andrewharrington

Members
  • Content Count

    10,005
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Posts posted by andrewharrington


  1. 2 hours ago, Gothamite said:

     

    I’m told they said at the event last night that the throwback uniforms are gone. 

     

     

    Thats okay, I don’t mind.  

     

    But good designs can be easily destroyed, and this is one example where minor changes have a major impact.  “Centering” the ball is such a bad choice I can’t believe a designer wanted to do that. 

     


    What is it about the act of centering the ball that you don’t like?


  2. 4 minutes ago, GFB said:

    This is basically where I’m at as well. Instead of wading through the rich history of Brewers baseball and selecting only the two or three best flavors, this identity is the equivalent of getting EVERY flavor of Brewers baseball and mixing it altogether until it’s a big bowl of visual mush. 
     

    They couldn’t commit to choosing only navy blue, so they added royal blue as a token gesture. They couldn’t let go of the modern-wheat era, so they created the new “wheat ball.” They couldn’t simply do a state of Wisconsin mark, it had to be Wisconsin AND bricks (?) AND a “M” AND a baseball for the location of Milwaukee. 

     

     


    Nailed it. It feels a little too much like one of those NBA identities from ten years ago where they get a new logo, but also recolor the previous logo, then repeat the cycle once more, and then bring in a freshened up version of an old logo until they have a full stable of logos that span every era of the team but have little or no stylistic connection to one another.

     

    While it’s great for licensing and merchandising and keeping your inventory fresh and having all kinds of new stuff to put on jerseys that last all of three years on the field, none of it really supports the building of a long-term identity or brand. This hodgepodge, everything-AND-the-kitchen-sink approach really doesn’t work for me, but I will say that if that’s the direction “branding” is headed, then we need to do a better job of linking all the pieces together.


  3. 12 hours ago, Chromatic said:

     

    The jerseys themselves remind me of nearly every other practice jersey I had growing up...

     


    I know, right? Like, how does “nostalgia” fit the Winter Classic brand?


  4. 18 hours ago, Ray Lankford said:

    Because it’s not a shirt, it’s a jersey that represents a team/fanbase and it costs $80+ to buy. 


    Still sounds like a type of shirt to me, and still doesn’t explain why it needs to be exciting. There are plenty of great baseball shirts that aren’t exciting in the least.


  5. 4 hours ago, insert name said:

    Are they? I’m pretty sure the pants are different. 


    The Cowboys have purposefully worn off-color pants for decades (something about Jerry wanting them to look better on TV way back when), but I do feel that the color difference appears more exaggerated now, which is likely a byproduct of 1. photos and TV broadcasts being clearer and more vivid, 2. fabric dyes and inks being more vibrant and colorfast, and 3. more indoor, nighttime, and artificially lit games, which makes the color difference painfully obvious.

     

    I’m theorizing this because the royal blue also looks more vivid today compared to decades past, and the warm sunset light creates a much better match between helmet and pants on Aikman and the crew compared to Dak in midday sun. You don’t get those twilight games too much anymore because of the prevalence of indoor stadia and prime time TV slots.

     

    spacer.png

     

    spacer.png


  6. On 11/6/2019 at 3:06 PM, Sodboy13 said:

    Before. it was an "m" and a "b" cleverly put together to resemble a baseball glove. Now, it's a poorly-drawn four-fingered baseball glove. Little changes, big difference. Kinda what this board is about in the first place.


    Poorly drawn? Have you seen the gross, bumpy curve along the bottom of the old one? How about the oddly off center “counter” of the B? 🙂

     

    On 11/6/2019 at 6:12 PM, Gothamite said:

     

    That’s my biggest problem.  Ruins the cleverness of the “mb”. 

     

    On 11/6/2019 at 9:17 PM, Dolphins Dynasty said:

    The newer one is actually cleaner than the older one by design. That being said, it's still a slight downgrade because like mentioned, it originally focused more on two letters forming a ball in a glove. The new one feels more focused on looking like a ball in a glove and then two letters forming it. I can still live with it though. At least they finally picked between the M wheat and BiG; I hated how they were BOTH used equally.

