Abstract
PurposeThis paper aims to identify and compare the graphical shapes and meanings attributed to place/city by the designer/creative/author of a city visual identity (VI) and by the client and designer’s peers.Design/methodology/approachTo identify and compare the graphical shapes and meanings attributed to place/city by the designer/creative/author of a city VI and by the client and designer’s peers.FindingsThis paper analysed the way the visual culture of different stakeholders influenced the process and the construction of the iconographic meanings. Secondly, this paper assessed how the design tools impacted the creative process in that specific context.Practical implicationsA demanding involvement of more participants in the design process can be worthy for a VI outcome. Visual identity of a city is both designer’s creative as a political process. The several aesthetical options decisions implied adaptation, trade-offs and negotiations.Originality/valueThis research explains how the design tools and forms were used in the creative process of designers when conceiving the VI of a place. This research also reveals how a design work can have an effective impact on the sensory qualities emanating from city brands which are recognized by tourists and citizens. The consideration of the designer’s tools makes a relevant contribution to understand some underlying procedural issues.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
