Jump to content

Lafayette Leopards


KCScout76

Recommended Posts

laf_leopards.gif

Lafayette got new logos - the athletic site has this banner on it. The old logo is horrible and now this. I noticed it in Mid-January.

Not sure if this has been discussed. I am trying to get a good .gif logo of it but have failed in my attempts to get it through the school's site.

Does anyone have the new logo. The best view of the new logo, though it's too small, can be viewed at the Book Store site.

If someone has this please post it?

What do you all think about the new logo?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

KCScout76,

I can't draw logos for anything, but by being a writer, you learn to where to find them (usually athletic PDF releases).

According to Lafayette's student newspaper, the Leopards' new logo (which was released in May of 2004) was done by the same designer/company that redid logos for Harvard and Brown.

Glad I could be of some service.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to Lafayette's student newspaper, the Leopards' new logo (which was released in May of 2004) was done by the same designer/company that redid logos for Harvard and Brown.

Phoenix Design Works updated the identity packages of both Brown University and Harvard University, so - based on the information provided by the Lafayette student newspaper - we can assume that they were responsible for Lafayette's new marks. The new logo certainly shows PDW's penchant for minute detail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Purely awful.

The worst part is for all that (unnecessary) detail, the work doesn't have any discernable depth or clarity.

When iDon goes detail wacky, its playing with shadow and serves to add a 3-D sensibility as well as whimsy. This has neither.

Imagine trying to stitch those whiskers! Holy buckets.

Design-wise, you can convey spots with far fewer.

Anatomically, I doubt Leopards even HAVE that many. Certainly not on the lower portions of their body.

Some of you may remember that IceCats logo I tried using a snow leopard. I never finished it so its not as though I "figured out" the problem. But I think I was on track with eluding to spots without drawing each one.

Another great example is Nitro's Anaconda.

This is putrid.

To me folks, this says that while we may not be Bosack, Flynn, or Radom. We should be able to put PDW out of business. They aren't even trying anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... to state that you might as well take the worst guy here more seriously than you should Phoenix is a given.

No, it's not. Even "joking" about it is a detriment to developing the skill-set necessary to consistently produce design at a professional level.

Do PDW's designs impress me as consistently as those produced by SME Branding, Studio Simon, the Joe Bosack Graphic Design Company, Osaki Design, Todd Radom Design, Flynnagain Productions and several other firms? No, they don't.

Are there designers within the CCSLC who are capable of creating identity packages that are the equal of those produced by Phoenix Design Works - indeed, any of these firms? I honestly believe that there are.

However, even if I am accepting of those two premises, these facts remain:

* Not every design PDW produces is some poorly-rendered disappointment.

* Not every designer within the CCSLC community is ready - or capable - of going "toe-to-toe" with the work of professional design firms; In fact, sorry to say, most aren't.

* Stating that we "might as well take the worst guy here more seriously" than Phoenix Design Works is hyperbole at its worst. The worst guy here - quite frankly, many of the guys here - have not yet developed the skills necessary to be taken more seriously than the team at Phoenix Design Works.

Look, it's perfectly acceptable for the designers of the CCSLC to take pride in their work. It's understandable that we are not going to laud each and every sports identity package produced by the professional firms. However, to unrealistically assess the merits of many of the designers in this community - let alone "the worst" of them - against the accomplishments of a professional firm does nothing to advance the craft of the CCSLC's designers.

Critique all you like, but this much is true: the vast majority of the designers in this community have never faced the realities that even the least of the aforementioned professional design firms have, i.e. designing for a client... on a budget... faced with time constraints, etc. And not just when the mood strikes them. Rather, professional designers do this as a job. Day after day, whether they feel like it or not, building a body of work one professional job at a time. Try designing logos when it's no longer just something you enjoy, but also your means of putting a roof over your head, food in your stomach and clothes on your back.

The reality is that only a handful of designers that call this community home - a couple of handfuls at the outside - are currently ready to pursue graphic design as a full-time, professional endeavor at the highest levels. I don't say this to rain on anyone's parade. I say it because it's true. Recognizing this and wanting to develop the skills and habits necessary to raise one's game to the professional level are part and parcel of eventually attaining that level. Self-deluding yourself into thinking that you've already achieved the level is counter-productive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BiB,

You?re always careful to remind us of an important lesson (that I?ll get to in a moment) and for that and dozens of other reasons I?ll always appreciate your input.

I am as prone to the ?rant? as anyone here. Some teensy part of me (us) wants to execute that viscous, biting commentary that used to be typical of the Dennis (Leary and/or Miller). That mixture of over-the-top hysterical, yet topical and honest insight that left you feeling refreshed and vented. In that regard, I think a lot of the over-the-top crit we give (Like Discrim?s) is meant to be entertaining to the rest of us.

The point you make , that I referred to above, is that here at the CCLSC we walk a seriously fine line in terms of our goals. Half the time we want to be taken seriously as a design house and actual professional resource for teams in search of sports marketing work. But we aren?t that. Not JUST that at any rate.

The other half of the time, we are anonymous joes on all sides of the globe who just want to do what people on all message boards do: Be heard, find common ground, share dirty jokes, favorite songs , our opinions and rip on stuff. Ripping on stuff is a vital part of the internet experience regardless of whether it?s productive or not. But we aren?t JUST this either. We can and HAVE actually scored real work in this industry.

I don?t think there is anything wrong with EITHER endeavor really. They are both very natural pursuits. But they don?t really work well in combination. There are simply too many people here to make sure that every opinion or statement meets certain professional standards. I don?t know how I would view this board from an outside perspective if I were a team looking for work. Perhaps by ripping on Phoenix or anyone else we are doing much more harm than good. That?s entirely possible, if not likely.

