pollux

LOGOLYMPIAD - EVENT 3 VOTING

Recommended Posts

The NFL has a very simple aesthetic. I voted for the ones that displayed a simple approach. More of a wordmark rather than being way over the top including logo assets.

G: 2 - I thought this did a great job of just being text that looked like it could be subbed into the list of NFL wordmarks today. Even if it didn't have the wreath leaves around Los Angeles, it would have been strong.

S: 24 - I liked the font choice..but again it's the simplicity that works.

B: 6 - Here I think the wings are just subtle enough. I don't even think it needed the drop shadow. I like the nice touch working out the L and A. There is a bit of negative space between the L's but overall I think it's a great concept.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GOLD - 22



SILVER - 17



BRONZE - 12



No bias I just REALLY like these


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

G: 18

S: 7

B: 17

Good work all around guys! Incidentally I got to this one super late, wish I could have spent more time, but was still pretty happy with what I put out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gold: 7

Silver: 18

Bronze: 9

No disrespect intened towards these three or anyone else, but McElroy should've ran away with this if he hadn't been disqualified. Great work all around, nonetheless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So can we put the team name on the wordmark or just the city. If it is just the city, it seems that the submissions would be very similar.

Put both. The guideline mentions that you should put the city name, but you also need to have the team name on there. I don't want anyone submitting only the team name. I clarified the initial post.

What if you have a logo coming from behind the wordmark

General rule of thumb: the wordmark should take most of the space. If the logo is too big, then it's not a wordmark.

I leave it up to your creativity to add some stuff in or around the wordmark, but the main focus here is the wordmark.

I was going off of the bolded bit when Designing it didn't say no logo it said the word mark should take up most of the space which mine I feel does. I understand there wont be any change in decisions just a little butt hurt I guess.

Especially when You look at some NFL wordmarks

5357_new_england_patriots-wordmark-2013.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tbh I would have been able to tell that was you mcelroy19. I wouldn't have told everyone, nut that look like your work. Fabulous and heavy outline. Love it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

G - 7

S - 17

B- 24

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually agree with McElroy's disqualification. Not saying it's not great work, but if I'm being 100% honest here, my eye goes to the icon before it goes to the wordmark. The uniform stroke doesn't differentiate it from the wordmark, and the icon being in front of the wordmark obstructs it more than it reinforces. Moving the icon down, or even removing it from the wordmark, would have taken it to the next level.

It's unfortunate because it's great work, but it's the rule. Sorry, bud.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gold- 17

Silver- 15

Bronze- 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So can we put the team name on the wordmark or just the city. If it is just the city, it seems that the submissions would be very similar.

Put both. The guideline mentions that you should put the city name, but you also need to have the team name on there. I don't want anyone submitting only the team name. I clarified the initial post.

What if you have a logo coming from behind the wordmark

General rule of thumb: the wordmark should take most of the space. If the logo is too big, then it's not a wordmark.

I leave it up to your creativity to add some stuff in or around the wordmark, but the main focus here is the wordmark.

I was going off of the bolded bit when Designing it didn't say no logo it said the word mark should take up most of the space which mine I feel does. I understand there wont be any change in decisions just a little butt hurt I guess.

Especially when You look at some NFL wordmarks

5357_new_england_patriots-wordmark-2013.

The Patriots have a logo-less wordmark. It's just New England likes to promote this version for some reason, despite the fact they have a very iconic logo.

I don't think it matters if a specific team has or doesn't have a logo on one of their 17 different wordmarks. If the contest was about no logos, then that's one thing. But the rules didn't say that, and was clarified that if one is included to have it be smaller than the rest of the wordmark. There was no rule or clarification that a logo MUST be melded in very specific ways in to the wording or any such thing. It was a design choice, simple as that. I thought we were here to be creative.

Personally, I honestly don't like it for a top 3 wordmark, but I do think it should have been included. We can't read minds, we can't interpret or follow rules that don't exist.

But that's just my opinion.

