Olympics brand launch joke

[RosieH]

AnotherPaul Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> That's an incredibly snotty comment from said

> designer. "?the british public (who have no

> taste)?". Boo!

ha, you know it to be true though - only we in ED (or him in Richmond) have good taste. outside our hallowed borders I've heard they like X Factor and Big Brother and Comic Sans and the Daily Mail

[AnotherPaul]

James, you're right it would require a bit of brainpower, more like months of work, to come up with a better idea but that is the lot of designers and they (me included) have to lump it.

A piece of work this public is bound to be a magnet for criticism, in this case, what I've heard here has been pretty constructive. But for the sake of not seeming to be wagon jumping the essence of my critique is this;

? it is post-modern, not modern as Seb Coe promoted it, it's already old, more 1983 that 2012

? the word 'London' is all lower-case, tiny and in a semi-illegible typeface - why?

? the jaunty, misaligned coloured edges are pop new wave, fine for the klaxons maybe not for this gig

? 'interactivity' sounds good in press conferences but is no replacement for good design

? where is the sport?

In short it is a design style applied to a project rather than a design style born of the project.

AP ;-)

[peckham_perkster]

Ooh like it AP good food for thought hadn't actually registered that no sport was referred to but I think that was simply cos I've glanced at the new site and not really taken it all in.

I asked my other half in Brum what he thought of it as he does animation and video so would have been able to come up and produce the video they did, here's what he said.

"Not bad on a technical front - most parts are nicely tracked and masked. They have definitely employed some of the techniques The Dommo and myself have used, to make sure that the composited stuff 'sits in scene'; 3D tracking, 3D Camera space data conversion - that sort of thing. I like the sparse pointy music best of all!

I'm not toooo won over by the visual style, after watching that - I feel like if I pop down to the shops, I will see people wearing sunglasses in the shape of zig-zags, and folk donning puffball skirts."

Yep, I don't understand the first part very much either but technically it does the job but again the style is something everyone is picking up on.

I've just been listening to BBC London and they are discussing this, someone has already said it looks like Lisa Simpson, they just didn't mention the sex act.

Maybe it's a grower I'm up for giving it the benefit of the doubt but would like to see how they use it. I think making it look like graffitti from the eighties is a bit of a mistake, new money for old rope etc etc.

[*Bob*]

It's grown on me a little bit already.

[TillieTrotter]

?400,000!!!! As someone just said on the radio. Its a London thing, why didnt they throw it open to the many amazing and talented Londoners out there as a competition, hence costing erm ?000,000.

Just a thought like.

[*Bob*]

It does seem like a lot of cash. But it's such a typical tabloidy thing to do: "LOGO OUTRAGE COST ?400000!!" - as if its just a letterhead or something.

[TillieTrotter]

Tis true BOB, but dont you agree that it would have been great for a London competition.

[*Bob*]

I think most people would have liked the idea of an open competition, but that would have come with its own set of difficulties. The winning design would have ended-up in the hands of a design agency anyway. And how do you (legally) deal with a logo entered in a competition that goes on to be a brand worth many millions in merchandising etc? If I was the Olympics Head Honcho I'd want to buy it and own it.

[James]

The more I see it, the more I like it. And the more pathetic all the whingers seem - jumping on the bandwagon. Us Brits do love a smug moan about how much better our taste is than everyone else's. And the cost argument is ignorant too - all corporate identities cost a fortune, as anyone who works in marketing knows. The main reason being the amount of negotiations, approvals, amends etc. required.

They had a feature on BBC TV this morning about it with some old f*rt who didn't like it (too old and out of touch). Then they showed the Barcelona 92 recent Sydney ones as examples of how it should be. They were both dreadful - dull, bland and generally reminiscent of a provincial tourist website.

In answer to your critique Paul (someone has to have the balls to stand up and defend it):

"It is already old." You could say that of any trend in graphic design whatsoever as they all use elements of what has gone before. The choice is not "old" versus "new" but "attitide" versus "bland". It seems most of the British public prefer the latter. But then, most of the British public like Barratt homes and DFS. Sorry to be snobby but it's true.

"The word 'London' is tiny etc." Agree with you on this one! But it's still legible, and what really matters is whether or not the logo captures something of London's attitude and energy, which I think it does.

"The misaligned edges are pop new wave". Um, that's what designers DO (I thought as a designer, you would know this!) - they take elements from music, art, film etc. and reinterpret them. In the same way, you could say the fantastic Mexico 68 one was "groovy swinging London." Fortunate that nobody did at the time, since it's now a design classic.

"Interactivity" - obviously web is important these days and they have had to address this.

"Where is the sport?" Surely this is obvious! The whole thing has a kinetic, dynamic feel delivered partly by the "wonky edges" everyone is so critical of.

