nash61

Best Logo Refreshes

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

 

No worries, man. You’ve produced a lot of fantastic stuff over the years and I really like hearing your opinions on logos, design, and branding. It’s nice to have that “insider” perspective on the matter as well, especially when it comes to the client-designer relationship. If I know anything from my time learning about historiography and book publishing, the publisher/client can do a lot to steer a piece of media in the right, wrong, or lateral direction.

 

I have never seen you “talk down” to a disrespectful point, as you’ve always been good about admitting your biases and having a sense of humor about your work. The sense can maybe be there (from some interpretations) is all I’m arguing. (e.g., “objectively better” can be a problematic phrase, I’ve found).

 

 

bold 1: absolutely. like a head coach, the Designers take on most of the blame and credit for design when there's a lot of moving parts, even to a single logo. actually, most especially to a single logo because thats where everyone in the franchise wants to put their 2 cents in. and even i find myself being reactionary and cursing Nike when something comes out when you might be surprised how much input the NFL gets. not sure how it works in other leagues, but thats definitely a topic (or a point) i wish was more widely understood

 

bod 2: Self Promotion, Lesson 01: only re-tweet the negative comments :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Morgo said:

 

It's always a  "unique case" when you've had a hand in the design.  The more square version works better as a crest no matter how much you talk up fixing what wasn't broken.

 

i had no hand in this design and i agree with Andrew's points. i would have given it the same critique he has. i think it was broken; but maybe the better point is to just leave it alone anyway? or maybe its one we need to live with for a while? i would be willing to bet a decade from now it will become better understood and accepted. you know, when the Colts changed their uniform in 2006 (different blue and gray face masks) i nearly denounced my fandom. then i came to love it, they definitely made the right move. i think this one just needs more time, too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Mingjai said:

I know a lot of BYU fans like this logo and would consider this a great logo refresh, but I've never been a fan of the updated rendering of the "Sailor Cougar" logo. To me it feels like the designer ran the original logo, which was nothing special in the first place, through Illustrator's trace feature and took whatever the program spit out. The lack of any sense of furriness in the updated logo makes me think of a hairless sphynx cat.

 

BYU-Logo-Compare.jpg

 

This was a good update, not great, but good. We have to remember the reasons that teams update/refresh old Arthur Evans era logos:

1. Sell Sell Sell, they want to make money. In order to do this effectively they need to....

2. Clean up the image for modern use. It's easier to get the image embroidered on a small scale without all the little details. It also helps with digital applications.

3. A cleaner image can be worked into different color combos more efficiently.

 

Lastly, lets remember that they are not sailor hats.... they're freshman/underclassman beanies.

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQzaP3Rfx04v4hDcwZTB-himages?q=tbn:ANd9GcQFzi_Hk2OlCany31sbuaG

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/5/2018 at 5:08 PM, SFGiants58 said:

 

Aren’t you forgetting? No matter how much you explain your design to people, they will dislike it (for some legitimate reasons, others not as much). I like it, even though I’d rather the team adopt a lighthouse/seafaring look (albeit not as cheesy as the fisherman set). 

 

Sometimes, I get the sense that you and @BrandMooreArt like “talking down” to the posters here, like we don’t know anything about design and are just a bunch of bumpkins. There’s also the sense that both of you “tow the company line” when it comes to performance materials, defending them to the extreme despite board members complaining about them. I agree with you guys on a lot of your theory and research points, but there’s still that sense of defending your employer.

 

You haven’t acted in the combative and unproductive/unprofessional manner with which Tom O’Grady verbally assaulted the board (which should have lost him a contract), but it can come off as elitism. It’s just something to keep in mind when posting here (and I often find myself agreeing with you on a lot of topics).

 

I make a concscious effort not to sound like I’m talking down to people, but I’m sure it does come across like that on occasion. People get fired up, they get defensive, it happens. I often find myself editing out snarky portions of my comments because I don’t want to come across like that.

 

What it comes down to for me is that you guys are part of the audience to which I want to connect through the work, and I like to engage that audience because it helps me become better as a designer. At the same time, I look at existing identities objectively, meaning irrational personal attachment doesn’t have much influence on how I design. I try to look at it like I’m a fan and I base a lot of decisions around what would appeal to me as a fan, but imperfections in a logo aren’t the reason why I’m a fan of any team, so I have no problem fixing imperfections if they’re not essential to communicating the message.

