Falcons New Unis 2020

[BrandMooreArt]

17 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

I’m just busting some chops on the hero worship.

I do agree with a lot of your points, but I find you to be a pain in the ass with some opinions I really disagree with that you try to pass off as objective truths.

 

ok, don't take it from me then. would the words of Massimo Vignelli carry more weight?

 

"Very often people think that Design is a particular style. Nothing could be more wrong! Design is a discipline, a creative process with its own rules, controlling the consistency of its output toward its objective in the most direct and expressive way."

 

and isn't the "ball busting" part of the issue here? no one is addressing the points made; just "i don't agree and you're an ass and Fraser is messiah". lets stay on topic? lets talk about the craft of the Falcons logo? is that allowed?

[OnWis97]

One thing I'm failing to see that was pointed out somewhere in this thread is that this logo does a great job conveying "motion." I (a total novice who just likes what he likes) kinda see it in the gray outline getting thicker toward the back/left. But I feel like the extra colors/layers in the update (particularly the red) give it a bit of a "robo-bird" feel, which for me kinda takes the "motion" off the table.  

 

I actually think the logo is staying, but if they do anything significant, I think one thing to do is not prioritize it being an "F."  Well, I guess I, as a novice, am more "asking" about this...does the insistence on the "F" tie their hands in any way?  I never thought either logo was an "F" until it was pointed out here. If I never came here, I'd never have known.  How many fans realize it's an "F?"  Plus, I don't like the falcon redundantly displaying it's own letter.  It's already a falcon; no need for an "F."

[infrared41]

1 minute ago, BrandMooreArt said:

16 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

I’m just busting some chops on the hero worship.

I do agree with a lot of your points, but I find you to be a pain in the ass with some opinions I really disagree with that you try to pass off as objective truths.

 

ok, don't take it from me then. would the words of Massimo Vignelli carry more weight?

 

"Very often people think that Design is a particular style. Nothing could be more wrong! Design is a discipline, a creative process with its own rules, controlling the consistency of its output toward its objective in the most direct and expressive way."

 

You've both made your points. Either move on or take it to PM. Thank you. 

[Sec19Row53]

Is the small, difficult to produce in small size "Clemson notch" a design flaw, or something made for identifying logo theft? Does that compare to some of the design flaws found above?

[SFGiants58]

2 hours ago, BrandMooreArt said:

and isn't the "ball busting" part of the issue here? no one is addressing the points made; just "i don't agree and you're an ass and Fraser is messiah". lets stay on topic? lets talk about the craft of the Falcons logo? is that allowed?

@BrandMooreArt, @davidson, I apologize.

[andrewharrington]

2 hours ago, DC in Da House w/o a Doubt said:

In the designer world I believe its 

 

Falcons logo designer: in the cool club

 

Panthers logo designer: not in the cool club

Truthfully, I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s the opposite, but I think both of those are probably unfair generalizations. Some people are more into the style, the trend, the hype, and the bullet point explanations. Some people are into weeks of research, relentless thought, patience, and craftsmanship that ultimately leads to a great final product. It’s kind of silly to correlate it to being “cool.” It’s 100% about talent and effort. There’s no shame in not being the best at drawing, but you have to take every opportunity to hone those skills if you want to be elite. It doesn’t just happen.

 

1 hour ago, Sec19Row53 said:

Is the small, difficult to produce in small size "Clemson notch" a design flaw, or something made for identifying logo theft? Does that compare to some of the design flaws found above?

 

I think it’s a completely different conversation. There’s no real form or idea to it. It’s the simplest, flattest, lowest-hanging fruit executed in an intentionally messy style, but the difference is it doesn’t rely on the detail being executed the same way every time to get its point across. I think the C is pointless, but it doesn’t really take anything away from the logo or stand out as a flaw because the whole thing looks like a sponge painting, and it works.

[BrandMooreArt]

the Clemson logo is definitely an interesting road to explore in regards to craft. lets set the stage and see if i recall this correctly: that paw logo is an actual print from their former tiger mascot right? someone rolled ink onto its paw, they pressed it against paper, and thats what was used to create the logo? and the scar on the logo was actually there on the tiger?

 

ill keep going on that, assuming its right. it starts with an idea. “lets make his paw the logo”. to execute that, you could draw a paw print and add the scar which is how most design is done. you create it by hand (to a certain extent) and that artists own style and craft becomes a part of it

 

with Clemson, and what makes this so different than other examples we’re talking about here, there is no artist involved. the simplest, most direct way to fulfill the vision (idea) is the route they took. and theres something to the authenticity of that i think is really cool. because its not drawn but made, if you will. of course, ill echo Harry again here, the final result is so unique and artistic, the roughness is a by-product of the concept thats works because the craftsmanship is in bringing the idea to life. skills supporting the vision. 

