The design problem encountered with the Greener Day Toys brand was the need to increase awareness of this online toy company by creating recognizable brand designs that helped to differentiate the brand from its competition and expand its audience. As a result of the brand’s need, a multi-week design process began by producing identity-centered designs to help expand the brand’s footprint on and offline. 

the process of establishing awareness for the brand was the creation of a look and feel sample board. The samples on the board include the onlyness statement, theme, typography choices, imagery, color palette, lines, shapes, textures, and patterns. 

There were three boards created. 

The typography, lines and patterns did not accurately reflect the look and feel of the brand on the first sample board. Later down the production process, a second board was created with updated typography, lines, and patterns that better reflected the look and feel of the brand. Finally, as the production of media assets began, a typographic style changed, resulting in an update and creation of the third look and feel board. 

The production of a brand vision board is another identity piece created for the Greener Day Toys brand. There were four brand vision boards produced for the brand. The first board lacked visual hierarchy and failed to tether together the look and feel samples of the brand to give it personality. 

​

The second production of the board was indeed aesthetically pleasing. However, the feel of the vision board was more corporate than fun—an important element of the brand’s personality. 

Vision board three addressed the look and feel of the brand but didn’t wholly embody the environmental element of the brand, resulting in the production of the fourth board. 

The fourth brand vision board accurately addressed the look and feel of the brand, presenting every element of the Greener Day Toys brand personality. 

The next production step in creating identity pieces that bring awareness to the brand was the creation of a brand logo. The first course of action was sketching 30 thumbnail ideas for a brand mark. 

​

A self-evaluation was performed on the 30 sketches, selecting six of the strongest concepts for possible logo creation. 

Those six underwent a resketch and refinement process, showing a minimum of five revisions for each sketch, leading up to a strong possible final sketch for each. The final six went through the self-evaluation process, selecting two of the strongest for vector production. Of those two vectors, a final logo was selected from the self-evaluation process and produced in black and white and color. 

In the production of media assets, the final logo changed twice to create a more versatile brand mark. The original logo did not represent the environmental element of the brand other than the name itself, so a new logo was designed. The new logo is more versatile, allowing it to be broken up and used in different ways while still representing the brand’s identity.

Following the production of the logo was the creation of six media assets to represent the brand through multiple channels of media. These media assets included a letterhead package, social media channels, logo animation, billboard, swag pack, and video commercial. 

Each media asset followed a 4-week production schedule, which started with 18 sketch concepts for the assets. The strongest sketch for each media asset was selected for vector production. 

Each week, the submission process for the media assets worked in two parts: submission, workshop and edit, then final submission. The process included the production of four logo animations, two letterhead package designs, 4 social media channel designs, three swag pack designs, and two video commercial renders. 

​There were four productions of the logo animation. The first two logo animations included the original logo. As the brand evolved, two new logos were created, resulting in a third and fourth logo animation. 

The production of this media asset concludes with the fourth logo animation, which includes the fourth and final logo.

The letterhead packaging communicates the brand's voice and tone through static media. Two drafts of the package were created. The first draft draft lacked cohesion and design effectiveness. 

The final draft combined all the brand identity elements together to created a cohesive design that portrayed the look and feel of the brand.

Mobile application websites such as Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook offer a user experience that's consistent with the brand's voice and tone. They also effectively communicate the brand's benefits and attributes. 

The first three images below are mock social media designs for Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter. The final image is the final social media asset design. It includes a design for a Facebook page for the Greener Day Toys brand and an Instagram page. 

Swagger items such as t-shirts, hats, canvas bags, and hats are promotional items used to bring awareness to the Greener Day Toys brand and to promote its products and services to a diverse audience. 

Below are the three design drafts created for the brand. 

The billboard asset is a tool that builds brand awareness by showcasing the Greener Days Toys Brand to as many people as possible. It also serves as a universal invitation to the brand's products and services. 

The commercial asset is an educational tool that informs potential customers about the brand and it products or services. Producing this high quality video also created differentiation for the brand, setting the Greener Day Toys brand apart from its competitors.

The final brand identity piece was the creation of a Brand Playbook. There were five renders of the Brand Playbook. The first three renders underwent self-evaluation where every element of the book received a critique to measure design effectiveness. 

The critique evaluated look and feel, voice and tone elements, visual hierarchy, mechanics, and brand cohesion and consistency. 

The final render of the book went through peer evaluation. Three media design peers followed the same critique guidelines, pointing out areas in the book where design effectiveness required improvement. 

One page in the book lacked alignment, affecting the visual hierarchy. There was also a navigation issue on another page. Both errors were fixed for the final submission.