SFGiants58

Members
  • Content Count

    6,567
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    52

Everything posted by SFGiants58

  1. Good work! I especially like the Common Toucan, the Flamingo, and the Northern Cardinal. Would it be possible to work in a Canadian Goose or a Mallard Duck?
  2. Have you ever tried getting anything done through Bay Area politics? It’s like trying to build a table with an eyeglass screwdriver while you’re standing atop a land mine. It’s a situation with both inadequate tools and dangerous ground, which will either produce disappointment or catastrophic failure. Besides, the area around the Cow Palace isn’t exactly the best place to put an arena. I know that China Basin was skid row before Mays Park, but the opportunities for development were far greater there than they are around the Cow Palace. You’d run into the Oakland-Alameda County Colliseum problems.
  3. I agree with this. I wouldn’t have minded the proposed “Oakland Warriors” name from the 1990s (after the stint in San José while Oracle was being gutted and rebuilt from the inside). SF Warriors, while I once defended it, really doesn’t work after the years in Oakland and being a general “Bay Area” team for so long. Golden State may be dumb and I may not like it, but I don’t mind it as much now as I did in my youth. Also, the Bay Bridge is pretty cool-looking, especially the new eastern span.
  4. While that’s an OK example, it does bring up a few odd implications. It’s kind of navy dress-up: While I get the idea of appropriating the imagery (changing the colors to royal/yellow), it’s a little too close for my tastes. Besides, Seattle doesn’t have nearly the same “navy” culture as a place like San Diego, so it’s doubly ill-fitting. I’m sure if the Pilots stuck around, they might have gone for a “vintage aviation” or “generic plane” look by the time they moved to the Kingdome or when the early-1990s rolled around.
  5. Yeah, the bagginess was pretty bad a lot of the time. Almost nobody could pull off the whole “wearing clothing several sizes too large” schtick. I’d argue that hockey had it the worst (using the Islanders and their classic template as an example): Baggy messed with traditional designs, leaving teams with disproportionally-sized crests and too much jersey material. It’s like the sports equivalent of this outfit: It’s got simple parts, but with overly-loose tailoring and sizing. Also, Bank Gothic was surprisingly popular at the time. I like Bank Gothic as an all-uppercase font. As for baseball’s retro push, I like that the 1990s set up a bunch of classic designs to return, be it wholesale or with modernizations. My only regret is that this period featured too many teams wearing pinstripes. If it were up to me, the Yankees, Mets, Phillies, Cubs, White Sox, and Twins would be the only teams wearing them.
  6. Hey! There was some good fashion that decade. Flannel's comeback was nice, and some of the bagginess was OK (just as a reaction to 1980s tightness - all fashion trends are reactions to the ones that preceded them). However, the bad trends of the decade just wound up looking exceptionally garish in the modern period: A lot of ill-fitting colors, excessive bagginess, and the overuse of graphics really looks nasty in retrospect. Some of it was a reaction to the 1980s or the early-1990s, while some of it was pushing burgeoning graphics software too far. Just because Adobe Illustrator 5 or 6.1 let you use gradients and cool text features doesn't mean that it was a good idea to throw it all together. The same went for uniforms of the time. Some of it turned out well, while some of it was wacky experimentation with new tools. For every tasteful design, you got a terrible one to go with it: Speaking of the above images, unpopular opinion is that I have a soft spot for the 1998-2007 Sharks' uniforms. While I have no illusions about their poor quality or the baggy tailoring, I can't help but love the wacky elements coming together. I know they're garish, but I like them more than anything the Sharks have done post-2007 with those dull colors.
  7. I have a less generous imagination: Disagree with 90'S UNIFORM SUPERIORITY is evil MODERNNESS.Jersey is teal COLORED not black COLORED. BLACK COLORED UNIFORM is LIE PROPAGANDA created by STUPID NIKE and evil EDUCATED STUPID who cannot accept TEAL GOLD BLACK DIVINITY. Yes kids, I'm making a deep cut with my gags! I'm also kind of making fun of a racist conspiracy theorist who probably had some mental illness. Sorry about that.
