Renovated Billboards

Read the campaign story

OBI’s Renovated Billboards used a billboard-sized improvement on existing building surfaces as the advertisement itself. Jung von Matt created the German campaign. Archive and trade records agree on 2014 but differ on the month; this case does not resolve that difference by choosing a precise date. The various locations belong to one execution family.

The visual contrast establishes a limited demonstration, not a complete building renovation or proof of wider community benefit. The sources provide no independent causal assessment of sales or neighbourhood conditions. This case examines how the medium can embody an offer, while recognising that visible surface change does not establish structural quality, long-term performance or permission to alter another person’s property.

Editorial interpretation: an advertisement normally points toward a future result elsewhere. A demonstration on the advertising surface reduces that distance by showing a local change. The audience can compare adjacent areas without relying entirely on an imagined outcome. Yet the chosen frame controls what is visible. A responsible adaptation should disclose the scope and avoid letting a neat contrast imply that all related problems have been addressed.

Editorial interpretation: the idea gains force from using the conventions of outdoor advertising against themselves. The familiar rectangle signals a commercial message, but its contents behave differently. Another category can borrow that relationship without renovating a building. The strategic question is what the chosen medium can genuinely demonstrate about the service, rather than how to create the most dramatic contrast at any cost.

Define the demonstration’s exact boundary

State what changed, what did not change and what the audience should reasonably conclude. Keep the comparison fair by avoiding unrelated differences in lighting, framing or condition. If the demonstration is a mock-up, label it clearly. A small visible improvement can be persuasive on its own; it does not need to imply a complete solution or conceal the additional work required in a real setting.

Treat location and ownership as part of the brief

Before any real-world installation, establish permissions, responsibilities and professional requirements. Consider people who live, work or pass nearby, not just the intended audience. Early concept research can use original drawings or an owned tabletop model instead. The communication value of a changed surface can be tested without making physical alterations or exposing anyone to construction materials, equipment or uncertain building conditions.

Connect the visible result with realistic next information

Explain what a customer would need to know before considering the service: scope, limitations and when qualified help is appropriate. Avoid turning a striking image into an implied instruction. Measure whether people understand the offer more accurately after the demonstration. A memorable before-and-after contrast is not useful if it leaves viewers with unrealistic expectations about effort, cost, safety or the range of problems a product can solve.

A small test for another brief

Proposed adaptation: create two original illustrations of a fictional community noticeboard, showing how a clearly bounded information redesign improves one section.

Measure whether readers find information more accurately and understand which part was improved. Compare the demonstrative layout with a conventional advertisement for the fictional service. Ask what they assume about the rest of the noticeboard, then revise any visual framing that suggests a broader improvement than the example actually shows.

Stop if the comparison hides important differences, implies unperformed work or encourages unauthorised alteration of physical property.

• Use a screen-based mock-up, not a real property alteration.
• Keep identical content and viewing conditions in both versions.
• Label the unchanged areas and the limits of the redesign.