McDonald's, for example, is among the most prolific in their study of marketplace and more specifically telling perhaps is their devotion via millions of dollars in research over decades to the very topic of visual appeal to ensure the utmost in terms of attractiveness to their products and experience. They are often deemed highly successful in exploiting our own senses for their gain.
For the world of autosport, the fan experience is predicated largely on the sensual perceptions of sight, sound, smell, and, to a lesser degree, touch. I'm not aware that I've ever tasted Indycars in action, but I can't say that I can rule it out either simply because I've never put my tongue on one, but several moments have left me with mouth agape.
Most fans who have experienced autosport in person will generally refer to the torrent of sensations related to it that drew them to the sport initially. I would concur. It is also such that it seems difficult to explain to someone who has never been.
Despite however great the IMS radio network has been at creating pictures in the mind's eye of the action, nothing will replace the experience of being at the track. It's what makes a day at the track so enjoyable for many - the incredible experience one has that engages most all senses to the maximum.
A very distant second to being at the track is perhaps radio for audible reception or TV coverage for whom the visual is primary. Visual input is perhaps the strongest factor in determining how most receive the experience of autosport.
Something as simple as the static design of the car, and colors and lettering upon it, generate much attention and appreciation by fans. It is the primary effective experience by which the fan can receive other information aside from the racing action itself. With the depth of sensory imprinting on the race fan, the livery is perhaps one of the most critical intersections of art and commerce.
Even in the earliest days of autosport, attention was paid to varying degrees about the visual aspect of the machine and how it relates to those who experience it in person. With the advent of color photographic film, the real beauty of the cars could be displayed to the masses who were not in attendance.
The word "livery" originates in French ("livree") and was used in reference to a person or thing who was required or given something (a badge, for example) to visually symbolise a connection (or loyalty/ownership). It's evolved into the automobile age through racing (car's color and lettering scheme) and we still appreciate them today. It's oft said, "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder", but I also like to more objectively rate the effectiveness of a livery by how quickly I can recall the sponsors associated. I have some major product recall due only to the liveries of cars decades ago. Pennzoil is one fine example of effective association of color and design to me.
Having spent some time watching Indycar practices for the 500, here are the first five sponsors from this year's Indy 500 entries to date that I can quickly recall at this moment: Arrow, Napa, DHL, Pennzoil, USAF.
Now here are their liveries:
|all pictures (c) 2018, LAT Images and their photographic artists|
Ask me again tomorrow and the answer likely would swap a couple of others not shown here.
Livery design is a competition within the competition of auto racing I enjoy to watch as well, especially in the build-up to the racing action. Those who can capture the eye likely have a better chance of name retention. Granted, some of the above liveries are a result, as noted above, of many years of consistency and clarity in design, or simplicity of name, but that is also to their credit.
Which liveries appeal to you?
Which ones from this year's field can you recall within seconds?
Which ones from years ago do you still quickly recall today?
If you let your brain spit them out without much thought, you might be surprised at what comes first...