  8. That’s part of what I dislike about the recent run of success. The name became permanent, even though most people I know think it’s rather stupid.
  9. You know, I just love the outlandishness of the design. The big logos, big stripes, and sublimated mesh on their own would be bad, but they look so oddly perfect together. It’s also nice to see red with such prominence in the design, justifying the red facemask. The NASCAR numbers I could do without, but the idea to use drop shadows was an inspired one.
  10. You’re being too kind to the Mack/Shibe families. They were the Spanoses of the 1940s-‘50s, albeit placing the growing senility of their patriarch at the forefront rather than hiding him away. As for baseball-related downgrades: The first step in a long line of terrible decisions.
  11. 1953-54, when the Athletics just... gave up their traditional design in favor of a script that had no ties to their "classic" identity. At least the 1955-present scripts have used an Old English "A" as the capital letter. Fitting for a team that got screwed over by Connie Mack's senility and family squabbles, as well as a bunch of AL dickery. Here's an article explaining how it went down.
  12. Ideally, the Cardinals should have just stuck a red bill on the road cap. All-red at home, with a red-billed navy cap on the road. A look that's just darkened enough for the road. Then again, I often detest the idea that teams should always go "dark on the road." This is especially the case when the home cap is such a fantastic look: Just because the road uniform has a grey base doesn't give one the excuse to "dull" the design.
  13. But there are key differences. Those Packers had glory days within recent memory and a “championship legacy” that wasn’t fifty plus years in the past. They didn’t move to a new city, only to be “reborn” as an expansion team that has only one playoff appearance. The Packers just fell into irrelevance, while the Browns became relevant for their consistent ineptitude. The Browns name has lost that connection to their glorious past. We, and the general public, don’t think about undefeated seasons, AAFC titles, pre-Super Bowl championships, the Cardiac Kids, or the mid-‘80s to mid-‘90s run of contention. Instead? We see “factory of sadness,” the QB jersey with over 20 names, one win in two calendar years, etc. Those two decades of consistent failure (not just mediocrity) are hard to shake. The people of Cleveland fought hard to keep the Browns name and history, only to see an impotent expansion team sully it. It’s time to see the franchise for what it is: a pale imitation of the original that doesn’t deserve the name or the records.
  14. Black/Turquoise/Gold/Sand, whaddup?!? They don’t need purple.
  15. While I like it from a conceptual POV (a good “what if” scenario), I’m more concerned with the technical challenges that come with the design. These include: 1. What color should the plastic shell be? 2. Do you use stickers or paint to render the logo? 3. How would it look on a TV screen, especially one from the 1990s (when this proposal surfaced)? 4. Would it cause visual problems with the players and/or announcers? I’m sure @andrewharrington or @BrandMooreArt know more about this than I do, but I’d argue that the proposed helmet would’ve been too much of a pain to pull off both back in the day and now.
  16. It’s supposed to show how the Spurs wore black/silver/white uniforms while also having the Fiesta colors on their logo, court, warmup jackets, and fan apparel. This is a terrible example, as bright, flashy colors are fairly antithetical to the Spurs organization’s philosophy and brand image.
  17. Maybe that's because the graphics are raster, compared to the vector graphics used by the rest of the promotion (which are far easier to reproduce, apparently). It's something I heard @ColorWerx say once (either here or on Twitter), so I figured I should put it out there.
  18. I've always been partial to the Polish poster of Tootsie, which makes it out to be a far darker movie than it is. The Polish poster of The Shining also highlights the scariest part of that movie, Shelley Duvall's horror face! Here are a few others I enjoy (The Spy Who Loved Me, Tampopo, and Bringing Out the Dead): If we're going to include Criterion Collection covers, I've got a few:
  19. It's associated with a cruddy team that skipped town (leaving the city without a baseball team for over 30 years), consistent playoff failure, and a popular chain of drugstores. It got promoted to main logo because the city fathers wanted to promote the arrival of the relocated Expos with Cooperstown Collection gear and Bud overrode the original plan to have a "W" logo that fit with the initial brand: That goes with the initial brand so much more. Sure, the Curly W works with the scripts (which were reverse-engineered from the logo), but the "DC" just looks better with both the bevels and the scripts.
