haven’t done any actual advertising for quite some time now. I like to think at this stage of my career it’s because I don’t have to – lol
Nathan: Do you think there are important skills that are being lost with todays designers?
Jeff: Without a doubt. When Photoshop came out, I remember thinking it was the end of graphic design as we know it. Tricky effects do not a relevant design make and that, for me, represents the biggest decline in our industry. The Big Idea is slowly dying and giving way to, what I call, “disposable” logos that rely on FX and not much more so it strikes me that critical thinking is becoming harder and harder to come by and because I’m a part-time instructor, I’m getting a front row seat so I’m able to report on this accurately and with conviction.
It’s alarming and telling to hand out a creative brief for a project and see everyone head right for the computer lab so when I make them sit down to thumbnail, I see expressions of confusion, terror and rage – lol
In a lot of cases, these students show up with nothing to make a mark and nothing to make a mark on! No paper. No pencil. Nothing.
I’m also on the Advisory Board at The Art Institute of Portland and I remember looking at student work and being completely underwhelmed so in my very first meeting I asked the faculty members at the head of the table what the process was when students were handed an assignment by them.
“Well, the first thing they do is go to the computer and… “. I said “Stop right there. That’s the problem!”
Students have to learn to work out ideas on paper and see for themselves that they can generate more (and better) ideas – as well as find solutions – with a pencil and paper faster than they can on a computer so my primary goal with teaching is to help students learn a creative methodology in order to help them arrive at The Big Idea.
Naturally, they go kicking and screaming at first but the ones who commit to the methodology develop faster than those who don’t and they are also more likely to have successful careers.
The misconception is that they have to be able to draw well. Not true. They simply need to draw well enough to explore ideas and convey those ideas non-verbally if need-be. They all can’t draw like Rembrandt or da Vinci, but they all can draw well enough to play Pictionary® and thumbnails are a requirement along with learning to defend their work meaning, in my class, there are no accidents in creating a well-crafted and relevant end-result.
And if any of them design another one of those damn 3D spheres, there’ll be hell to pay – lol.
—
Pollard Design - http://www.pollarddesign.com
Tiger Woods - http://web.tigerwoods.com
NFL Hall Of Fame - http://www.profootballhof.com
