Jump to content

How we define a "concept".


Cola

Recommended Posts

I haven't read through all the posts here, but it seems the general idea is, if you don't make your own logos, your design wont get looked at.

I'm sorry, but that seems kinda... i cant find the word (curse my small vocabulary!)... but it doesn't seem right to me at all.

Maybe because im one of those guys who just does unis. I'm also one of the guys who feels most comfortable in paint. But some people, as well as not being able to make logos, just plain suck at it, but are good at unis. I think im awful at making logos. Uniforms, however, I like to think are my specialty. Why knock a guy for putting his best out there?

Well I think the overall goal here is to get more original logos as opposed to more uniform concepts, not just to bash guys who like paint. let's look at becoming a solid designer like riding a bike. You start with training wheels aka m.s. paint, and eventually take those off and get to the big boy trek bike, being your Paint.net & Inkscape. Now you will fall and scrape your knee (th where a rough looking, but original, logo) but thats were the community steps in to help guide you along and get you back on your feet. Then after words we all get a nice fuzzy feeling inside :P

Thats all well and fine, but I dont see why there cant be more acceptance of people who use paint for just uniform concepts. I mean, sure, if a concept sucks, it sucks, but if its good and the person put alot of work into it, its kinda.... once again, cant find the right word... just to click right back and not even look at it just because they didn't make their own logo.

I understand if you want the guy to evolve, and in that case everyone has to start somewhere. Ignoring them because they didn't make an original logo or something is not going to do that.

I don't think the goal of this is to ignore people. It's to encourage them to move on to the next step. The uniform designs have their place, don't get me wrong, but if that's all you do then the concepts section becomes less fun.

But people in this thread just admitted that they will click right back and not even look at the concept further. Thats pretty much ignoring them. Whether thats the goal or not, that's whats going on. Just uni concepts might make it less fun, but its just as not fun, or even less, to work on something and get no CnC or anything in return.

And I don't like how this is being perceived as a "progress". Like I said before, if someone feels most comfortable just doing unis in paint, I think you should let them do that, and not treat them like they're just straying behind, because they're not, they're just doing what they're best at, and its not fair to knock someone for it.

I think what they are saying is that a uniform concept shows less effort, which, having now done both, I agree wholeheartedly with. Not that uniforms are easy but it is a lot more effort designing an original logo and making it look good.

But what I think is being misunderstood is that just because its just a uniform concept isn't just because it requires less effort (which isn't entirely true), and shouldn't be treated as such.

Trust me on this one it does. It takes a lot more effort to take an idea from your head, onto paper, into the computer, vector it, and then reform it to get it to the level it should be. where as a uniform the hard part (the logos) are already done for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I haven't read through all the posts here, but it seems the general idea is, if you don't make your own logos, your design wont get looked at.

I'm sorry, but that seems kinda... i cant find the word (curse my small vocabulary!)... but it doesn't seem right to me at all.

Maybe because im one of those guys who just does unis. I'm also one of the guys who feels most comfortable in paint. But some people, as well as not being able to make logos, just plain suck at it, but are good at unis. I think im awful at making logos. Uniforms, however, I like to think are my specialty. Why knock a guy for putting his best out there?

Well I think the overall goal here is to get more original logos as opposed to more uniform concepts, not just to bash guys who like paint. let's look at becoming a solid designer like riding a bike. You start with training wheels aka m.s. paint, and eventually take those off and get to the big boy trek bike, being your Paint.net & Inkscape. Now you will fall and scrape your knee (th where a rough looking, but original, logo) but thats were the community steps in to help guide you along and get you back on your feet. Then after words we all get a nice fuzzy feeling inside :P

Thats all well and fine, but I dont see why there cant be more acceptance of people who use paint for just uniform concepts. I mean, sure, if a concept sucks, it sucks, but if its good and the person put alot of work into it, its kinda.... once again, cant find the right word... just to click right back and not even look at it just because they didn't make their own logo.

I understand if you want the guy to evolve, and in that case everyone has to start somewhere. Ignoring them because they didn't make an original logo or something is not going to do that.

I don't think the goal of this is to ignore people. It's to encourage them to move on to the next step. The uniform designs have their place, don't get me wrong, but if that's all you do then the concepts section becomes less fun.

But people in this thread just admitted that they will click right back and not even look at the concept further. Thats pretty much ignoring them. Whether thats the goal or not, that's whats going on. Just uni concepts might make it less fun, but its just as not fun, or even less, to work on something and get no CnC or anything in return.

And I don't like how this is being perceived as a "progress". Like I said before, if someone feels most comfortable just doing unis in paint, I think you should let them do that, and not treat them like they're just straying behind, because they're not, they're just doing what they're best at, and its not fair to knock someone for it.

