brandIDENTITY: Detroit Red Wings

[UnclearInitial]

By far the best Red wings concept I've ever seen. The primary logo and the home are fantastic, but I'm not feeling the silver.

[The_Admiral]

Oh, also, way to incorporate a variation on the fantastic Bookman Swash wordmark. One of the best wordmarks in the Big Four, and this from someone who wishes to see the Red Wings drown in a half-frozen pond.

[AsM29]

I really like this concept a lot. The only thing I would like to see is maybe have you go one step further and create numbers that resemble the wordmark's R and W a little.

Just a side note, when putting stripes on hockey pants, they always stop under the belt. It always bother me when I see people make them go right up the hip in their concepts. I'll give you a pass on this one considering you're not much of a hockey guy.

[tBBP]

Good point about the numbers, Asm--and by the way, nice surprise to see you pop up in here and chime in. Oh--and the pants/shorts stripe. Didn't know that before, but I do now, and will keep it in mind for the future. Imma go back and see about drafting some new numbers here sometime soon. To Jamikel's point, and one that was echoed by several others...i didn't even think of the "sleeves as wings" thing until Jamikel pointed it out. makes perfect sense to view it that way.

Again, I do appreciate everyone's feedback thus far. Imma see about revising this just a lil' bit here soon...and who knows, maybe perhaps roll out some more puckster concepts somewhere down the line...??

[GFB]

I like the wordmark... a lot. But for the rest of it, I can't say I care too much for it. No one likes "modernized" logos as much as me, but I think there has to be a better way to do this. And some thinking points:

1) While the silver doesn't look bad, it is far too reminiscent of "that school in Ohio" to be welcomed in Detroit, especially with the gray alternate. If you have to add a color, try a tan or a burgundy.

2) A great, but often unnoticed attribute of the current logo is the hinting of a second wing on the far side of the wheel. Notice the very top line of the wing and how it falls behind the wheel; when the lower, nearer line goes in front of the wheel.

This adds perspective to an otherwise flat logo. Even though your logo looks much newer, it also looks very flat and pancaked.

[tBBP]

Actually, Matt, I consciously decided to leave that second wing off--to me, it seemed like a lil' bit of an unneeded extra detail. In my mind's eye, trying to add a 3-D perspective to an otherwise flat 2-D logo didn't mesh too well. But, I do understand where you're coming from with that, and it makes perfect sense. (And, naturally, only a Michigan man would point out the similarity in color scheme to those evil Buckeyes. ) That said, I also briefly explored the option of going with an off-white, sort of cream-looking color (almost like the tan you mentioned) in place of the current silver, the idea of which came from some old Red Wings pictures I collected for research...but it didn't look right to me, so I opted for the silver instead.

Somehow, I don't think I'm done playing around with this yet, but we'll see what occurs later on down the road.

[andrewharrington]

2) A great, but often unnoticed attribute of the current logo is the hinting of a second wing on the far side of the wheel. Notice the very top line of the wing and how it falls behind the wheel; when the lower, nearer line goes in front of the wheel.

This is the part of the logo that I like least, actually. It's because that top edge of the background wing isn't in proper perspective. It's the same size as (and somehow above) the foreground wing even though the rest of the logo indicated that we're looking at a flat, panckaked, profile view. I'm with Buc on this one, and I don't think it ever really should have been there in the first place.

But the problem is that when you remove that upper line, it makes the wing look really weak. Not near substantial enough. I think my solution would be to keep that upper line, but instead of having it terminate behind the wheel, continue it on and make it part of the foreground wing. Maybe bring the end of it back a little bit from the tip of the wing to become that stubby little thumb feather that you see on the leading edge of large birds' wings.

[GFB]

I think both of you are operating under the assumption that both wings are on equal levels. I always believed that the far wing was in a slightly different position, and thus was drawn correctly. It is almost naturally impossible (I realize we're talking about a flying wheel right now, but ignore it for argument's sake) to have two arms, wings, legs, etc to be in perfect alignment when motion is being suggested. Try standing up, putting your arms directly out in front of you, then jumping up in the air. What do you think the chances are your arms were in perfect alignment the whole time? The same principle applies to wings as well.

In fact, I used this principle (I don't know if it is truly a principle or not.. if it isn't I'm making one up) when I drew the Quad City Mallards logo:

[andrewharrington]

I think both of you are operating under the assumption that both wings are on equal levels. I always believed that the far wing was in a slightly different position, and thus was drawn correctly. It is almost naturally impossible (I realize we're talking about a flying wheel right now, but ignore it for argument's sake) to have two arms, wings, legs, etc to be in perfect alignment when motion is being suggested. Try standing up, putting your arms directly out in front of you, then jumping up in the air. What do you think the chances are your arms were in perfect alignment the whole time? The same principle applies to wings as well.

