• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

51 Prospect
  1. Before all the swooshes, panels, etc. hit the NFL, the Colts changed up pant striping just enough to be innovative. Dallas also put a number on their pants in the mid 80's which added some flair but kept the integrity of the traditional pant stripe.
  2. Does a fauxback need to be an alt to qualify? I am guessing so because the late 80's versions went reached back to borrow from the WWII era uniforms, yet weren't called "fauxbacks". The same goes for the late 70's uniforms which borrowed heavily from several past uniforms, especially regarding the wordmark. My opinion is that this "new" wordmark is something of a brand refinement. A brand encapsulates the vision, values, feel, etc. of an organization by visually communicating its personality. The old Comiskey era Sox had a definite personality which has been, for better or worse, sanitized since the move to the (then) new stadium. I don't know if such a refinement its the intent of the team or designer but I think the effect is to tap back into that a little. Is that "faux"? I really don't know but to me "faux" means "fake" whereas the feel of the 1970's-1980's team was very real. Is it a good strategy to tap back into that? I don't know that either. In fact, I don't even know if such an attempt will work or be attractive and well received. I guess we will see...
  3. Pardon the hasty execution, but a quick mock-up of the White Sox script on the home pinstripes...
  4. According to the studio’s website, “The style of the wordmark pulls elements from the prior "White Sox" script logos as well as characteristics from the current "Chicago" script. It features minor bumps and hiccups along the contours of the letters as a nod to the imperfections of baseball's rich aesthetic history while still creating a unique mark with its own distinguished personality.” To me, the new “White Sox” mark has a subtle laid back, retro vibe. Maybe it’s just me, but it feels like something from the crazy old Comiskey days. That said, it looks like it would be tough to pull it off with the road mark because it is so well executed as you show.
  5. I would be good with that but I know the current road script is pretty popular.
  6. Yes, this is a brand new font but it feels like its from the old Comiskey Park era.
  7. Good call if true. Its a surprise to me but they have developed a full custom don't and everything.
  8. ???...
  9. I am old enough to remember this series of commercials for New York Life but was young enough then that I actually thought this was a real football team, and that the uniforms were cool...
  10. Regarding the White Sox, the shorts were a brief experiment but the standard home uniform was still originally white over navy and roads were navy over navy (!). The navy pants were just one more reason they looked ridiculous to me. However, in a couple years they went with navy over white for home or away and made me think they looked like they finally had a "real" uniform (collars, shirttails, and no stirrups notwithstading). Shortly thereafter they evolved to a white over white combo at home, which was even better. In short, the point is that color over white (or gray) seems "normal" to me. Pants that aren't white or gray look like an abberation. FWIW I didn't mention powder blue because to me that's essentially gray for a baseball uni. Its not an identity color but just a backgound color.
  11. Frankly, I would start with good old fashioned pencils and paper. You don't want the learning curve of software hampering your creativity. Not speaking for the others, usually logos are hand-drawn anyway before they are scanned, traced, and refined in the software. That said, as far as software goes, I would suggest a vector program, and rather than invest in Adobe Illustrator right off the bat, go with Inkscape, which is free and has all the capabilities you would need as a beginner. The concepts of paths, curves, fills, etc., are pretty fundamental to any of the vector programs.
  12. No short pants in baseball. No long pants in hockey. No sleeves in basketball.
  13. Now digital art is at best an occasional hobby for me. That said, when I deal with offset paths, I make the larger path its own shape behind the smaller one and tweak things like vertices and serifs because the offset path tool can exaggerate things or otherwise not look quite right. Knowing that, I just cannot "unsee" the curved bottom of that "N". Its like the only reason its that pronounced is because that's what the offset tool caused. Again, and you can tell by my rather poor terminology, I am no professional in illustration software but even I can see that problem.
  14. Is he wearing a red polo shirt under that jersey?
  15. I guess its the nostalgia value but I do agree. What's worse is that they took what was a bad logo and made it even worse. It is hopelessly generic now because the original logo never had the batterman separate from the block "SOX" beneath it. Never. Never ever. The bottom of the batterman torso even had a point protruding down to fill the void space of the "X" underneath. It wasn't the logo with a separate wordmark under it. The wordmark was integral to the logo and is what connected it to the team. Also, this logo was never black and white. Never ever ever. It was blue and red, the colors of the team then.