 

yea it kind of sucks in embroidery and is messy but its a literal paw print. it would be unfair to say its so rough and doesnt reproduce well because it was always going to be what it was going to be from the tiger. you couldnt really get a better result than what it is given the chosen route of creation. 

[andrewharrington]

38 minutes ago, BrandMooreArt said:

the Clemson logo is definitely an interesting road to explore in regards to craft. lets set the stage and see if i recall this correctly: that paw logo is an actual print from their former tiger mascot right? someone rolled ink onto its paw, they pressed it against paper, and thats what was used to create the logo? and the scar on the logo was actually there on the tiger?

 

ill keep going on that, assuming its right. it starts with an idea. “lets make his paw the logo”. to execute that, you could draw a paw print and add the scar which is how most design is done. you create it by hand (to a certain extent) and that artists own style and craft becomes a part of it

 

with Clemson, and what makes this so different than other examples we’re talking about here, there is no artist involved. the simplest, most direct way to fulfill the vision (idea) is the route they took. and theres something to the authenticity of that i think is really cool. because its not drawn but made, if you will. of course, ill echo Harry again here, the final result is so unique and artistic, the roughness is a by-product of the concept thats works because the craftsmanship is in bringing the idea to life. skills supporting the vision. 

 

yea it kind of sucks in embroidery and is messy but its a literal paw print. it would be unfair to say its so rough and doesnt reproduce well because it was always going to be what it was going to be from the tiger. you couldnt really get a better result than what it is given the chosen route of creation. 

It is derived from a cast tiger paw, but it’s not a physical print, nor does it have any direct connection to Clemson, as far as I know (link below). I thought the C-cut was added so they could point it out in legal proceedings if someone tried to steal the logo and claim fair use in court because it’s just a generic tiger paw; it’s a way to claim, “No, this is definitely *our* paw. I can tell by this little cutout.”

 

To expand, the human component does come in when digital art is needed, and even then there’s still an opportunity to draw it well or draw it poorly even if the style is messy, rough, distressed, etc. I think Clemson’s logo is pretty genius in that it’s kind of an art piece that invites you to execute it however you need to without worrying about fidelity of detail, yet it still holds up and communicates its message very well. The “forest” on it is so simple and clear that the “trees” hardly matter. You’ll always get it, though it does falter when people try to get cute and unnecessarily go off script with outlines and such:

 

Article about the origin...

 

That also goes to show how important a good presentation is. To think that the Clemson logo never would have been if the designer hadn’t shown it on a helmet puts it in perspective.

[monkeypower]

I've always thought the paw being the "O" in CLEMSON was a bit of a stretch.

[aawagner011]

Oh, boy. As a fan, this quote from owner Arthur Blank isn’t getting me excited. This reads more like a Bucs, Titans, Jags Nike 1.0 rather than a Vikings, Lions, Jags 2.0. We need to revert to tradition rather than reinvent the wheel here. Contemporary with flair, player input, and lots of combinations never sounds like a good mix.

 

https://www.atlantafalcons.com/news/q-a-with-arthur-blank-2020-expectations-draft-free-agency-salary-cap-uniforms
 

Q: Speaking of the fans and speaking of excitement, I've gotten a ton of emails from fans who are just beyond excited about the first major uniform redesign in 17 years. Without giving anything away, what was your first reaction when you first saw the new duds and how excited are you to unveil a new look?

 

Quote

Well it's the first time in 17 years that we're changing them which is remarkable to me because I didn't realize it was quite that long. But I did remember when we first bought the team a couple years later that we did change it – and that was a great change at that time. I think that this look that fans will feel, experience and see and hopefully wear is one that's more in keeping with a contemporary look and feel that our fans are looking for – a little more flair. I think the level combinations is one of the things that struck me about the tops and bottoms, the way they could be combined and put together provides a lot of options. The players had a lot of input in the uniforms; you know, they have to wear them. Beyond that, they're young and they're hip and they get it. They want to wear something that looks good on them. I think the uniforms will good on them and even better on our fans.

 

[IceCap]

5 hours ago, BrandMooreArt said:

lets stay on topic? lets talk about the craft of the Falcons logo? is that allowed?

I know you like to ignore me because I don't consider every word you type to be infallible around here, but this is me with my mod hat on giving you some very good advice. Take it or leave it, but here it is. 

 

People react not just to what you say but how you say it. Your points on what you believe to be the Falcons logo's strengths wouldn't attract the negative reactions they did if you worked on how you presented them. I've heard from people (who will remain nameless) that agree with your overall points but find your attitude intolerable. Imagine how people who don't agree with you feel. 

