9erssteve Posted October 28, 2009 Share Posted October 28, 2009 I'm so sick of this crap that's seems to be the new fad, "It's too detailed to be a good logo." That is pure BS! A good logo is a good logo, no matter how detailed it is. If it works, it works. There is no one right way to do a logo. The first version was excellent and honestly, making it less detailed just made it blah. Go back to the first logo as it was dam good!Okay first off I think I was the first person to suggest redrawing the bull rather than just running it through live trace, and it had nothing to do with the amount of detail in there, and everything to to do with the fact that the detail in there was being completely obilterated by the fact that inset paths which should have been parallel were all over the place, areas which should have been curves were just random sharp angles etc etc.If redrawn well the original Bull would have looked fantastic, but live trace for all it's useful it has serious drawbacks as well. With that said looking fantastic and being a useable logo are often two different things, Imo the original even if perfectly drawn would have required a little simplification to make sure outlines didn't disintegrate and small white areas didn't fill in when the logo was reduced but for the most part I think 80 to 90% of the detail in the original could be kept.You said it yourself there is no one right way to do a logo, but with regards sports where the logo may only be seen for a fraction of a second, and where it will be used at sizes ranging from about 10mm wide (or smaller) on sports trading cards to maybe 40 yards wide if displayed on the new screen in the Cowboys stadium you need something that will reproduce well at all those sizes and clean simple shapes do that well, hence the reason for simplified logos.hettinger_rl needs to find some middle ground with this one, the original was to scrappy and untidy to work well as a finished logo and the redraw I feel is a little over simplified and still suffers from some bad inset paths, but it's part of the process so doing it hasn't been a waste of time. He just needs to go back and add a few more of the important details and clean up a few areas he'll be onto a winner. I didn't see a proclamation that the last one posted was the finished article, did you?9erssteve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webalizer Posted September 28, 2010 Share Posted September 28, 2010 Estonian BC Tarvas (basketball club) have new official logo: http://f.postimees.ee/f/2010/09/28/439915t41hd9b0.jpghttp://www.bctarvas.ee/index.php/page_id/848 (official press announcement) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windmill360 Posted September 28, 2010 Share Posted September 28, 2010 Haha how do you find that? I actually was looking at this logo a few days ago because I was thinking of making a bull concept. I found it on google images then after further inspection I realized it came from here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Imperfect Posted September 28, 2010 Share Posted September 28, 2010 I'm so sick of this crap that's seems to be the new fad, "It's too detailed to be a good logo." That is pure BS! A good logo is a good logo, no matter how detailed it is. If it works, it works. There is no one right way to do a logo. The first version was excellent and honestly, making it less detailed just made it blah. Go back to the first logo as it was dam good!I completely agree. Dude, quit trying to keep up with the Jones' and do whatever you want with it, no matter how detailed it is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePreacher Posted September 28, 2010 Share Posted September 28, 2010 I'm so sick of this crap that's seems to be the new fad, "It's too detailed to be a good logo." That is pure BS! A good logo is a good logo, no matter how detailed it is. If it works, it works. There is no one right way to do a logo. The first version was excellent and honestly, making it less detailed just made it blah. Go back to the first logo as it was dam good!Agreed! The original was BADA**!! And the re-colored RED version was terrifying (in the most awesome way possible.) Fine work sir, fine, fine work you've done here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pianoknight Posted September 29, 2010 Share Posted September 29, 2010 Estonian BC Tarvas (basketball club) have new official logo: http://f.postimees.ee/f/2010/09/28/439915t41hd9b0.jpghttp://www.bctarvas.ee/index.php/page_id/848 (official press announcement)The best part was the second link, where BC Tarvas is using a blatant Houston Texans logo rip. The bright yellow and royal blue on the Texans' bull head make me want to vomit.So much for "international" copyright law. 5th in NAT. TITLES | 2nd in CONF. TITLES |  5th in HEISMAN |  7th in DRAFTS |  8th in ALL-AMER  | 7th in WINS  | 4th in BOWLS |  1st in SELLOUTS  | 1st GAMEDAY SIGN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ESTONES6 Posted September 29, 2010 Share Posted September 29, 2010 Estonian BC Tarvas (basketball club) have new official logo: http://f.postimees.ee/f/2010/09/28/439915t41hd9b0.jpghttp://www.bctarvas.ee/index.php/page_id/848 (official press announcement)The best part was the second link, where BC Tarvas is using a blatant Houston Texans logo rip. The bright yellow and royal blue on the Texans' bull head make me want to vomit.So much for "international" copyright law.They added a basketball between the horns... its completely legit. SAINT IGNATIUS WILDCATS | CLEVELAND BROWNS | CLEVELAND CAVALIERS | CLEVELAND INDIANS | THE OHIO STATE BUCKEYES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pianoknight Posted September 29, 2010 Share Posted September 29, 2010 I'm finding that the Cleveland Indian in your signature makes all your posts seem sarcastic. It's like an emoticon that's always there. 5th in NAT. TITLES | 2nd in CONF. TITLES |  5th in HEISMAN |  7th in DRAFTS |  8th in ALL-AMER  | 7th in WINS  | 4th in BOWLS |  1st in SELLOUTS  | 1st GAMEDAY SIGN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hettinger_rl Posted October 12, 2010 Author Share Posted October 12, 2010 Wow, I guess thats what I get for not watermarking my images! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancebridwell Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 Wow, I guess thats what I get for not watermarking my images!Well they were able to take the Texans logo, and if you watermarked it, I bet ya' they'd find a way to un-watermark it (if that's a word?) I don't think, because thinking implies uncertainty. Therefore, I KNOW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
9erssteve Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 Wow, I guess thats what I get for not watermarking my images!Yeah it's a bummer but the truth is you said yourself you'd based the logo on an old ink print and you live traced the first version. If the image you used as source is out there in the public domain there's always a chance that someone else is gonna use the same image to base another logo on. If you saw something in it that made you think it would work you can bet your life you wont be alone.I saw a concept on here just a few weeks back that I'd bet my life on, was based on exactly the same photo as I'd used to create one of my concepts earlier this year. It happens. If you'd used many references to create your logo it's less likely to happen, or if you draw something from scratch you'd have a stronger case if you were to decide to pursue this, but as it stands right now you've already admitted your piece was a reworking of an existing work, and they could just claim their logo is based on the same piece as yours was.9erssteve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
9erssteve Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 Wow, I guess thats what I get for not watermarking my images!Yeah it's a bummer but the truth is you said yourself you'd based the logo on an old ink print and you live traced the first version. If the image you used as source is out there in the public domain there's always a chance that someone else is gonna use the same image to base another logo on. If you saw something in it that made you think it would work you can bet your life you wont be alone.I saw a concept on here just a few weeks back that I'd bet my life on, was based on exactly the same photo as I'd used to create one of my concepts earlier this year. It happens. If you'd used many references to create your logo it's less likely to happen, or if you draw something from scratch you'd have a stronger case if you were to decide to pursue this, but as it stands right now I dont think watermarking would have helped any, you've already admitted your piece was a reworking of an existing work, and they could just claim their logo is based on the same piece as yours was.9erssteve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.