I think what they are saying is that a uniform concept shows less effort, which, having now done both, I agree wholeheartedly with. Not that uniforms are easy but it is a lot more effort designing an original logo and making it look good.

But what I think is being misunderstood is that just because its just a uniform concept isn't just because it requires less effort (which isn't entirely true), and shouldn't be treated as such.

Trust me on this one it does. It takes a lot more effort to take an idea from your head, onto paper, into the computer, vector it, and then reform it to get it to the level it should be. where as a uniform the hard part (the logos) are already done for you.

As another person who has done both uniforms and logos, the fact that something is a logo rather than a uniform does NOT automatically mean it took more thought or creativity. I have seen very thoughtful uniform designs, and not so thoughtful logos, and vice versa. I can appreciate both.

MegatronSig2.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, theads where there are 6 pages of bickering need to stop (see the CFL thread and another All-Star thead). It's exactly what the concepts section should strongly discourage. If you are going to do something like that, don't leave it up for debate. Just go out and do it, because people will fight over your imaginary team/event for pages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't read through all the posts here, but it seems the general idea is, if you don't make your own logos, your design wont get looked at.

I'm sorry, but that seems kinda... i cant find the word (curse my small vocabulary!)... but it doesn't seem right to me at all.

Maybe because im one of those guys who just does unis. I'm also one of the guys who feels most comfortable in paint. But some people, as well as not being able to make logos, just plain suck at it, but are good at unis. I think im awful at making logos. Uniforms, however, I like to think are my specialty. Why knock a guy for putting his best out there?

Well I think the overall goal here is to get more original logos as opposed to more uniform concepts, not just to bash guys who like paint. let's look at becoming a solid designer like riding a bike. You start with training wheels aka m.s. paint, and eventually take those off and get to the big boy trek bike, being your Paint.net & Inkscape. Now you will fall and scrape your knee (th where a rough looking, but original, logo) but thats were the community steps in to help guide you along and get you back on your feet. Then after words we all get a nice fuzzy feeling inside :P

Thats all well and fine, but I dont see why there cant be more acceptance of people who use paint for just uniform concepts. I mean, sure, if a concept sucks, it sucks, but if its good and the person put alot of work into it, its kinda.... once again, cant find the right word... just to click right back and not even look at it just because they didn't make their own logo.

I understand if you want the guy to evolve, and in that case everyone has to start somewhere. Ignoring them because they didn't make an original logo or something is not going to do that.

I don't think the goal of this is to ignore people. It's to encourage them to move on to the next step. The uniform designs have their place, don't get me wrong, but if that's all you do then the concepts section becomes less fun.

But people in this thread just admitted that they will click right back and not even look at the concept further. Thats pretty much ignoring them. Whether thats the goal or not, that's whats going on. Just uni concepts might make it less fun, but its just as not fun, or even less, to work on something and get no CnC or anything in return.

And I don't like how this is being perceived as a "progress". Like I said before, if someone feels most comfortable just doing unis in paint, I think you should let them do that, and not treat them like they're just straying behind, because they're not, they're just doing what they're best at, and its not fair to knock someone for it.

I think what they are saying is that a uniform concept shows less effort, which, having now done both, I agree wholeheartedly with. Not that uniforms are easy but it is a lot more effort designing an original logo and making it look good.

But what I think is being misunderstood is that just because its just a uniform concept isn't just because it requires less effort (which isn't entirely true), and shouldn't be treated as such.

Trust me on this one it does. It takes a lot more effort to take an idea from your head, onto paper, into the computer, vector it, and then reform it to get it to the level it should be. where as a uniform the hard part (the logos) are already done for you.

As another person who has done both uniforms and logos, the fact that something is a logo rather than a uniform does NOT automatically mean it took more thought or creativity. I have seen very thoughtful uniform designs, and not so thoughtful logos, and vice versa. I can appreciate both.

I'm not saying that uniforms don't have any merit, they can be rather fun to look at, there are some great redesign projects out there that don't have original logos. But what I'm saying is that if someone is making a minor changes to a uniform, it's not a very creative concept and doesn't have as much merit than something more original.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't read through all the posts here, but it seems the general idea is, if you don't make your own logos, your design wont get looked at.

I'm sorry, but that seems kinda... i cant find the word (curse my small vocabulary!)... but it doesn't seem right to me at all.

Maybe because im one of those guys who just does unis. I'm also one of the guys who feels most comfortable in paint. But some people, as well as not being able to make logos, just plain suck at it, but are good at unis. I think im awful at making logos. Uniforms, however, I like to think are my specialty. Why knock a guy for putting his best out there?