     

    Fun fact: The stitching in the old BiG logo is very similar to the one in the Phillies' throwback logo.


    The old one Indeed felt like it was trying to do both things equally well, and I think it lacked a clear hierarchy as a result. The new one is more clearly a glove first and foremost. It does take slightly more effort to discover the MB, but I think that makes it *more* clever, not less. It has enough separation to retain the purposeful and distinct forms of the letters, but now they’re really good supporting actors instead of the sidekick who’s trying to steal the spotlight from the star.

     

    I also think it’s a huge aesthetic improvement. The drawing quality of the curves is night and day, as mentioned above, and I think the location of the ball works better, too, as the off-center ball made for a really ugly B and killed some of the positive/negative relationship in the old one.

     

    The biggest improvement for me, though, is definitely the balance and composition. The old one is optically narrower, I think because of the taper toward the top of the thumb. The open web made the M feel almost like it was “sliding” off the B and that tiny detail gave the whole mark an unstable feeling, like it’s tilting to the right. They nailed the new one in this regard, filling out the mark by evening the thickness of the thumb, centering the ball, and giving the outer edge of the thumb just a slightly softer curve. Connecting the web actually serves a great purpose to that end, “holding” or “pulling” the M back toward the the center, which brings the stability back. It also brings some visual weight back to the web area, which does wonders for that positive/negative relationship. Looking at them side by side, especially with the squint test, the new one looks much more full, balanced, and uniform In almost every way.
     

    With that said, there’s probably a nice in-between step here that would both clean up the composition and quality but retain more of the old one’s details to make both sides happy. There’s also no discernible benefit to changing the orientation of the ball seams the way they did, so that could very easily revert, as could the counter in the web. I’d honestly like to see what an ultra-simple stitch pattern that resembles a wheat stalk looks like running through the ball.


  7. 7 hours ago, scouserduke said:

    I don't know if it was intentional, but I'm also getting a few retro/Thanksgiving Cowboys vibes with the shoulder yoke and number font. Just take the shoulder star and put it front and center and boom.WC_91_Front__01156.1572905194.jpg?c=2&im
    4457a_lg.jpeg


    That new skinny yoke was developed to bring a little more authenticity to some of these vintage looks, and the lettering is meant to evoke both what the Texans wore in their later days and act as a hypothetical “prequel” to the Stars’ current numbers, so it’s mostly coincidence that there’s so much overlap with the old Cowboys’ looks, but it’s definitely one of the things that brought it home, given that the Cowboys played their first decade in the Cotton Bowl.

     

    5 hours ago, CS85 said:

    WHERE'S THE LACES

     

    Crewnecks (and maybe V-necks) for the Texans. I can’t remember exactly what my dig uncovered, but it definitely wasn’t laces.


  8. 20 hours ago, dont care said:

    I guess their regular jerseys are mismatched then by your logic. They are completely different stripes, from size to shape. That kind of wedge shoulder stripe never has an outline like the pats, and USC, while pants stripes then to be outlined especially when they are color on color so they don’t get muddled. Also all stripes don’t have to be the same on a uniform as long as they work with the uniform as a whole, like the pants stripe does matching the numbers.

     

    Not everything has to (or should) match, but when you match everything else (logo, numbers, pant stripes all feature red fill/white trim), the one thing that doesn’t tends to stick out for all the wrong reasons, even though it’s the most subtle thing on the uniform.

     

    2 hours ago, dont care said:

    So why are their regulars perfect yet the pants stripes don’t match the shoulder stripes which you said before is flawed. And while I will say they aren’t as good as their regular set my point is there is no Mismatching in the uniform.


    To piggyback on what I said above, I think their normal uniform works well because of how the colors touch each other. Red is used as a trim color on the numbers and pant stripes, and the sleeve design is solid red, so the common theme is that the red is always touching the blue or otherwise acting as a buffer between the blue and white, and it looks pretty nice. The logo is what breaks the pattern on the normal uniform, but I think most people are okay with the logo standing on its own against the number and stripe designs.


