Retro Canucks logo

[Seymour]

I created this "retro" logo by using the old Canuck colours and combining it with the current one:

I was just bored one day when I did this. Enjoy!

[Perfect Zero]

Glad to see you know how to use the paint bucket...

Meh, it really doesn't do it for me, but your millage may vary.

[Taylor R.]

i actually like that better good work

[Brass]

i actually like that better good work

Stop running up your post count with useless, one sentence critiques. At least explain what you like.

Anyway, this has been done. Time and time again. Try to put it on a jersey or something and if you are going to present a logo, please get rid of the extra white space around it.

[dustyb58]

Ladies and Gentlemen, the BC Flaming Orca!

[nwtrailtrekker]

i find it hard to believe we have 3 or 4 canucks concepts on the first page of concepts, alone.

anyways, not feeling it.

[uniguy22]

The first thing I saw was a Calgary Flames logo. I like their old colours, but they don't work for that logo.

[Alphabet Man]

Yes, as uniguy said, looks too much like Calgary.

[Coast2CoastAM2006]

I like the color scheme, just not for that logo. It looks way too much like the flames.

[leggman01]

I created this "retro" logo by using the old Canuck colours and combining it with the current one: I was just bored one day when I did this. Enjoy!

what exactly did you CREATE? you didn't CREATE the logo and you didn't CREATE the colors...

[jman077]

On the one, its interesting looking. Its a nice little re-color and is a kind of cool idea.

On the other, it doesn't really work for me. I don't think it'd work on a jersey. It looks like one of them recolored logos that minor league teams do to look like their parent clubs.

Also, the Canucks just have a crappy logo. No other way to put it.

[DelayedPenalty]

I created this "retro" logo by using the old Canuck colours and combining it with the current one: I was just bored one day when I did this. Enjoy!

what exactly did you CREATE? you didn't CREATE the logo and you didn't CREATE the colors...

Exactly! It's already been done on this board, it's not original, it doesn't make any sense (the whale is supposed to be breaking the surface of the water, what now? lava?). A good recolor at best. There are way too many Vancouver concepts on this board already. Unless it's outstanding or original, I'd say don't bother.

[Guest darkpiranha]

I don't understand all the hating going on. So what if it's been done already? Personally, I've never seen that logo redone with the 80's colors. Maybe I didn't go back over 80 pages worth of concepts, but I've never seen it done quite like that.

Whether or not it's "worthy" of being included here, I don't see what the big deal is that it occupies a few pixels of space. I see tons of posts and concepts and replies that I'm not all that impressed. I shrug. No harm done to me or anyone else that I can see.

Unless people are wanting this forum to be ultra-exclusive, please try not to be so snobbishly elite. If it IS going to be that kind of forum, maybe appoint a review board of the "approved" designers and allow them to pass judgment on whether or not each and every logo or concept or response to a post is worthy of being included.

I'm being facetious here, obviously, and I know that 90% of the people here are friendly, helpful, and supportive. It's just the other 10% make me scratch my head...

If you don't like a logo, just click the back button on your browser... takes all of half a second.

[DelayedPenalty]

http://boards.sportslogos.net/index.php?s=...st&p=635323

Research is a key step in any form of design.

[VC//]

recolouring is hardly a concept.

Canucks logo's have been changed colour wise for a while now by other people trying to pull off a fresh look.

The demented whale is dead after this season, i would be pissed if i saw some native logo again, its not that well liked by the fan base, there are a few that do that think a lot of fans like it, but soo damn false.

[leggman01]

I don't understand all the hating going on....

don't know if this was directed toward me, but let me respond

i don't mind looking at re-color's, i don't mind seeing some "concepts" that simply use existing logos - for me the problem is the use of the word "create" - seymour "created" nothing...he simply re-colored an existing logo...honestly, it's something that virtually anyone can do

[Coast2CoastAM2006]

I don't understand all the hating going on. So what if it's been done already? Personally, I've never seen that logo redone with the 80's colors. Maybe I didn't go back over 80 pages worth of concepts, but I've never seen it done quite like that.

Whether or not it's "worthy" of being included here, I don't see what the big deal is that it occupies a few pixels of space. I see tons of posts and concepts and replies that I'm not all that impressed. I shrug. No harm done to me or anyone else that I can see.

Unless people are wanting this forum to be ultra-exclusive, please try not to be so snobbishly elite. If it IS going to be that kind of forum, maybe appoint a review board of the "approved" designers and allow them to pass judgment on whether or not each and every logo or concept or response to a post is worthy of being included.

