Jump to content

Tennessee pays 46k for new State Logo


elsephen

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Thought it would be fun to try out, I made mine in 2 minutes and 31seconds and wasn't even trying to be quick. I also made it in apple Pages, which is essentially the same as Word.

I also like my version better! (But I did realize mine is more rectangular than the actual logo, that must be the $46k mistake.)

Screen%20Shot%202015-05-21%20at%2012.20.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Must be nice to charge 46k per 3 minutes of work.

That's such an ignorant statement. Not defending the outcome of the work in any way, but to say that anyone pocketed a boatload of money without putting in any effort is just dumb.

Most often, when you see overly generic logos, it's the result of too many people being able to give feedback. In the case of a logo for a state, it's easy to see how that could be the case. I think it's part of the reason Nike requests schools participating in their GIG program to keep everything under wraps during the process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Must be nice to charge 46k per 3 minutes of work.

That's such an ignorant statement. Not defending the outcome of the work in any way, but to say that anyone pocketed a boatload of money without putting in any effort is just dumb.

Most often, when you see overly generic logos, it's the result of too many people being able to give feedback. In the case of a logo for a state, it's easy to see how that could be the case. I think it's part of the reason Nike requests schools participating in their GIG program to keep everything under wraps during the process.

100% agreed. It's not the most complex or visually stunning logo ever made, but to suggest little to no work was put into it, is ignorant. Especially as someone they interviewed about it said something along the lines of "a 5 year old with a computer could make it."

Maybe, but as with most logos, what we're NOT seeing here is all the sketches and variations of countless other concepts.

Instances like this always remind me of this image

funny-graphic-designer-comic.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Must be nice to charge 46k per 3 minutes of work.

That's such an ignorant statement. Not defending the outcome of the work in any way, but to say that anyone pocketed a boatload of money without putting in any effort is just dumb.

Most often, when you see overly generic logos, it's the result of too many people being able to give feedback. In the case of a logo for a state, it's easy to see how that could be the case. I think it's part of the reason Nike requests schools participating in their GIG program to keep everything under wraps during the process.

I knew someone would try this.

No. Sorry.

It's not the simplicity of the logo that makes me think it took 2 minutes. It's the emptiness of it.

This logo is bad. Ideally. Technically.

Sorry. No defending this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Must be nice to charge 46k per 3 minutes of work.

That's such an ignorant statement. Not defending the outcome of the work in any way, but to say that anyone pocketed a boatload of money without putting in any effort is just dumb.

Most often, when you see overly generic logos, it's the result of too many people being able to give feedback. In the case of a logo for a state, it's easy to see how that could be the case. I think it's part of the reason Nike requests schools participating in their GIG program to keep everything under wraps during the process.

.... but to suggest little to no work was put into it, is ignorant.

No it isn't. When your concept is pathetic, has zero symbolism, etc- the "amount of work" put in is irrelevant.

In that case, I'm going to assume it was "designed" (hurts to use that word here) by an 80 yr old grandmother that has zero design experience- but she did her best learning how to operate a computer and sketched 200 variations of other generic logos with no substance.

Hey cool! Now it's legit! I mean... it was 3 minutes worth of work- but it took someone 5 years! Brilliant!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was not a one-and-done process by the designer, I guarantee it. There was a concept phase where they came up with multiple ideas and ran them past the client (the state). They chose one that they want to pursue and it was refined, many font options were looked at, scale of the text, etc. and then the final logo was chosen.

Implying that there was 3 minutes worth of work involved is insulting to the designer. Blame the state for choosing a boring, uninspired logo, but don't insinuate that the designer didn't try and pocketed a load of money for minimal effort.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Must be nice to charge 46k per 3 minutes of work.

That's such an ignorant statement. Not defending the outcome of the work in any way, but to say that anyone pocketed a boatload of money without putting in any effort is just dumb.

Most often, when you see overly generic logos, it's the result of too many people being able to give feedback. In the case of a logo for a state, it's easy to see how that could be the case. I think it's part of the reason Nike requests schools participating in their GIG program to keep everything under wraps during the process.

I knew someone would try this.

No. Sorry.

It's not the simplicity of the logo that makes me think it took 2 minutes. It's the emptiness of it.

This logo is bad. Ideally. Technically.

Sorry. No defending this.

All you're doing is revealing that you've never designed for a high profile client before.

Again, the end result is not good. We're in alignment there. But to say that they spent no time on it is nothing but naive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't say they spent no time. I said it was 3 minutes worth of work. There's a difference.


To prove as much- here's what I did in 1 minute. Timed. 1 minute. And it has more substance/relative to the state than the above logo.

10moah0.jpg

It's terrible, but I wouldn't charge someone 46 cents for it, much less 46 thousand dollars...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair, I'm sure it took longer than 3 minutes to come up with that.

But if someone on this website posted that as a concept, he would get laughed off the board with the same comments this logo is getting. In some cases, even worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That actual logo may have taken a short time to make, definitely not three minutes though. Like JP said, that's an ignorant statement.

But you have to take in to account the entire process of coming up with a logo for that big of an organization. Interviews, observations, mock ups, sketches, etc. Plus material costs, travel costs (depending on the firm they selected), etc.

While the logo they settled on doesn't seem very detailed. They probably came up with 20 or more fully finished logos, plus countless revisions on a few of those. Until finally, the board (comprised mostly of boring old men) chose this logo.

You are judging the final outcome without considering any of the process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys continue to assume I'm ignoring the basics of the process. I'm an art director at a branding firm... I'm aware of how it works.

However you're also assuming that this logo was done by a firm that knows what they're doing. And outside of conning, that's a very bold assumption.


My point is- I or any other designer that is even mediocre in this business could create a concept AND design better than that within 3 minutes.



So it doesn't matter how much time THEY took on it. It's still only 3 minutes worth of work. Don't justify bad design.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can do it in three minutes because you are looking at it and have the advantage of being able to just replicate it.

It probably took a while and a lot of re-draws to get to that. They may have wanted a lot and then realized with each iteration that it was too much and then ended up at that.

You don't know what the client wanted or what their input was, so criticizing the designer is below even childish.

Any time someone comments that a design is "lazy" or "I could have done it in x mins" it just shows that they don't understand the process and the client/designer relationship.

You could have done it in 3 minutes? Well you didn't. Someone did, and pocketed $36k for it while you're posting about it on a message board. One party seems to me to be demonstrating much more talent than the other. I'll leave it to the masses to determine which one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or it shows they DO understand the process and know that this is terrible.

And one party seems to be demonstrating more talent?... If that talent is thievery, yes. Otherwise- not even close.


Makes me wonder when artists can't see the flaw in this. You're advocating terrible work- while telling someone else they don't understand the process. It's silly.

You truly think this firm just had a ton of great sketches/ideas and this is what they rolled out? Come on now.

It's far more likely they were at a deadline and just pushed this forward and the client said "sure."... to which they all celebrate at the office for getting 46k for absolutely nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thought it would be fun to try out, I made mine in 2 minutes and 31seconds and wasn't even trying to be quick. I also made it in apple Pages, which is essentially the same as Word.

I also like my version better! (But I did realize mine is more rectangular than the actual logo, that must be the $46k mistake.)

Screen%20Shot%202015-05-21%20at%2012.20.

That is more fitting for a newspaper outlet.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.