 

So again, ignore me if you want. I'm trying to offer you solid advice as to how to present yourself here. Try to seem less arrogant when presenting your argument. 

 

I know how that's gotta seem coming from me of all people, but think of it like this. You might have something to work on if even I see the problem 

[PaleVermilion81]

6 hours ago, DC in Da House w/o a Doubt said:

In the designer world I believe its 

 

Falcons logo designer: in the cool club

 

Panthers logo designer: not in the cool club

 

I'm a designer, so my opinion matters. I hate the Falcons logo. I think the Panthers logo is okay (not great, but not bad).

 

Edit: just wanted to make sure it was clear that the "my opinion matters" part is pure sarcasm and not meant to be mean  haha

[GFB]

7 hours ago, infrared41 said:

For the record, I've produced and directed all sorts of stuff for TV and video. That doesn't make my opinion on the quality of those endeavors any more valid than the opinion of a viewer.

People can enjoy whatever art, books, music, design, or film that speak to them. No one should ever police the subjective realm. Let everyone have their own opinions.

 

On the other hand, it’s also silly to pretend that Art only has subjective value and zero objective value; or that “all opinions are equally valid“ and should be treated with the same weight. I can hate something that is objectively good (say, Citizen Kane) and I can love something that is objectively bad (Sucker Punch). Artistic subjective value and objective value exist independent of one another.
 

If you asked Martin Scorsese to list the ten best movies of all time and then asked my delinquent cousin for his list of the ten best movies, both opinions absolutely do not hold the same weight. That does not mean that my cousin’s list is less true, less honest, that he’ll suddenly start enjoying Ugetsu more than Suicide Squad, or even that he’s wrong to have such poor taste in movies to begin with, but he simply has not spent his entire life meditating on the medium of film like Scorsese has. 
 

That’s not to imply that Scorsese’s list is “correct” either. Other great directors like Kubrick, Hitchcock, and Spielberg could have completely different lists... if you put them all in a room, they’d argue and debate for days about the ten best movies of all time. But each one of their opinions holds more objective value and truth than my cousin’s opinion, simply because of their knowledge and experience with the topic. 

 

The point in all of this is that we all have our different areas of expertise and our guilty pleasures. I might have expert opinions on coffee and terrible opinions on wine. Infra, you could be an expert at motorcycles and have a horrible fashion sense. Elon Musk has brilliant ideas about how engineering and terrible ideas regarding common sense. It’s ok... you don’t have to stop wearing your Ohio State apparel in public and I can keep enjoying my $10 boxed wine from the gas station. Our subjective poor opinions are perfectly valid to us all.

 

Brandon, Andrew and Fraser are three world-class designers who have forgotten more about design than most of us will ever know. This isn’t about ”hero worship” or saying they are always correct, simply that their opinions should hold more weight than the average poster because they know so much. If you ask them for their artistic opinions, they are typically able to explain them by looking past their own subjective opinions and into the objective realm. You never HAVE to change your subjective opinions about what they are saying, but an opinion that is able to point to the objective (I believe this is good because A, B, and C) should always hold more weight to us than an opinion that never leaves the subjective (I believe this is good because I like it and therefore it is good).

 

tl;dr - Opinions are like holes, in that some holes have more value than others.

 

[MilSox]

2 hours ago, monkeypower said:

I've always thought the paw being the "O" in CLEMSON was a bit of a stretch.

 

They could pull it off much better if they made the paw the negative space in the O rather than the O itself.

[infrared41]

1 hour ago, GFB said:

it’s also silly to pretend that Art only has subjective value and zero objective value; or that “all opinions are equally valid“ and should be treated with the same weight. I can hate something that is objectively good (say, Citizen Kane) and I can love something that is objectively bad (Sucker Punch). Artistic subjective value and objective value exist independent of one another.

 

Show me the data that definitively proves Citizen Kane is objectively good or the data that definitively proves Sucker Punch is objectively bad and I'll concede the argument. You can't. The best you can do is offer the opinions of a lot of people who agree that Citizen Kane is good. When you do, I'll just counter with a bunch of people who claim UFOs are real. Both arguments will have the same merit and neither can be proven. There is no such thing as objective value in art. There can't be because there are no scientifically proven theories on art. For something to be objectively anything is to be able to prove it with undeniable facts. Can't do that with art. Sorry. 

 

No one said all opinions are equally valid. "That sucks" or "that's really cool" aren't going to add much to the conversation. Then again, "that doesn't suck because I'm a designer and I say so" doesn't work either. The point, I believe, was that expertise in a field does not automatically make ones opinion more valid than someone who is not in that field. If me with my oversized ego and shelf full of awards can admit that my opinion on the quality of a TV program or movie doesn't carry any more weight than your opinion does, then maybe you designer guys can step down off the high horses and live amongst the rest of us commoners. 