  20. I gave it a test run with my Brewers concept, just to test the functions: I'd say that it works really well! The options are plentiful, the layers are well-organized, and the use of smart objects for caps and helmets was an inspired choice. I did notice that the layer mask on the jersey back was misaligned, but that's a quick fix. I'd also suggest adding Tigers-style belt loops. Still, well done and I'd love to see it gain traction on the forums!
  21. The earliest rumblings of the neo-retro movement in baseball also happened in the 1990s. Take the Giants, who adjusted their cap and wordmark logos to "update" their 1947-1976 wordmarks and cap logo: Compare that to their bulbous 1983-93 look, as seen in this late 1993 image (a fun case of branding overlap): The White Sox started this push towards neo-retro designs in the 1990's (after being part of the "1987" wave): Many others following suit. The Phillies created an odd modernization of their "Whiz Kids" design, the Expos redid their uniforms in a traditional style, the Cardinals eschewed uniform stripes and added a road cap, the Reds revived vests and pinstripes, Cleveland brought back the 1940s-'50s scripts in an "uncanny valley" fashion, and the Angels revived their 1960s aesthetic for a brief period. Also, the 1993 teams both came out with modern spins on "traditional" (White Sox ripoff) designs. Neo-retro was an underrated part of 1990s design, one that would gain traction in the following decade.
  22. Marlins: It's nice to see that my concept had a bit of influence! While I like what you've done with the "Vice" colors, I think the color balance could use a little shifting. I'd go for a pink/black/cyan arrangement on the road uniform, using a lighter grey and a cap logo with inverted colors. My big complaint is that you played it a little too safe by not going with a magenta hat on the magenta-centric alt, and that you didn't fix the hat Marlin (i.e., deleting the hat Marlin). A new Art Deco-styled Marlin would be an excellent sleeve patch for the design. Angels: While it's good, it feels a little paint-by-numbers. The red bill really needs to be on the road uniform's cap (maybe have an alt cap with the alternates). As it stands, the attempt to co-balance red and navy takes some of the liveliness out of the set, making it look generic. A good method to rectify this would be to add some sock design with an emphasis on red, work yellow-gold into the trim, and maybe recreate one of the old primary logos the Angels used instead of the roundel. I see where you were coming from with this one, but it's too sedate. Giants: It's my team, and I kind of grade on a pass/fail system. You brought back the pre-2012 road uniform, so you pass. Faux-flannel is an especially nice touch as well! My only complaints are that you made the "SF" the primary logo, when the 2000-2013 roundel would work far more in that capacity (minus gold). The "script in front of a baseball" needs to go away. I'd also recommend adding sock stripes, be they the orange tri-stripe or an northwestern stripe (like these cuffs). Still, good work! I like seeing where you've taken this series, and I see a lot of potential in what you've done. However, I think you're holding yourself back a little. Some of your designs come off as sedate, with too much of a commitment to traditionalism instead of experimentation. It's OK to go wild with your designs every once in a while and branch out from this board's expectations for designs. Don't feel afraid to put out unpopular concepts or make the most out of unappealing ingredients (e.g., what you did with the Diamondbacks). Just keep pushing forward, improving your skills (e.g., original logo art, experimenting with colors, etc.) and building off of the forum's input.
  23. I’ve lived in Milwaukee for almost two years now, and I’d argue that you’re right. There’s way more of a beer scene here than there was in any other place I’ve been. I don’t drink beer or like drinking it (too many carbs with a not-so-nice taste), but I don’t mind the smell. I guess the Miller Park name makes sense with Milwaukee.
  24. 12/8/17, then 12/11/17. It’s not like it was a rapid-fire thing. I don’t see it as criminal as much as other people do. The organization was in horrendous debt before the purchase, and I doubt Jorge Mas’ capital would have been able to fix it while keeping the team together. The contract but the Marlins in the ass in the worst ways possible.
  25. Yeah, bad idea, especially when their sewers back up. How about Carlton Park? I could go on with several. Hank Aaron Field could work for both Atlanta and Milwaukee (although Matthews or Yount Park might be better for the latter).