In fact, I used this principle (I don't know if it is truly a principle or not.. if it isn't I'm making one up) when I drew the Quad City Mallards logo:

In the Mallards logo, the edge of the background wing is in proper perspective, being smaller than that of the foreground wing, and the Mallards logo is 1. a flying duck and 2. done in a style that also suggests fluid motion. The Red Wings logo does not depict an organic being in motion and has has never in any way suggested motion to me. The tire does not appear to be spinning, nor do the wings appear to be flapping, or doing anything suggestive of movement. Also, given how clean the perspective and illustration style of the Red Wings logo is, it strikes me as odd that the artist would be concerned with such minutiae as the difference in the timing and path of each wing as it flaps about. Executing such a clean, engineered illustration to show a tiny amount of asymmetry wouldn't make the logo any better. Part of the artist's job is streamlining the message and having the wings in slightly different positions would only roughen the path of the information from eye to brain (which is supported by the fact that we're even having this discussion about what this logo actually depicts). If it was clear and obvious, this conversation wouldn't be happening.

Looking at the Mallards logo, I see the two wings flapping on equal levels, even if you didn't intend it that way. The difference is the far wing is in proper perspective to the near one and looks natural based on the viewing angle. This is in tune with the style of the illustration in my eyes. Whether the artist responsible for the Red Wings logo meant to show two symmetrical wings in perspective or two wings slightly offset in profile, it's a step off somewhere along the line.

[AsM29]

Good point about the numbers, Asm--and by the way, nice surprise to see you pop up in here and chime in. Oh--and the pants/shorts stripe. Didn't know that before, but I do now, and will keep it in mind for the future. Imma go back and see about drafting some new numbers here sometime soon. To Jamikel's point, and one that was echoed by several others...i didn't even think of the "sleeves as wings" thing until Jamikel pointed it out. makes perfect sense to view it that way.

Again, I do appreciate everyone's feedback thus far. Imma see about revising this just a lil' bit here soon...and who knows, maybe perhaps roll out some more puckster concepts somewhere down the line...??

I don't spend much time in the concepts forum anymore, but your thread caught my eye and decided I needed to speak up since it's such a great concept. I can't wait to see what you come up with for new numbers. Really looking forward to that.

[The_Admiral]

The Wings tried Bookman Swash-ish numbers in the Dead Things era and gave it up after one season. 82-83, says NHLuniforms:

I can't tell if it works or not. It's not bad, I'm just so used to block.

[Buster]

The Wings tried Bookman Swash-ish numbers in the Dead Things era and gave it up after one season. 82-83, says NHLuniforms:

I can't tell if it works or not. It's not bad, I'm just so used to block.

Definitely prefer the block.

Great concept...perfect execution. If you touch the Red Wings, it better be perfect.

[bohob]

Everything looks great. The revamped logo looks great, and the wordmark is spot on as well. The uniforms look really well done, although I still really like the plain red and white look. That said, you nailed the red and silver version. I particularly like the white sleeves on the home jersey. My only qualm is the numbers on the third. I don't really like the way the angle look against the chest stripe.

[neo_prankster]

I like what you've done here. Are you going to do a whole series of NHL concepts? I think it would be cool to see your take on the other 29 teams.

[Lights Out]

The Wings tried Bookman Swash-ish numbers in the Dead Things era and gave it up after one season. 82-83, says NHLuniforms:

I can't tell if it works or not. It's not bad, I'm just so used to block.

It didn't look half-bad on the real thing:

[The_Admiral]

Actually, I'd say it's precisely half-bad. It's also half-good. The problem is that it marries the numbers to the wordmark but not to the nameplates, which are right there next to the numbers while the wordmark is just a teensy decal on the helmets, and for obvious reasons you cannot use Bookman Swash on a nameplate, arched or straight, without extreme legibility concerns or compromising the integrity of the typeface. But hey, they tried. Terrific typeface. Really stirs up sort of a mid-20th century Americana feel, and nostalgia's a good thing to aim for when you live in Detroit.

[Morgan33]

Excellent concept. I didn't think the Red Wings logo could be improved upon but I think you may done just that. I like the sharper edge and the subtle addition of silver. That Grey Alternate looks great too!

[Jezus_Ghoti]

Most of this is great, but the white sleeves just do not work at all for me.

[tBBP]

Aiight folks...update time.

Went back and took all feedback that was given into consideration, went back to my lil' drawing (art)board, and--well, I'll let y'all see if y'all can spot the updates...

Lemme know what's up with v2.0...much appreciation in advance.

~Buc

[bohob]

I love the silver spokes; they make for better color balance in the logo. The logo looks more complete with the second wing as well. I know it shouldn't rationally, but it does anyway. I preferred the white sleeves on the original home sweater, but this version is pretty good too. Great stuff!