  9. On 10/17/2019 at 9:23 AM, Morgo said:

     

    I prefer McCarthy's version but still don't see why the lack of green on their current logo is an issue let alone a deal-breaker.  The numbers don't contain any green, nor did they on any of the team's original blue and green uniforms, so why must the main logo?  The stripes contain more than enough green to balance the uniform and the way the Orca is presently coloured has its benefits as well.  Navy is great way to depict the whale without having to taint the palette with black and the metallic silver would be missed if it was eliminated all-together as it makes the art style even more eye-catching.


    I don’t think he’s necessarily taking issue with the lack of green in the logo, but rather the inclusion of two colors (navy blue and silver) that are, arguably, not even team colors at this point. Even the secondary logo is silver-free now, so there’s no real excuse left to retain those colors in the primary logo.


  10. 14 hours ago, BigRed618 said:

    So I heard Auburn is deciding against changing their logo. Not gonna lie, I’m annoyed at this. The changes were so minor, and they made so much sense from a design and marketing standpoint, and yet people stubbornly resisted the change and the school caved into their demands. I understand that it’s  important to listen to their fans and give them what they want, but I just wonder if they even know why they didn’t want the new logo? Did they really not like it, or is this another case of people resisting change of any kind?


    Honestly, I think it’s a marketing issue more than anything, but I don’t think there’s an easy playbook for winning a situation like this.

     

    In today’s media snippet culture, everyone is competing for that same little shred of relevance every minute of every day, and teams just think/see “NEW!!!” and automatically move to, “Well, how do we roll this out to get our fans excited?!” without ever evaluating whether presenting to the public as new is even worth it.

     

    The fact is, not everything needs to be publicized in this way, and especially not if it’s just a clean-up for the purposes of better display across all media. If I saw a “New Logo!” headline and clicked the link to see a barely noticeable change like that, I’d be let down. It feels a little dishonest, like you’re trying to sell people on how important and exciting the new model is when it’s really just last year’s model with a new paint job. That doesn’t put people in a good mood, and you’ve basically set your audience up with a sour taste, and they respond by roasting you for wasting time and money on something so inconsequential to them.

     

    On the other hand, if you roll it out with no press release, someone somewhere is going to notice (because you have no notify vendors and licensees who put your logo on product), they’re going to put it up on Twitter, and then the narrative becomes, “They tried to sneak a new logo through like we wouldn’t notice! Get out the pitchforks!”

     

    It’s a lose-lose proposition these days. Great work doesn’t even guarantee success against mob mentality. It would be interesting to compare the different ways teams/companies have unveiled projects like this and see if that has a correlation to the success of the “new” logo.
     

    EDIT: Great insights from Clint up above as well.


  11. On 10/10/2019 at 7:36 PM, Brian in Boston said:

    ...However, there was a difference - no matter how subtly technical - between privateers, buccaneers and pirates.


    I’m confused...

     

    Why write several long paragraphs in apparent disagreement if your conclusion is the exact point we’re all trying to make?
     


  12. 15 minutes ago, Chawls said:

     

     How do you feel about the Bears all-white uniforms? Their stripes don’t match either. 


    The Bears’ stripes, though, are very clearly different; there’s sufficient contrast between the two patterns.

     

    These, on the other hand, are too similar and the end result looks unintentional, like they were ordering stock items and had to choose the closest one because they didn’t have the jersey that matched the helmet and pant pattern.


  13. 1 hour ago, duxrcool048 said:

    But it's ok for the Cowboys' color rush? People seem to really like those.

     

    https://radioimg.s3.amazonaws.com/kvilfm/Dallas-Cowboys-Color-Rush-Jersey%20%281%29.jpg


    The beautiful thing about “people” is that there are billions of individual ones who all have different preferences and opinions, so it would be more accurate to say *some* people like them.