But I don?t see it changing. I know I can?t control myself nor do I have the desire to. I take this stuff seriously (perhaps TOO seriously) and cannot stomach a half-hearted effort (no matter what the budget or time constraints) from someone who is paid a premium to succeed. It?s like dogging an rich athlete who doesn?t give 100% effort. Do I know what it takes to be a pro athlete? No. But I sure do know ?p*ss poor not worth the money? when I see it. You hear me Darren Sharper? I see something like this Leopard and just want to torch it. And if it costs me work down the line I don?t really care. This is my hobby and I enjoy everything about it from wow-ing at incredible work, to helping out fledglings, to ripping on junk. Anyone wanting to work with me knows that 1) I?m a lot nicer and more mild mannered than I seem here, and 2) That I apply the same strict standards of ?not sucking? to everything I look at.

Now, I?ll grant you this point too, none (or very few of us) have had to make a living at design on the level of which Phoenix does. Few have had to meet deadlines or follow ridiculous parameters. Indeed, very few, possibly none of us have what it takes to BE the next PDW. No argument. Furthermore, pointing out other people?s weaknesses is not the same as spending time to get better yourself and that too will not help us figure out what it DOES take. Again, no argument.

But few of us (you might be actually) are professional comedians, and it doesn?t prevent us from knowing that Jim Breuer isn?t funny.

Ya know, there is a great sequence in Jay n Silent Bob Strike Back?.wait, scratch that. There is just a sequence??where one of Ben Affleck?s characters is describing to J&SB what the internet is and what people on a movie chatroom do all day. His description basically boils down to the old ?Those that can, do. Those that can?t ???..well, they tear stuff down online.? Here, we do both.

We COULD try to fight that I suppose. But I don?t see the point.

My post at least, was just a comment that there are 6-8 people here (listing them will only result in me forgetting someone) who turn out better work on average than Phoenix. And I think that is too bad. Somehow we?re not picking up on the most important missing piece, which is actually getting the foot in the door and getting the job. Executing it is the least of our troubles right now.

There is no way, that Nitro for one, isn?t better than PDW entire staff. Why he runs into roadblocks or why I do or why anyone else does may be a lack of drive, lack of experience, lack of connections, lack of savvy, lack of pushiness, lack of desire, lack of lucky breaks, lack of money, lack of business sense or lack of tact. But I doubt it?s because we make random internet comments under assumed names.

If I?m wrong I?m wrong. Maybe the heads of all those great firms are here everyday and have taken a Sharpie and made a black line through Sterling84 a long time ago. Maybe I?ve blacklisted myself with my mouth ?cause I like to critique and sometimes like to make fun.

I dunno. Maybe. How come the pros always say I have to ?toughen up? and learn to deal with criticism and the big boys themselves can?t deal with it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not saying that the "big boys" can't take criticism. Truth be told, they probably don't give a rat's as$ what's being bandied about out here on the internet, because at the end of the day they continue to land work and produce identity packages that their clients are more than happy with.

And you know what? In my opinion, many of those customers should be happy with the work that PDW did for them. I think that PDW did well by the Florida Marlins, Major League Soccer, the Seattle Supersonics, Arkansas, Brown, Delaware State, U of I-Chicago, Iona, Massachusetts, Sacred Heart and Saint Peter's to name a few. I like what they came up with as a proposed logo for the Philadelphia 76ers.

Now, that's not to say that on some occassions they haven't dropped the ball. I'm not a fan of their work for the College of Charleston, Jacksonville State, North Carolina A & T or Western Carolina... again, just to cite a few examples.

Good or bad (again, IMO), I think that their work can run the gamut from cartoon-like to excessively detailed. At either extreme, I'm turned off by their work. Much of what I like falls somewhere in the middle.

I guess what bothers me about taking potshots at PDW, is that doing so has pretty much become nothing more than a knee-jerk reaction in the CCSLC. Frankly, I can't recall the last time that a Phoenix Design Works logo was critiqued with anything approaching impartiality. It seems all too common for everyone to pile on the minute that PDW is identified as the design firm responsible for a particular identity package... regardless of the package's merit.

Meanwhile, other designers are pretty much "untouchables" as far as many in the CCSLC are concerned. Don't get me wrong, I love much - hey, most - of what the Joe Bosack Design Group and Studio Simon have produced. In fact, I think that they're two of the most consistent firms out there. However, they're just as capable of generating less-than-blockbuster work as PDW. Yet, you'll hear nary a word of criticism towards any of their designs.

For instance, go to either of their sites. Joe Bosack's work for the Akron Zips, Alaska Aces, Gwinnett Gladiators and Reading Royals (as examples) are some of the finest achievements in sports identity design that I've ever seen. By the same token, JBDG's work for Southern University, Drew University, the Columbus Destroyers and the Youngstown Steeldogs isn't up to the calibre of the aforementioned designs. Studio Simon's efforts on behalf of the Visalia Oaks, Modesto A's, Yakima Bears, Mudville Nine, Madison Black Wolf and Goldklang Group are outstanding. Are the efforts for the Lancaster JetHawks, Nashua Hawks, Los Angeles Black Sox, Tri-City ValleyCats or St. Xavier Tigers as impressive?

To be sure, much of what we think of a given designer's work for a given client is purely subjective. We've all got a right to our opinions. However, if we're going to truly critique the efforts of the pros - or, for that matter, each other - shouldn't we at least strive to do so on the merits of the designs. It's far too easy to say that "Designer # 1" is always brilliant, while judging each and every effort from "Designer # 2" as derivative crap. Given our love for - and, one would hope, knowledge of - this particular brand of artistic expression, I would hope that we'd try our very best to judge work as impartially as possible.

Oh, and for the record... IMHO, this effort on PDW's part is clearly too "busy" to be considered one of their better efforts.

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.