The Liron system

The architecture

Liron is the company. The six below are its lines. Every product category belongs to exactly one of them, so no two lines sell the same product to the same customer through the same channel.

Five of the six are endorsed: they carry their own name and acknowledge Liron on anything the customer keeps. Liron Lighting is the exception — it carries the parent name directly, because it already does, and 752 customers and 50 agency partners order under it.

Why endorsed rather than freestanding. 175 candidate names were checked against the registry. Essentially every freestanding .com was gone; essentially every liron<name>.com was free. The endorsement is not a styling decision — it is the only architecture with a clean digital footprint, and it lets a new line inherit the parent's standing on day one.

The six

Colour — Pine & Signal

Alta takes Pantone 432 C, the standard corporate charcoal-blue — grey with a clear blue cast, 17% saturation, so it reads as a neutral rather than as a blue brand. Casa takes 7729 C, the deep pine that was the green in Bronze Spec. Fortis takes Orange 021 C, which is a Pantone BASE INK. EmberSafe takes 186 C, one of the most used reds in the world. Solus takes a muted terracotta coral at the Principal's direction — darker and less orange than the bright 170 C it replaces.

Measured. Simulated dichromat vision across all fifteen pairs: worst pair is Casa / Solus at ΔE 17.7 under protanopia; the closest under deuteranopia is EmberSafe / Solus at 20.5. Two colours read as plainly different from about 10 upward. Every colour clears 4.5:1 on its own plane.

The one usage rule that matters across brands: Solus coral and Fortis orange are only 19° apart in hue, so their mid-ramps collide. Solus lives at steps 100–400; Fortis lives at 500–800. Never set them adjacent at the same step.

Liron Lighting's navy is locked at #2E3D7A, the existing brand colour. It is the one hue in the system that sits inside the blue band 45% of the lighting category already occupies — a deliberate trade of distinctiveness for recognition, and the reason the other five are deliberately not blue.

The marks — Silhouette Class

Three silhouette families, assigned by register, exactly matching the three colour poles. Organic and open for living. Orthogonal and machined for technical. Circular and enclosing for safety. Colour then reinforces a distinction the shape has already made.

Measured. All six rasterised at 16 and 24 px and every one of the fifteen pairs compared by coverage difference. Worst pair 18.8% — the figure quoted is always the worst pair, because a family is only as legible as its two most confusable members. 16 px is the minimum size for the whole system.

Why this system and not six drawings. Eight other systems were built and measured. Every one where the six shared an outer container scored badly — a monogram set scored 4.4%, cut-out apertures 7.1% — because four of the six initials are a stem with horizontal bars, and because shapes inside a shared outline converge. Every system that gave each mark its own silhouette scored well. This one does, and it is the only one built on a rule a viewer can decode.

Typography — shared by all six

Sora for display. Inter for everything else.

The standing decision, and the evidence supports it. If name, colour and icon all vary per brand, one thing has to stay constant or the six stop looking related. The sweep found type cannot carry differentiation in this category anyway — Luminis, which is spec-grade, and Kichler, which is decorative, land 6.5 degrees apart in tracking with near-identical constructions. So type should carry family resemblance instead, and it should be the same across all six.

No monospace anywhere — a standing directive, June 2026. Where figures must align, use Inter with tabular figures.

What is decided, and what is not