Color Transforms:

Color transforms what it touches. 

Take the Starbucks logo. The classic logo, and the temporary “retro” logo, are brown; the iconic logo that everyone recognizes now, the iconic logo, is green. Each evokes different responses. Green is generally perceived as a friendly color, making one think of spring, or renewal - or the word, "go." It stands out, vividly, attracting attention and keeping it. 

Brown, admittedly, is the color of coffee – but it’s a much more bland, understated color. Professional, maybe – a color associated with business. It speaks of a more reserved sensibility, appealing most to the older generation who might remember the original logo. It can suggest a certain different kind of warmth, but time will tell if it is effective here.

Would Superman’s costume be as effective in a different color scheme? Cut any of the component primary colors, and it loses much of what makes it bold and powerful. Without the yellow backdrop to the iconic shield, he’s almost sinister; without the red trunks, the blue becomes overwhelming and almost melancholy, off center and unbalanced.

The Starbucks logo, in green, is similarly bold. It’s simple, yet effective, and it demonstrates the difference a choice of colors can make very easily. It's a subjective judgement, but I think it has the "Superman" quality - that certain "it" that a design needs in order to take off on its own power. Josef Albers would argue that color is always subjective, and there's a good deal of truth in that.

Of course, if the logo didn't have "it," would there be a Starbucks in every airport in America? Would there be a Starbucks in London charging five pounds for a cup of coffee just up the street from a local shop charging one?

Probably not.