[*Bob*]

I was much more impressed when I saw more (last night) of the way it moves, as opposed to how it looks as a static logo. And seeing as (in 2012) we will all have LCD screens built into our trainers and be wearing jetpacks (I think) what it does when it's animated will be all the more important.

Most importantly - it's not DULL (like the last four or five corporate snoozefest logos we've had)

[AnotherPaul]

Blimey, thanks James.

Attitude vs Bland, you're polarising my argument. You are right that design has to refer to something, but for me the olympics shouldn't be new wave. It's possible to borrow visual traits from all over and make them into something new. This doesn't manage that. It's a pastiche of a pre-existing graphic style. To wish for an olympics logo which is very good does not equate with thinking that Barratt homes and DFS are a good idea. It makes for a neat argument but not a particularly water-tight one.

The word London isn't legible when the logo is small. Putting words within shapes forces the words to be displayed small. Experimental and potentially dynamic yes, functional, no.

As for reinterpreting design styles already present in culture as being 'what designers do', really. Sometimes that's what one should do according to the project. What niggles me about this is that rather than being inspired and finding a new solution within the context of the project, someone (or a committee of someones) seem to have gone for lazily borrowing a graphic style.

My interactivity dig was against the way it was promoted yesterday, as if it's a solution in itself. No-one would be daft enough to stand up and say 'we printed it on paper!' everyone knows things get printed on paper but I'd wager that for some of the committee deciding on this, the web and mobile phones are a bit of a mystery. Hence 'look, it's interactive!'. And?

And the wonky edges are kinetic, dynamic etc, They're also trendy wonky edges.

I'm off to make some bland unlikable designs.

Ap

[TillieTrotter]

You have to careful when you accuse people of "Jumping on the bandwagon". If many people dislike a thing, then it could be telling as opposed to lazy mindedness!

[*Bob*]

I do believe that if you surveyed 1000 average Britons by presenting them with something new, unexpected and different, 900 of them would immediately take offence as a matter of course.

[Asset]

It's not just london though is it? I thought events were going to be taking place in other parts of the country too

[AnotherPaul]

*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I do believe that if you surveyed 1000 average

> Britons by presenting them with something new,

> unexpected and different, 900 of them would

> immediately take offence as a matter of course.

Spot on Bob. I love it that not only is almost impossible to make anything in Britain without being Daily Mailed to the floor, amongst the other 100 many will argue from a contrary position so as to prove they have taste. A kind of 'i know it's crap but I want to prove I know more than those 900 saps.' argument. Endless fun.

[Huguenot]

Well, I slept on it....

and now I like it!

In a post modern irony kinda way. Who else has a blowjob logo? Hurrah!

[James]

Yes but I DO know more than those 900 saps!;-)

Honestly Paul, I may have been a bit harsh - sorry if I seemed patronising or rude - but working in the creative industry myself, few things annoy me more than people joining in a game of Let's Rip It To Shreds without offering a constructive way forward. It's too easy! What's worse is that when everyone does this you end up with dull, inoffensive rubbish.

Think about it. Who has made more impact (in all creative spheres, not just music) - the Sex Pistols or the winners of X-Factor?

Btw I do see your point regarding it being a pastiche of 80s new wave style - but that is an aesthetic judgment, not an incontestible fact.

Incidentally, would anyone of the critics care to proffer their own design here on the forum?

...thought not.

[*Bob*]

I think what swung it for me was watching a news report on it last night - where the principal critic was some Old Fart Tory, sitting in a panelled library, waistcoated up and reclining foppishly in a high-backed chair.

At that moment I thought "i like it"

[AnotherPaul]

Ok then, here's my logo.

London 2012

It is a model of understatement. Bold so as to express strength, red as that's London's colour.

[AnotherPaul]

*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think what swung it for me was watching a news

> report on it last night - where the principal

> critic was some Old Fart Tory, sitting in a

> panelled library, waistcoated up and reclining

> foppishly in a high-backed chair.

>

> At that moment I thought "i like it"

Oi, that was me. Less of the Tory. :))

[Mark]

I like it AP

Here's mine, in the style of Catchphrase I'm trying to capture the feeling of the British public towards the handling of the Olympics so far.

;-)

[James]

Brilliant, Paul. Totally inoffensive. You can't be offended by it as there is nothing to it. The trouble is, if we had a referendum on it tomorrow, yours would probably win! Which sort of proves my point really.

[Brendan]

Did anyone catch the Daily Mail this morning? Apparently the logo was designed by illegal immigrants in an elaborate benefit fraud plot, there is real evidence that the subversive imagery is aiding the spread of HIV and house prices in rural Surrey have already dropped after gypsies started flying the logo from their caravans.

[TillieTrotter]

Sorry but when were we Saps asked for constructive advise?

[*Bob*]

I have designed this logo especially on behalf of Daily Mail readers - harking back to a Golden Age when Britain was once great, and emphasising the two most important aspects of the Olympics: "Showtime" and "Racial Inclusiveness"