Los Angeles NFL Brands Discussion

[chakfu]

11 hours ago, Old School Fool said:

 

It's going to upset some people, yes, but I see this as something similar to the Vikings. The idea that the Rams have a horn on the helmet will still be there. I don't personally find the idea to be anything too drastic if it's the same signature idea. A sorta different horn design isn't a deal breaker for me personally.

 

 

Using the new horn seems like a perfectly nice modernization of the classic design.  I feel like the shade of blue is also a huge victory.  As I just posted on twitter:

 

Am I the only one who thinks this is a great logo, particularly this version with the blue wordmark? Has another team ever successfully morphed an "anatomic" helmet design into a proper standalone logo this successfully? (Bengals striped B being less successful.)

[Gothamite]

51 minutes ago, DNAsports said:

Probably a safe choice of words:

 

 

 

Shame they're operating from a faulty premise, though. 

[The_Admiral]

Remember that the Chargers started getting serious about the powder blue throwbacks in the throes of the darkened and faded early 2000s, when so many teams, including the Chargers themselves. had drab or "intimidating" uniforms, so when people actually saw a splash of color amid all the black, midnight blue, midnight green, copper, bronze, brick red, "Vegas gold," and whatever else made up the palette of 2003 malaise, a team wearing light blue and yellow was so idiosyncratic that everyone was like "whoa, these are the best uniforms ever!" They weren't really the best, they were just were the Manic Pixie Dream Throwbacks teaching us how to love again. 

[upperV03]

The NFL’s Sr. Creative Director posted a nice breakdown of the changes to the Chargers’ bolt logo:

[Gothamite]

It is a serious upgrade.  Bravo, Chargers. 

[burgundy]

42 minutes ago, upperV03 said:

The NFL’s Sr. Creative Director posted a nice breakdown of the changes to the Chargers’ bolt logo:

 

That graphic makes It look like a South Park character got a haircut.

 

But in all seriousness, I love the update.

 

[MJD7]

I’m late to the party, but here are my thoughts on the LA logo changes:

 

I’m definitely in the camp of not at all being a fan of either new Rams logo. It seems they really overthought what should have been a simple update. I never would have thought orange would be added to the team’s palette, even as small of an accent as it is, but here we are. The gradients seem to be completely unnecessary and add nothing to the dimension of the horn. The worst part about this is it almost guarantees they’re going to mess with the helmet horn, really the main iconic and unchanging aspect of their brand. At least they got the royal & yellow right.

 

As for the Chargers, on the other hand, everything they’ve done with their logo revamp is just about perfect. It makes me realize shortcomings I didn’t even see of the previous logo. It evokes speed and lightning way better than the prior logo did. It’s also super exciting to see what the removal of navy might entail for the uniforms. Hopefully the powder primary with the yellow facemask was a test for what they’re planning to unveil this year, and we just didn’t know it yet.

[spartacat_12]

2 hours ago, chakfu said:

 

Using the new horn seems like a perfectly nice modernization of the classic design. 

 

The helmet horn has stayed the same (colours aside) for over 70 years. There's no need for any modernization.

 

You don't see the Packers or Bears updating their helmet logos even though the fonts they use aren't seen anywhere else in their branding.

[kimball]

I love the upgrade to the bolt. But, I am skeptical of how the jerseys will look with only light blue, gold and white to work with. I liked the navy blue outline. 

[j'villejags]

1 hour ago, burgundy said:

 

That graphic makes It look like a South Park character got a haircut.

 

 

[MDGP]

14 minutes ago, kimball said:

I love the upgrade to the bolt. But, I am skeptical of how the jerseys will look with only light blue, gold and white to work with. I liked the navy blue outline. 

 

They'll look pretty good.

 

[AnPheitseog]

I just hope the chargers dont add the numbers back on the helmets.

[j'villejags]

1 minute ago, _J_ said:

I just hope the chargers dont add the numbers back on the helmets.