     

    I’m not one of them.

     

    It’s a decent uniform, but if I had to guess, I would bet the reason most of those people like them is because they can’t stand the color crisis of the normal uniforms; a “good when compared to the alternative” scenario.


  14. On 10/8/2019 at 9:39 AM, GFB said:

     

    I stand corrected! That knowledge does makes some of the eccentricities easier to stomach and it makes the white pants that much more bizarre. Thanks for sharing.


    They are pretty historically accurate (besides the weird white pants), but I definitely think they looked better with the simpler stripe they wore when they first switched back:

     

    spacer.png

     

    Nice hook to the helmet, and truly, in my opinion, a perfect uniform. I really like your single red stripe for the home uniform, but I’m wondering if it would work with their road jersey, given the lack of blue to balance all the red.


  15. 9 hours ago, Brian in Boston said:


    The reality, of course, is that what actually distinguished a buccaneer from a pirate is that the former - at least initially - carried a letter of marque from a government entity, granting him permission to attack and seize vessels from nations at war with the issuer. I say "initially" because it was not uncommon for buccaneers/corsairs/privateers who started out scrupulously adhering to the terms of their issued letter of marque to later engage in acts of piracy when it suited them. Likewise, it was not unheard of for governments, as a matter of convenience, to  issue letters of marque to known pirates when it suited the state's needs, thus adding an air of legitimacy to the actions of the former criminals.

    Further, those dubbed buccaneers were government-authorized privateers operating in the Caribbean.

    The point being, the notion that there were hard-and-fast styles of dress and behavior particular to buccaneers/corsairs/privateers versus pirates is nonsense.

    In any event, what seems apparent is that most of us agree that something needs to be done with the modern, football-playing Buccaneers' uniforms. They are a sartorial dumpster-fire.     


    What’s nonsense is pretending a privateer who had to report back to a commander or government official presented him or herself with the same level of dress and decorum (or lack thereof) as a career sea burglar. 🙄


  16. 8 hours ago, VancouverFan69 said:

    A Canuck is not an animal nor does it have anything to do with First Nations.


    Just so you’re aware, at the bottom of page 81 you said,
     

    “And how do you know Johnny Canuck is Caucasian? He could have been Native Canadian for all we know.”

     

    So, does the term “Canuck“ represent First Nations/Native Canadians or not? You can’t claim it both ways to support your point.

     

    Also, would you say a skate represents the name “Canucks?” A hockey rink? Or is Johnny the only proper representation of the name?

     

    I’ll take my answer off the air.


  17. 12 minutes ago, stumpygremlin said:

     

    The "Walking Deacon" instantly reminded me of Washburn University's Ichabod logo. They're close enough, I think, that Washburn could ask to have it changed. I say that based on Iowa vs. Southern Miss.

    Image result for washburn ichabods


    I honestly wouldn’t be surprised if they get a letter from Johnnie Walker, either.


  18. 4 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

     

    I just want to see it in kelly/yellow/black for some controversy. 

     

    Also, if we're talking an alternate logo for the Leafs, I have a fantastic idea!

     

    27879426614_290d9933fc_z.jpg 

     

    Take the '67 leaf and combine it with the Toronto Arena's "T" insignia.


    From what I understand, anything involving a stand-alone T and leaf is legally dead on arrival because of the University of Toronto’s deep association with it.


  19. A little late, but...

     

    If you’re looking for tips that help you create, develop, and compose different styles, I would suggest grabbing some books and/or looking at work by people who do it at the highest level: Simon Walker, Jessica Hische, House Industries, Jon Contino, many more. Find those people online and ask them who their favorites are to build a bigger sphere of inspiration.

     

    If you’re primarily looking to improve the quality of your analog and/or digital drawing skills, try grabbing some images of different lettering pieces you like and recreate them. You’ll get a better feel for how to place points, pull handles, manipulate curves, etc., and it will force you to focus on the details.
     

    The Astute Graphics VectorScribe plugin is a tool that I find essential for building vector artwork, and especially lettering.