Well I think the overall goal here is to get more original logos as opposed to more uniform concepts, not just to bash guys who like paint. let's look at becoming a solid designer like riding a bike. You start with training wheels aka m.s. paint, and eventually take those off and get to the big boy trek bike, being your Paint.net & Inkscape. Now you will fall and scrape your knee (th where a rough looking, but original, logo) but thats were the community steps in to help guide you along and get you back on your feet. Then after words we all get a nice fuzzy feeling inside :P

Thats all well and fine, but I dont see why there cant be more acceptance of people who use paint for just uniform concepts. I mean, sure, if a concept sucks, it sucks, but if its good and the person put alot of work into it, its kinda.... once again, cant find the right word... just to click right back and not even look at it just because they didn't make their own logo.

I understand if you want the guy to evolve, and in that case everyone has to start somewhere. Ignoring them because they didn't make an original logo or something is not going to do that.

I don't think the goal of this is to ignore people. It's to encourage them to move on to the next step. The uniform designs have their place, don't get me wrong, but if that's all you do then the concepts section becomes less fun.

But people in this thread just admitted that they will click right back and not even look at the concept further. Thats pretty much ignoring them. Whether thats the goal or not, that's whats going on. Just uni concepts might make it less fun, but its just as not fun, or even less, to work on something and get no CnC or anything in return.

And I don't like how this is being perceived as a "progress". Like I said before, if someone feels most comfortable just doing unis in paint, I think you should let them do that, and not treat them like they're just straying behind, because they're not, they're just doing what they're best at, and its not fair to knock someone for it.

I think what they are saying is that a uniform concept shows less effort, which, having now done both, I agree wholeheartedly with. Not that uniforms are easy but it is a lot more effort designing an original logo and making it look good.

But what I think is being misunderstood is that just because its just a uniform concept isn't just because it requires less effort (which isn't entirely true), and shouldn't be treated as such.

Trust me on this one it does. It takes a lot more effort to take an idea from your head, onto paper, into the computer, vector it, and then reform it to get it to the level it should be. where as a uniform the hard part (the logos) are already done for you.

As another person who has done both uniforms and logos, the fact that something is a logo rather than a uniform does NOT automatically mean it took more thought or creativity. I have seen very thoughtful uniform designs, and not so thoughtful logos, and vice versa. I can appreciate both.

I'm not saying that uniforms don't have any merit, they can be rather fun to look at, there are some great redesign projects out there that don't have original logos. But what I'm saying is that if someone is making a minor changes to a uniform, it's not a very creative concept and doesn't have as much merit than something more original.

Just because its not an original logo doesn't mean its unoriginal. There are also cases, if you will, where the designer might think the current logo is good enough. And like I said before, if it is a real small change or a crappy design, then fine, ignore em, though CnC would be better. What Im talking about are people who put alot of effort and creativity into their uniform-only designs.

All in all, what im saying is, there are reasons why people do just uniforms, and just because people do just uniforms does not mean they are any lazier or less skilled than anyone else, and I think that people need to start showing more appreciation for those who do just uniforms, rather than ignoring them and/or insisting they change.

oBIgzrL.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't read through all the posts here, but it seems the general idea is, if you don't make your own logos, your design wont get looked at.

I'm sorry, but that seems kinda... i cant find the word (curse my small vocabulary!)... but it doesn't seem right to me at all.

Maybe because im one of those guys who just does unis. I'm also one of the guys who feels most comfortable in paint. But some people, as well as not being able to make logos, just plain suck at it, but are good at unis. I think im awful at making logos. Uniforms, however, I like to think are my specialty. Why knock a guy for putting his best out there?

I think that is too much of a generalization...I don't think anyone is saying that if people don't make original logos, it won't be looked at, that's just silly and it's not true. In my mind, there are two types of uniform designs.

-Template filling in.

-Made from scratch jerseys, you start with a blank template.

And it's pretty obvious which one takes more effort, and it's pretty obvious which one you would rather look at. So, maz, in my opinion, if you can't/aren't good at making logos, at least show that you wanted to put in a lot of effort, and not use templates ripped from sportslogos.net. Sometimes it's just about effort. The worst concept I ever posted was my first concept, which was a template I created myself in photoshop, everything was terribly messy and the striping on the two sleeves didn't even match in width. But I think I tried as hard as I could, at the time, and with my beginning skills. I had never even looked at the templates sticky. So just the simple act of doing original templates can at least make it clear to viewers that some thought and effort was put into the concept.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People like what they like. If someone finds a uniform posted with a few minor changes uninteresting, so be it. People are fooling themselves if they say developing a uniform tweak is on par with the difficulty behind developing a new logo. Getting an identity right is far more problematic. If it were similar in effort, we'd get more variety posted.