With the comment on simplifying and evolving, I don't expect to see them on there. Especially after removing navy from the palette. Powder or gold numbers on a white helmet at that scale would not be all that legible from a discernible distance. 

[LogoFan]

8 hours ago, TruColor said:

 

It was, and still is, this:

 

 

Ugh, I just noticed my typo of 385.  You are our resident color expert, so thanks for clarifying.

The weird thing is, when I tried to match in both Corel and Illustrator, I got the same results with the 285 being slightly off but 3005 matching perfectly.

 

[LogoFan]

8 minutes ago, _J_ said:

I just hope the chargers dont add the numbers back on the helmets.

 

THIS.  This, this, this, this, this.

[LogoFan]

Alot of questions about "What changed?" with the #Chargers bolt update. 1. Didn't want to change the essence of the bolt 2. More natural arc 3. Repair misaligned cutback 4. Balanced the width and horizontal location of the "cutbacks" for more symmetry 4. Remove arduous keyline ️ pic.twitter.com/ZQ53I9KJaZ

— Dane Storrusten (@DaneStorrusten) March 26, 2020

If I'd known Dane was working with the Chargers, I'd have known they were in good hands.  His work, particularly on the A11FL which never got out the gate, is truly fantastic.

[PaleVermilion81]

9 minutes ago, LogoFan said:

 

Ugh, I just noticed my typo of 385.  You are our resident color expert, so thanks for clarifying.

The weird thing is, when I tried to match in both Corel and Illustrator, I got the same results with the 285 being slightly off but 3005 matching perfectly.

 

 

You can't match Pantone in RGB. Pantone is a printed medium, not screen. It isn't 1 to 1.

[TruColor]

3 hours ago, PaleVermilion81 said:

 

You can't match Pantone in RGB. Pantone is a printed medium, not screen. It isn't 1 to 1.

 

Same with CMYK. Pantone colors (Pantone Matching System/Solid colors anyway) are spot inks; only way to accurately reproduce PANTONE 285 C is to use the following formula ink mix:

• 37.50% Reflex Blue
• 12.50% Process Blue
• 50.00% Transparent White

And then, print on coated paper stock. (What the 'C' indicates.)

 

CMYK values are - like RGB values - just simulations of the intended color.

 

(This is one of my many pet peeves these days...too many people think that Pantone colors are CMYK colors. No, they are spot/solid colors. There's a big difference.)

 

[Sec19Row53]

5 hours ago, spartacat_12 said:

 

The helmet horn has stayed the same (colours aside) for over 70 years. There's no need for any modernization.

 

You don't see the Packers or Bears updating their helmet logos even though the fonts they use aren't seen anywhere else in their branding.

A - No the horn HASN'T remained unchanged for over 70 years, colors aside. It has changed size and location on the helmet, and if you scroll back a few pages I guarantee someone has posted pictures of when the horn was more realistic, featuring 'ridges' on the helmet.

 

B - The size and shape of the Packer G has indeed changed on more than one occasion. It originally had a much narrower green outline and the entire logo was far more football shaped and less rugby ball shaped than it is now. As for the Bears, they have, at a minimum, added the orange color to the helmet logo in the early 70s.

[PaleVermilion81]

1 hour ago, TruColor said:

 

Same with CMYK. Pantone colors (Pantone Matching System/Solid colors anyway) are spot inks; only way to accurately reproduce PANTONE 285 C is to use the following formula ink mix:

• 37.50% Reflex Blue
• 12.50% Process Blue
• 50.00% Transparent White

And then, print on coated paper stock. (What the 'C' indicates.)

 

CMYK values are - like RGB values - just simulations of the intended color.

 

(This is one of my many pet peeves these days...too many people think that Pantone colors are CMYK colors. No, they are spot/solid colors. There's a big difference.)

 

 

Oh I know, I just didn't want to get too complicated in my response  But honestly I love hearing it and I kinda geek out on color talk so it's cool to hear someone who knows even more than me explain it. I worked at a printing press in the early 2000's, but I've been almost exclusively digital designing now these past 10 years. Sigh, I miss the print world...