I'm being facetious here, obviously, and I know that 90% of the people here are friendly, helpful, and supportive. It's just the other 10% make me scratch my head...

If you don't like a logo, just click the back button on your browser... takes all of half a second.

i understand where you are comming from and to a greater extent i agree with what you are saying. i personally think though, if all the concept contains is a recolor, then the user at hand needs to mention that it is a simple recolor and not a full blown concept. I don't mind recolors, i think they are pretty neat. But unless you plan on using it on a jersey and making some sort of concept out it, I suggest people staying away from recolors. it generally is never well recieved and it become a magnet for negative comments.

[josh_cat_eyes]

i find it hard to believe we have 3 or 4 canucks concepts on the first page of concepts, alone.

anyways, not feeling it.

I am getting tired of canucks concepts that involve 1 of the 3 color schemes and 3 logos. I think the canucks are going to be a REALLY good team a few years down the road and I think they deserve 100% new color scheme, logos and jerseys. They have not been to the finals very much in the past soo why try to keep the past...instead they should look toward the future.

"Cat Eyes" - Josh

[Guest darkpiranha]

My comments weren't directed at anyone in particular, just the general tone of the comments in this thread, and to a greater extent throughout the entire forum. It's the whole "Why are you wasting OUR time with your stupid contribution?" attitude.

I don't know the guy that 'created' this version of the logo, but my guess is that he's relatively new to logo design and/or to this forum (42 posts isn't exactly new, I'll grant). In reading the explanation that went along with his logo, it's clear to me that when he used the word "created", in NO way was he implying that he whipped this up from scratch. He was using 'create' in the sense that he made this version of the logo. He 'did' this for lack of a better word. I mean, come on... it was people just looking for an excuse to pile on someone.

As to the whole recolor thing, yes, maybe he would have been technically and semantically more accurate if he would have said "hey, look at this logo I recolored", but so what? I see dozens, if not hundreds of recolors in this forum. Some good, some not so good. To be able to KNOW what each and every recolored version of every logo that's been done prior to embarking on creating (oops! shouldn't have used that word), prior to playing around with it is improbable without a better system of collecting images together and being able to search.

A better way of handling this poor guy's attempt at a recolor would have been to post links to all the previous threads (or the images themselves) that contain the ones that have already been done. That way, it shows that you're concerned with keeping redundancy at bay, but it does it in such a way that it actually is of benefit to the person who submitted the offending recolor, by letting them see the depth of what's come before.

What would be great (and I don't know if something like this has been suggested before) is if each image could be tagged with various keywords, like 'Canucks" and "Recolor". Or to be able to submit a new graphic to a pool of similarly categorized images. I love looking at all the variations people come up with, even if they look almost identical to what's out there already. It would be great to be able to just jump straight to the images and then click on them to bring us to the forum that discusses that image.

[VitaminD]

What would be great (and I don't know if something like this has been suggested before) is if each image could be tagged with various keywords, like 'Canucks" and "Recolor". Or to be able to submit a new graphic to a pool of similarly categorized images. I love looking at all the variations people come up with, even if they look almost identical to what's out there already. It would be great to be able to just jump straight to the images and then click on them to bring us to the forum that discusses that image.

That system already exists. There's a search function at the bottom of the page, based on the titles and subtitles of the initial post. You can put in keywords as you mentioned and see what's been done as far back as the board goes (minus graveyarded threads).

However, the system breaks down if people aren't truthful about labeling their work. Had this thread been labeled a recolorization, it would turn up on the search you describe. But since it's labeled a creation, a search for recolorization projects would overlook this completely. You call it semantics, but clearly there needs to be more careful and honest descriptions of certain projects if they're to be properly categorized and made easy to find.

But maybe it isn't just semantics, and maybe you're overlooking another crucial part of the equation. Many of the designers here are professionals or design students who want an objective audience for their own truly original work. Most people don't have time to go through every thread, one by one, and scrutinize them. Many people don't go back beyond the first page. So projects that are mislabeled, misleading, or otherwise take up space on the front page and knock many worthy original creations into the abyss, never to be seen or given their proper due. And when people looking for something novel open a thread with nothing more than someone else's work recolored, it's frustrating, and to many, a waste of the reviewer's time.

I'm not saying there's a right and a wrong here. It's [usually] not an issue of exclusivity or snobbiness; it's more people feeling their time is being wasted by non-original work, or their truly original works aren't being seen because of the non-original work taking up space, or a combination of both. Just consider where the discontent comes from, and consider the whole picture. And enjoy your stay.