 

That’s why I explain my opinion through the lens of design principle rather than as my own personal “like or dislike” point of view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, andrewharrington said:

 

I make a concscious effort not to sound like I’m talking down to people, but I’m sure it does come across like that on occasion. People get fired up, they get defensive, it happens. I often find myself editing out snarky portions of my comments because I don’t want to come across like that.

 

That’s why I explain my opinion through the lens of design principle rather than as my own personal “like or dislike” point of view.

 

Thank you for responding. I see entirely where you’re coming from, trying to be detached and finding a solution through your interpretation of design theory. I’ve run into this problem myself, and it’s often frustrating to balance what the designer, the client, and the customer want.

 

However, you dodged my “towing the company line” criticism. Are you ever going to criticize a decision made by Adidas/Nike in their design department or with their performance materials, or will you just spit out defenses? I’m not disagreeing with your assessments, but I am curious about how you stand on critiquing your employer/s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/7/2018 at 2:53 AM, SFGiants58 said:

 

Thank you for responding. I see entirely where you’re coming from, trying to be detached and finding a solution through your interpretation of design theory. I’ve run into this problem myself, and it’s often frustrating to balance what the designer, the client, and the customer want.

 

However, you dodged my “towing the company line” criticism. Are you ever going to criticize a decision made by Adidas/Nike in their design department or with their performance materials, or will you just spit out defenses? I’m not disagreeing with your assessments, but I am curious about how you stand on critiquing your employer/s.

 

I have my own opinions, and I’m probably more fortunate than others in that my employer doesn’t censor them. My stance on that is if you don’t critique yourself, you’re never going be the best you can be.

 

With that said, I don’t alter my opinion based on who created the thing I’m critiquing, even if it’s from my company or if it’s my own work. If I believe in it, I’ll tell you why I think that. If, in hindsight, I think it could be improved, then I’ll tell you why I think that as well. Likewise, I give credit where credit is due, even if it’s from a “competitor.”

 

As far as material technology goes, it is something that I believe in. Of course, I have the luxury of seeing and feeling some of the most advanced materials in the world, and sometimes even how they’re designed, developed, brought to life, and tested. It’s a place where science meets art (and business), and it’s quite interesting to me. Beyond the curiosity, though, I believe in taking small steps to advance something incrementally rather than keeping it status quo until you have the perfect solution (this applies to everything, not just materials), and that’s because the perfect solution is like a needle in a haystack. It’s hard to find, and sometimes that needle even changes its position as science, art, and commerce evolve. If you let something stay the same, it’s just going to become obsolete and disappear. Porthole mesh and dazzle were once modern and became very popular based on scientific and aesthetic qualities, respectively. Those materials didn’t evolve very much, however, and now they’ve either been left in the dust or are quickly disappearing because of it. Someday, though, I fully believe the appealing qualities of those fabrics will come back when we figure out how to incorporate them into modern textiles. Just look at wool’s transformation from chunky sweater yarn to one of the most technical fibers in use today, or how the tradional concept of a knit structure has evolved and is now a highly advanced process for footwear and garments, or even how the incorporation of elastic fibers has made woven materials a viable option for uniforms. Creating ideal materials for athletes doesn’t happen overnight, and I think climbing the ladder one step at a time is a better way to get there than hanging out at the bottom until we know what’s at the top.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, andrewharrington said:

Side note: this is probably a good one to throw in the refresh bin.

 

ff_3268771alt5_full.jpg&w=900

 

The stitching on that crest is beautiful. I love the attention to detail.

 

Chicago-Blackhawks-Felt-Logo-Detail-2019

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Bmac said:

 

The stitching on that crest is beautiful. I love the attention to detail.

