by James Whittaker, Design Bridge
GS_googleAddAdSenseService(“ca-pub-3860711577872988”);
GS_googleEnableAllServices();
GA_googleAddSlot(“ca-pub-3860711577872988”, “incontent1”);
GA_googleAddSlot(“ca-pub-3860711577872988”, “incontent2”);
GA_googleFetchAds();
GA_googleFillSlot(“incontent1”);
GA_googleFillSlot(“incontent2”);
‘Do the graphics, leave the structure’
Anyone working in a brand agency for any period of time will have received this brief many times, and while this approach is understandable in some ways, it is also an increasingly poor way for clients to create winning brand propositions in the ferociously competitive market segments of today. Segments where the competition is less defined yet more disruptive than ever before.
Now for any brand manager planning to (re)launch their brand compellingly into the market, the role structural pack design has to play is a bit of a double-edged sword. On one hand structural design or 3D branding as it is increasingly known is a powerful vehicle through which brands can communicate values to their audience. However the counter to this is that the investment required to develop a new pack in time, logistics and cap-ex is frequently appreciable and the returns are not immediately evident.
Taking the investment first, the typical cost/time required for a new and innovative pack is certainly more than would be needed to say identify an off-the-shelf pack, and certainly much more than using the existing structure. The cost of research, design development and testing a new pack are significant but seem small in comparison to the cap-ex needed for supply chain, tooling and the production line, a cost that can easily run into tens of millions of Euros. Thus the advantages for either off-the-shelf or existing packaging in this context are clear in terms of cost and time to market and this will feature heavily in the client decision making process.
However, as with many things in life this is a question of balance and the quid-pro-quo benefits of great 3D branding are many and varied, yet these frequently don’t see the light of day, otherwise buried underneath the harder quantitative criteria.
Blowing the 3D branding trumpet for a second then (and before you ask, yes I am a 3D junkie!), when you focus on the potential hard and soft returns on the investment, the case for 3D is strong.
Putting aside structure’s functional requirements of ‘contain, protect and deliver’ for a second, perhaps the primary value add of 3D branding is the tactile, multi-dimensional experience that interfaces consumer’s senses much more widely than graphics alone. Orangina is a great if literal example of this type of treatment with its branded ‘stippled’ surface, but other brands also use the perception of the material use to borrow product values. A good example of this is how Tuborg and some other beer brands play on the qualities of blown glass to transfer values of solidity and fine crafting into their PET bottles.
However the opportunities in ‘haptic branding’ do not end with surface treatment alone. How packs open, close, click and slide all communicate and this stuff sticks in the mind. Speaking to the perhaps one or two readers out there that might have an iPhone, can you remember opening the pack your i-phone came in? The wonderful slow slide-off of the top component while air seeped in around the edges suggested exactly what Apple wanted with the product. Substantial, precision engineered, layered, considered and welcoming! Sexy stuff! That’s almost a once in a lifetime experience. Now consider the humble shampoo or shower gel bottle. Your whole family could use that bottle cap every day – is it a satisfying, soothing welcome into the weekday morning? Or is it an annoying, nail-breaking, leaky, messy experience.
Going further though, 3D branding also brings the third dimension to life and this gives the pack a depth of character that we have all experienced when turning a pack in our hands, admiring it from every angle. How a pack is shaped talks to us visually and the care and detail in the formal crafting can communicate not only the qualities of the product formulation itself, but also the attitude of the brand to things like fashion, technology and the environment. The embossing on the ‘Beefeater 24’ gin does this well, hinting at after hours decadence in a chilled out nightclub!
When you look at the above, 3D can evidently add a lot to a consumer’s experience of a brand, but more importantly, we tie these 3D attributes to the product and the brand to the point that the two become inseparable. When skilfully integrated with graphic design they may become the “icons” that our marketing clients often request. By way of example, when you look at some the most resonant packaging of all time, 3D branding plays an important if not central role to these brand propositions. To prove my point I have ‘removed’ the 3D branding of some well-known brands:
– Coca-Cola – in a straight glass bottle
– Orangina – in a square bottle
– Campbells soup – in a stand up pouch
– Jack Daniels – in a round bottle
– Kiwi shoe polish – in a pump dispenser
– Oxo cubes – in a pouch
– Toblerone – in a square box
– Brasso polish – in a pump-spray
– Pringles – in a bag
And let’s take a couple of unbranded classics:
– Tetrabric – as a cube
– Egg box – as a cardboard tube
Coming back close to the core tasks of ‘contain, protect and deliver’ perhaps one of the greatest qualities of 3D is actually coming to the fore as we speak, that being the interwoven relationship between technology and the environment. On one side this can be the important material reduction / sustainable sourcing that is featuring in more and more briefs, but good as this is, it just means we are using incrementally less than before. Maybe the big win here is when 3D design we can influence consumers behaviour away from aspects that damage towards a more sustainable and responsible approach. The numerous carrier bag reuse schemes and the Design Council UK’s ‘safer glass’ project are both good examples of how a slight shift in consumer (and retail) attitude can have a great impact.
3D branding has a lot to offer brands and consumers alike and the intelligent use of its qualities can make a brand stand out from the masses. Yes the value balance does mean finance and time investment, but the wins can be big and if you’re lucky, 3D can become the ownable differentiator that means you resonate where others don’t.
James Whittaker
Head of 3D branding and Innovation
James leads the Amsterdam 3D team in ideating, developing and implementing branded 3D experiences for some of the biggest global brands. James’s focus extends from the initial briefing, through creativity to implementation and his work has won international design awards many times including the Starpack, Red Dot and IF awards.
James has worked extensively in packaging design for the last 14 years for international clients based across Europe, Asia and the US. His clients include numerous brands in Unilever, Mars, P&G and Sara Lee including Axe, Rexona, Dove, M&Ms, Duvel, Durex and Ambi Pur. James also has many years experience running tactical and strategic innovation activities for these brands on both incremental and disruptive initiatives.
Prior to Design Bridge, James worked in Germany for 8 years as European Creative Director of frog, one of the world’s biggest global design agencies and prior to this as a senior creative for Fitch and 3 other design businesses
James is originally from England where he has graduate and post graduate degrees in ‘Design, Strategy and Innovation’ and ‘Product Design’.