     

    Don’t hesitate to contact me if you have questions, either. I’m always willing to help as much as I can.


  20. 2 hours ago, the admiral said:

    His face can't have three colors, he looks splotchy-faced. 

     

    I thought maybe pewter could work as the outline color so that there's a little more of it, and that on a white helmet it would be a nice accent to call back to the old pewter helmets, but the problem then is that you have a logo where there's not very much of the team's predominant color (presuming jerseys would be creamsicle) and a whole lot of the accent colors (dark red, pewter). 

     

    KAG9Ync.jpg

     

    Would this still work with orange jerseys/socks or does it demand maroon as the primary color?


    Truth be told, I think it works without the extra outline. The part that’s currently maroon already contains everything, and the extra pewter line doesn’t do anything productive; it just fills in details.

     

    I do agree that dark red is Washington’s thing, so I’d suggest either coloring it up like the old one (bright red base, orange skin, and white highlights), or using pewter as the base and then using orange and bright red for the face and details.


  21. spacer.png

     

    While the styling may have been a little dated and there was definite room for improvement, the old one was built on a solid idea that communicated something about the company without using any words, which is a really nice bonus to have in your identity.

     

    The new one doesn’t really communicate anything.


  22. 3 hours ago, -Akronite- said:

    I think a lot of these updates to Bruce are really well done. Unfortunately, Bruce sucks as a logo IMO. Odd dimensions and a bad concept IMO.


    Roughly square are odd dimensions, and a depiction of the actual team name is a bad concept? 

     

    30 minutes ago, Brian in Boston said:


    Yes, and the oversized plume in the source material looks every bit as foppishly asinine as the feather in the original "Bucco Bruce" logo. 

     

    As I said in my original post:

    "After all, one way to prevent your brand icon from being disparagingly compared to Errol Flynn is to refrain from embracing the costume design tropes of 1930s and '40s Hollywood swashbucklers when creating your logo. In other words, when it comes to piratical headwear, think less Captain Blood and more Pirates of the Caribbean."

    In other words, when you're creating the branding package for a professional gridiron football team, perhaps taking your sartorial cues from a 1930s cinematic swashbuckler isn't the route to go. Believe me, I'm not arguing that Johnny Depp actually possesses more machismo than Errol Flynn. Rather, I'm simply pointing out that the headwear Depp sports in his corsair flicks doesn't look as flamboyant as the chapeaux that Flynn and his co-stars most often wore in their pirate films.                  

     

    I think the distinction, though, is that a buccaneer was typically a government-sanctioned privateer and thus should be depicted with a little more grandeur and polish than a regular ol’ pirate, which I don’t necessarily disagree with.  It’s a tough subject to work with because nearly everyone’s understanding of pirate culture is built on tropes and stereotypes.

     

    I generally prefer the flag for them, though it does present its own challenges trying to keep the imagery distinct from the Raiders’ brand.


  23. On 10/2/2019 at 7:39 PM, McCarthy said:

    yeah the plume feather is weird and always was, especially the way it made their helmets look from the back,

    quarterback-trent-dilfer-of-the-tampa-ba

     

     

    but when you're writing a love letter to Bucco Bruce you gotta use it to capture the same essence. 

     

     

     

    Here's how I'd helmet this thing, by the way

    spacer.png


    This is looking nice. I think it’s a little too complex, especially when you start extend it to other merchandise and executions, but the style is working.

     

     The main thing I would look at is the eyes. He looks a bit crosseyed, but I can’t tell if it’s something as simple as moving both eye highlights to the same side instead of having them mirrored, or if the pupils themselves are positioned too far toward the center.


  24. 14 hours ago, WavePunter said:

    I wasn't commenting on the existence (or lack thereof) of shiny pants fabric.. I was simply stating that I don't recall any major manufacturer specifically commenting on the impossibility of creating shiny high-performance pants


    I think I meant to quote the post you quoted, but mistakenly quoted your response. Whoops. 🙂