 

Chicago-Blackhawks-Felt-Logo-Detail-2019

 

It did come out fantastic. Very true to the spirit of the original, but also crisp and contemporary. My favorite part is the black chain stitching used to separate the texture of the hair from the felt background. The same black stitching is also used to keep the logo’s face paint in the crest, but in the most subtle way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/4/2018 at 6:14 AM, Gothamite said:

 

Ditching a gradient is almost always the right choice, but I have to say it really bothers me that the flames now change color when they pass through the hoop. That doesn’t make much sense. 

 

Man, am I the town contrarian here or what? 😛 

 

The way they did it has always been a clunky solution to the gradient problem.

 

There's at least 3 better ways to handle this. I made this years ago so I had to really dig deep on my computer. 

 

xUxNPgu.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, andrewharrington said:

Side note: this is probably a good one to throw in the refresh bin.

 

ff_3268771alt5_full.jpg&w=900

 

I'd throw it in the garbage bin. The team's name is not Blackhawks Chicago, the 2000-present Indian Head doesn't fit the roundel well, and the beauty of the Indian Head, which is how it uses so many colors that aren't red, black, and white, is gone. The black/white era of the Black Hawks isn't worth throwing back to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bmac said:

 

The stitching on that crest is beautiful. I love the attention to detail.

 

Chicago-Blackhawks-Felt-Logo-Detail-2019

 

Wow.  That’s gorgeous.  Makes all the difference. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/22/2018 at 6:30 PM, Morgo said:

9iDx6lz.png

 

In the same vein as what's being discussed in the '18-'19 NHL thread right now, it took way too long to find this in this thread. Major, major upgrade. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/7/2018 at 3:21 AM, andrewharrington said:

 

I make a concscious effort not to sound like I’m talking down to people, but I’m sure it does come across like that on occasion. People get fired up, they get defensive, it happens. I often find myself editing out snarky portions of my comments because I don’t want to come across like that.

 

What it comes down to for me is that you guys are part of the audience to which I want to connect through the work, and I like to engage that audience because it helps me become better as a designer. At the same time, I look at existing identities objectively, meaning irrational personal attachment doesn’t have much influence on how I design. I try to look at it like I’m a fan and I base a lot of decisions around what would appeal to me as a fan, but imperfections in a logo aren’t the reason why I’m a fan of any team, so I have no problem fixing imperfections if they’re not essential to communicating the message.

 

That’s why I explain my opinion through the lens of design principle rather than as my own personal “like or dislike” point of view.

 

Well put, Harry. I feel i could have written these words myself. (Also in the post that followed). 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, the admiral said:

 

I'd throw it in the garbage bin. The team's name is not Blackhawks Chicago, the 2000-present Indian Head doesn't fit the roundel well, and the beauty of the Indian Head, which is how it uses so many colors that aren't red, black, and white, is gone. The black/white era of the Black Hawks isn't worth throwing back to.

 

Fair enough, but it’s an old design meant to capture the spirit of an era that’s long gone, so most of those nitpicks are non-negotiable parts of the design.

 

I am curious, though; how does their mark not fit the roundel well? It’s nearly circular in proportion and takes up a similar footprint as any of the other native heads they’ve used in the past.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, andrewharrington said:

 

It did come out fantastic. Very true to the spirit of the original, but also crisp and contemporary. My favorite part is the black chain stitching used to separate the texture of the hair from the felt background. The same black stitching is also used to keep the logo’s face paint in the crest, but in the most subtle way.

 

DubnTW2XgAAU-u_?format=jpg&name=medium

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, andrewharrington said:

I am curious, though; how does their mark not fit the rounded well? It’s nearly circular in proportion and takes up a similar footprint as any of the other native heads they’ve used in the past.

 

Plenty of space to the top, bottom, and left, none to the right. It looks forced to the right even though it's centered because the feathers draw so much attention to the right side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, the admiral said:

 

Plenty of space to the top, bottom, and left, none to the right. It looks forced to the right even though it's centered because the feathers draw so much attention to the right side.

 

I’m still confused. It’s definitely not centered, at least not mathematically centered. It’s positioned so that it appears centered, which is typically referred to as “optically centered.” I do agree that having the feathers touch the edge isn’t ideal, but I also think that it’s the best way to center this mark at this size in proportion to the circle. Come to think of it, maybe that answers my question and proves that it doesn’t fit the circle particularly well, at least not st that size. 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now