 

FWIW, I think Scorcese is hit and miss at best. Some of his films are great, others (looking at you, The Irishman) not so much. Other than Full Metal Jacket, Kubrick's films bore me to death. They're self-indulgent and not terribly interesting. They are, however, very nicely shot. Point being, we can't even agree on which directors should be the experts making these lists. What's objective about that? 

 

With regard to my opinions on motorcycles. All I know about motorcycles is how to ride them. Does that mean I'm unqualified to buy the Harley I think looks the coolest? Should I ask an expert which one looks best and buy the one they recommended instead? With regard to my fashion sense. I don't have any. I wear what I like. Period. Then again, who have we appointed to decide what's fashionable and what isn't. Where's the hard data on that? 

 

I respect what you're saying, but I don't agree with what you're saying. 

[IceCap]

2 hours ago, GFB said:

Brandon, Andrew and Fraser are three world-class designers who have forgotten more about design than most of us will ever know. This isn’t about ”hero worship” or saying they are always correct, simply that their opinions should hold more weight than the average poster because they know so much. If you ask them for their artistic opinions, they are typically able to explain them by looking past their own subjective opinions and into the objective realm. You never HAVE to change your subjective opinions about what they are saying, but an opinion that is able to point to the objective (I believe this is good because A, B, and C) should always hold more weight to us than an opinion that never leaves the subjective (I believe this is good because I like it and therefore it is good).

I would just refer you to what I said to Brandon above.

 

I'll also add that ultimately what people take issue with is Brandon's insistence that his subjective opinion on the Falcons' logo is correct. If he just likes the Falcons logo, cool. If his background in art and design gives him an appreciation for how it was crafted, cool.

We're at the point, however, where he's trying to use an appeal to authority to elevate his subjective opinion above those who disagree with him. And that's the problem.

[BrandMooreArt]

i havent insisted upon anything other than someone make a counter argument to the merits of craftsmanship other than "i like / dont like it". BellaSpurs was able to push beyond that a bit after some back and forth with a thoughtful post. few others have done the same.

 

ive answered questions, asked plenty myself, and expanded upon further completely respectfully. i never suggested anyone was wrong or lesser than unless in a playful "quit trollin'" way followed by "on a serious note..." to make it clear i didnt want that confusion. 

 

there seems to be a misunderstanding that the thoughts i share are my own, being pushed upon you all or are my own conjured standards for design. truthfully, theres actually very little to that. those standards of quality expressed through these pages largely come from godfathers of modern design: Massimo Vignelli, Paul Rand, Saul Bass. not me. an injection of others thoughts on the topic is evidence for the points being made. again, no one else has done this as a counter. its mostly been mockery and false characterization and not just towards myself

 

to suggest im trying to strong arm anyone to agree with me or that anyone is trying to present themselves as authority, or make a comment even resembling "that doesn't suck because I'm a designer and I say so" is just absurd. what are we here for? whats the point of this forum? in any other thread someone says "thats not their best uniform, this is" and another person says the same thing resulting in pages of "no u" arguments and its nothing, but when someone is interested in exploring deeper as to WHY someone might hold a certain opinion, it's elitist? please. and if that discussion expands respectfully into a 3rd point it calls for slander? 

 

some of what has always been wrong with this forum (and any digital conversation) comes from misunderstanding; things taken the wrong way or not expressed properly. there's no emotion or substance beyond the words displayed so intent and personality is hard to pick up. but a lot more of the problems here come from people who can't actually engage in a discussion without petty, intentional misrepresentation of others

 

[IceCap]

3 hours ago, BrandMooreArt said:

but a lot more of the problems here come from people who can't actually engage in a discussion without petty, intentional misrepresentation of others

I'm going to make two things very clear, because you are correct in so much as a digital text based medium makes tone hard to convey. So I'm letting you know I'm not being snarky or sarcastic. This is me being upfront and honest. 

 

First, the advice I gave you earlier was made in good faith in the hopes it would help how you present yourself and your opinions here. 

 

Secondly, I have never once intentionally misrepresented you. Any and all disagreements we have had have, at least on my end, come a genuine clashing of opinions and what I honestly perceived to be arrogance on your part.

 

I would be happy to extend the olive branch and offer to sit down with you, here or in DMs, to burry the hatchet. If you're willing, I'm willing. 

[JayMac]

So...how about those new Falcons uniform rumors?

[IceCap]

11 minutes ago, jmac11281 said:

So...how about those new Falcons uniform rumors?

Same thing I said in the Browns uniform thread. The discussion will drift until we either have a leak or an unveiling. Once either happens I can assure you (based on past precedent) actual uniform discussion will wash over everything else like a tidal wave.