Many people seem to just making up their own guidelines for judging, and that's fine and all, but many people are stating that they love many of the wordmarks but automatically discounted them because they don't match some of the ones that the NFL teams are currently using, and then only (or mostly) voted on the wordmarks that are generally straight up text. I thought we were trying to be innovative and creative, not boring and repetitive like the Bengals/Broncos/Cardinals/Falcons/Texans/Seahawks. That being said, I think there are some that went slightly out of those bounds and came up with some utterly great stuff. I'm just disappointed that so many are discounted for being creative, and disappointed in myself for trying something along those lines (let's be honest, here, lol). I like wordmarks that are descriptive of the team, not just something to put on letterhead.

I'd love for there to be a new team in LA, but I'd think it sucked if they followed the same boring routine. Spice it up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually agree with McElroy's disqualification. Not saying it's not great work, but if I'm being 100% honest here, my eye goes to the icon before it goes to the wordmark. The uniform stroke doesn't differentiate it from the wordmark, and the icon being in front of the wordmark obstructs it more than it reinforces. Moving the icon down, or even removing it from the wordmark, would have taken it to the next level.

It's unfortunate because it's great work, but it's the rule. Sorry, bud.

Then I think you could have just not voted for it, if you didn't like the design choice.

There were several design choices that move your eyes to move to certain points of the wordmark first before the wordmark, to include the Mammoths that everybody seems to like. You either like it and it works, or you do not. But there was no rule against it. I'd hate for us to be disqualifying people solely on opinion on what one person's eye moves to first.

You say removing it would have "taken it to the next level" while others say they think it's the best one, period, without a change. We should only disqualify due to strict rule breaking, not design opinions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So can we put the team name on the wordmark or just the city. If it is just the city, it seems that the submissions would be very similar.

Put both. The guideline mentions that you should put the city name, but you also need to have the team name on there. I don't want anyone submitting only the team name. I clarified the initial post.

What if you have a logo coming from behind the wordmark

General rule of thumb: the wordmark should take most of the space. If the logo is too big, then it's not a wordmark.

I leave it up to your creativity to add some stuff in or around the wordmark, but the main focus here is the wordmark.

I was going off of the bolded bit when Designing it didn't say no logo it said the word mark should take up most of the space which mine I feel does. I understand there wont be any change in decisions just a little butt hurt I guess.

Especially when You look at some NFL wordmarks

5357_new_england_patriots-wordmark-2013.

The Patriots have a logo-less wordmark. It's just New England likes to promote this version for some reason, despite the fact they have a very iconic logo.

I don't think it matters if a specific team has or doesn't have a logo on one of their 17 different wordmarks. If the contest was about no logos, then that's one thing. But the rules didn't say that, and was clarified that if one is included to have it be smaller than the rest of the wordmark. There was no rule or clarification that a logo MUST be melded in very specific ways in to the wording or any such thing. It was a design choice, simple as that. I thought we were here to be creative.

Personally, I honestly don't like it for a top 3 wordmark, but I do think it should have been included. We can't read minds, we can't interpret or follow rules that don't exist.

But that's just my opinion.

Many people seem to just making up their own guidelines for judging, and that's fine and all, but many people are stating that they love many of the wordmarks but automatically discounted them because they don't match some of the ones that the NFL teams are currently using, and then only (or mostly) voted on the wordmarks that are generally straight up text. I thought we were trying to be innovative and creative, not boring and repetitive like the Bengals/Broncos/Cardinals/Falcons/Texans/Seahawks. That being said, I think there are some that went slightly out of those bounds and came up with some utterly great stuff. I'm just disappointed that so many are discounted for being creative, and disappointed in myself for trying something along those lines (let's be honest, here, lol). I like wordmarks that are descriptive of the team, not just something to put on letterhead.

I'd love for there to be a new team in LA, but I'd think it sucked if they followed the same boring routine. Spice it up!

I get what you are saying about creativity. Makes sense. I took this particular event to be an exercise in typography as opposed to type with graphic elements. I felt that the creative challenge was to make type interesting without adding much graphic support (logos etc). That reason alone is why I personally voted the way I did. But there were some really creative executions.

In the end this is all opinion based. People will vote either for what they think simply looks good....or they will try to rationalize their decision to what they think best fits the brief.

What is for damn sure, is people are cranking out some awesome work and having fun doing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gold - 7

Silver - 6

Bronze - 17

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.