This same idea is at play in beer packaging where certain styles, and regions, just have a look. IPAs are green. Lagers look like nostalgic regional brands. Big barrel aged stouts look brown and, well, big and intimidating. Even domestic macro brands have a certain look—which is why, to the trained eye, it’s easy to spot fake craft brands out in the wild. They just can’t shake that mega brand provenance and sheen.
This framework makes it easy to stand out, visually. Even more so if you don’t have to worry about duking it out with the number 1 brand in a category and therefore can’t take a wild chance on boundary pushing package design.
Some fun examples? Hazy IPAs have a look that completely separates them from traditional IPAs—namely, maximalist pressure sensitive labels (with minimal branding) slapped on a brite 16oz can.
Though they share the IPA style in name, Hazy’s have a markedly different visual ruleset than traditional (clear?) IPAs. This styling helps them to be categorically differentiated from traditional IPAs.
So Hazy IPAs are a great example. And sour beers before them. It would’ve been cool to see where the Brut IPA aesthetic could have landed (I’m guessing more nostalgic regional aesthetics). But alas, us fickle beer fans moved onto the next shiny thing, effectively killing it in the cradle before a common language could be defined.
–
The point I’m trying to make here, is that by breaking down visual vocabulary and category “rules,” you will have a framework for working within, and around, depending on your communication and positioning goals.
You can make something different, just for the fun of it. For the wit and surprise and delight that it brings.
Or, you can get strategic and create a new category to bypass all of those rules in the first place.
–
TLDR: go shotgun a Truly Hard Lemonade Punch this weekend. Just don’t call it a seltzer.
|