Now, if you are comfortable with not upping your game, that's fine. Just keep in mind that for many of us, we want better. I visit this board because of my interest in sports logos. Part of that interest is looking at clean imagery. Honestly, if you want my C&C, using vector software goes a long way in getting my attention. I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in that opinion.

If you're upset about people skipping your contributions, keep in mind that a large percentage of the board skips the Concepts forum completely.

shysters_sm.jpg

"One of my concerns is shysters show up and take advantage of people's good will and generosity".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't we just simply appreciate the fact that someone has the balls to put his work out, regardless of perceived "effort"? If the poster asks for comments and criticism, let 'im have it—but at least be constructive about it.

Sigs are for sissies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few things on this topic. I fully agree with the point of labeling your concepts better. Giving more information not only will help people skip the concepts they could care less about, and don't say that's rude because we all skip concepts and may look at a couple a day, but it may grab the attention of someone who might have skipped your concept. I don't do that many concepts because of time, my last concept was the SEC 75th Anniversary hockey concept, and I know it's somewhere in the graveyard. What would also help is instead of posting 26 concepts in 26 days, package them together so that someone doesn't have to search through pages to find your last one either via other concepts and posts within your concepts. Whether a person does a logo or a uniform, if they put time and effort into it, it should get its just do. I just am one person who thinks sigs need their own forum. On recoloring, as someone who is a graphic designer, that is a concept 100%. I do websites and half the time I'm laying a site out and just changing colors. Heck, the one of the reasons I got the job was because I recolored a logo, and I'm now working on the site that should be up within the next week. Oh, and it is very much sports related, so the next time someone wants to say that a recolorization is not a concept, it very much is. What I think part of the problem is, some people just think something they do is worthy to show people, not so true. Have some personal conviction and if it's good for you, but really bad and pixelated then work on it some more and make it better. Don't just throw crap up there for people to comment on, I think some people spend too much time on the computer and have no real friends so they need to validate their lives by how many "concepts" they can do. If you're going to do a concept, put the time and effort into it. Oh and before posting, ask yourself the simple question, "Do people need to see this, or was this just to satisfy my own curiosity?" That I think should be the question people should ask themselves.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of the points elliott made are the reason I make and use my own templates. My problem is that I'm never 100% satisfied with them and that's why it takes so long for them become available for others to use.

oddball, I completely agree with you that recoloring is a concept. When I first came here I did a recolor job and called it a concept, only to be met with some very rude behavior from some of the other members. First of all, treating a new person like that is just uncalled for, no matter what you think of their work.

This is what I believe, if you don't like the concept posted, and you are not gonna offer any real C+C, just don't say anything at all. I would much rather have people tell me they don't like it as long as they are going to offer advice on how to make it better.

There is a little thing I like to call courtesy. I think the uniform tweakers have just as much a right to be here and post their stuff as anyone else. I have done both, and I have just as much respect for the uniform guys as the logo guys. The last uniform concept I posted was very well received. Yes I used my own template that I created myself. But I used an existing logo. There is nothing wrong with that. Worst case, just say: "I like the uniform, but not with those logos" I know for some people that would be really hard to do. But a little courtesy goes a long way.

chuckymack, you said it best. If someone takes the time to do something, respect that. Some of these guys are really trying, and the attitude by some of the individuals on the high horse could turn them off to graphic design completely. Trust me, after the first couple of months here, I almost said screw it. Of course, I don't give up that easily. :) This isn't a place for the better designers to show off their superiority by acting like everyone else sucks if they are not as good as them. Some of these guys that make these smart comments about these concepts need to take a look their own work, original or not. I have seen some original work that was just horrible. I'll take the clean recolor over that.

Anyway, I'm going off on a rant, and like I said before, I fought this battle when I first got here. This thread is nice and all for discussion purposes, but in the end, the new guys looking at this need to just stick with it and post what they post.

 
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think I got my point across 100%, but I see where everyone is coming from.

And, for the record elliott, I already do use blank templates when making uniforms.

Yeah, I wasn't directing that at you or anything, I mean, it's hard to make generalizations when I know a lot of people have paint and don't do what I'm talking about, like yourself, but still, it happens a lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am one of those people that do mostly uniforms and not logos. The main reason being that logos are hard, very hard. That?s not saying that i will never get into logos. Compare some of my first work to the work i am doing now, I have made some major improvements. I know that a simple uniform concept with no original logos can be hard to look at (even more so for the people on here with a great deal of talent) but for a person like myself that has some limited skill, the comments i get on a uniform concept really mean a lot and help me as a graphic designer grow. I have only been on these boards for a little over a year and i have to say that the people of the ccslc have helped me so much to the point that i may want to do something like this for a living.

So my point is that even though some concepts are made with little effort, with the right kind of comments they can turn the person that made them into a better graphic designer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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