The Carolina Panthers new logo is HERE

[fbiz]

I think a lot people will notice because cam newton has one the best selling jerseys

[FiddySicks]

here's a quick rendering I made of Newton with the new logo

I actually like that, and it just goes to show how good the panthers current home set is, but something still feels just so half assed about just changing the logo. Maybe that's me just expecting too much though. I hope they at least make some tweaks to that road set because it's really terrible compared to the home set. The jersey is fine, but the white pants just ruin it IMO.

[Pizzaman7294]

amazing job on the rendering, but that just proves that there was no point in changing the logo if the uniforms are staying the same in my opinion. Besides maybe wanting a new nike jersey, who in their right mind is gonna run out and buy a new one because of the little logo on the sleeve??

[Quillz]

Nice render, but I thought there wasn't going to be a white keyline?

[powersurge]

here's a quick rendering I made of Newton with the new logo

I actually like that, and it just goes to show how good the panthers current home set is, but something still feels just so half assed about just changing the logo. Maybe that's me just expecting too much though. I hope they at least make some tweaks to that road set because it's really terrible compared to the home set. The jersey is fine, but the white pants just ruin it IMO.

Its almost like plastic surgery...once you change one thing you end up noticing other faults, which inevitably forces you to change other things.

I have a feeling that they will indeed change the unis. I just hope that they only slightly modernize certain elements of the uniform as opposed to making drastic changes.

[waltere]

No one in the general public is going to have any idea they changed logos if they don't change uniforms (not that a lot of people will anyway)

And this is a bad thing because?

Front office realised that the logo needed tweaking but there is nothing at all wrong with the uniforms. They don't even directly get the money from merchandise sales because of revenue sharing.

[powersurge]

No one in the general public is going to have any idea they changed logos if they don't change uniforms (not that a lot of people will anyway)

And this is a bad thing because?

Front office realised that the logo needed tweaking but there is nothing at all wrong with the uniforms. They don't even directly get the money from merchandise sales because of revenue sharing.

Even if the general public doesn't notice the change without it being pointed out to them I would bet that once it is pointed out that most people would favor the change.

I would put this logo change in the same category with the recent modernizations of the Cardinals and Seahawks logos; subtle, but necessary and very well done.

[boog]

there is nothing at all wrong with the uniforms

They aren't bad but could use some tweaking. Having the same logo shown three times from the profile angle is ridiculous.

They should remove the logo from the pants completely and consider replacing the shoulder logos with the secondary logo (eyes+whiskers), and possibly having the wordmark or primary logo centered on the chest above the player's number. Personally I'd like to see them just get a full on update to go with their more aggressive logo styling.

[DC in Da House w/o a Doubt]

No one in the general public is going to have any idea they changed logos if they don't change uniforms (not that a lot of people will anyway)

Agreed, if that is in fact their uniform then this whole change probably wasn't worth it. How many people are going to be lining up to buy those new uniforms?

Gladsadmad, you are the f***ing man btw, the renderings you do are incredible... If I sent you a picture of me do you think you could photoshop a pic of me and Nicky Whelan feeding each other strawberries by the fireside? Thanks in advance!

[waltere]

Ok, so nothing at all may have been overstating it, but it is only a couple of really small tweaks away from being near perfect (e.g. ditching the pants logo).

Re: Powersurge, I have nothing at all against modernising the logo, and agree that is definitely a good modernisation, I was just wondering what the 'issue' was with updating the logo and otherwise not changing things.

[raysox]

Now that it's sunk in, every time I see it with the old one, I like it a lot more.

[crashcarson15]

The one thing that's always bugged me with the Panthers jerseys...

On the helmets, the stripe is black outlined in blue. On the pants, the stripe is blue outlined in black.

[andrewharrington]

the flaws are painfully obvious and infuriating to those who care enough to notice. They are signs of an amateur designer. i can tell you even while i was in school, if someone made this as a project they would get a pat on the back for a nice run. then torn apart for its poor craftsmanship. the tangents and poor paths/vector shapes are month 3 stuff. its those things that separates those youngins from the professional talents of Fraser, Kris Bazen, joe Bosack, Marc Verlander, Von Glitschka, etc. its one thing for an NFL team to have a poor concept but theres no excuse for an NFL team to have a poorly crafted logo with a ton of tangents and bad pen tool use.

even if Fraser has missed on the overall tone of voice for a professional sports logo (more suited to NCAA?) he certainly has not missed of craftsmanship and proper perspective. but like i said, if it were up to me the logo above would be the new mark. not even close

While I'm supremely pissed you left me out of your list , you're spot on with your second paragraph. Fraser's style is a bit whimsical/cartoony for my tastes, at least for professional sports, but his craftsmanship is second to none, and that's the one thing that no one can deny you as a designer. People can moan about how you missed the voice of the fans, about how this imagery isn't a good fit, about how they don't like the concept, but a great illustration and great craftsmanship can never be denied in identity design.

Unfortunately, regarding your first paragraph, you'd be surprised how many graphic design programs don't 'teach' vector drawing. Sometimes they expect students to just stumble into it. I'll point out that a program that doesn't teach and expect excellent vector drawing is one in which the staff isn't well versed in vector drawing. This should be a huge priority, as craftsmanship is as important as concept/approach in my opinion.

[Pizzaman7294]

figured you guys would get a kick out of this

[kpbl_design]

the flaws are painfully obvious and infuriating to those who care enough to notice. They are signs of an amateur designer. i can tell you even while i was in school, if someone made this as a project they would get a pat on the back for a nice run. then torn apart for its poor craftsmanship. the tangents and poor paths/vector shapes are month 3 stuff. its those things that separates those youngins from the professional talents of Fraser, Kris Bazen, joe Bosack, Marc Verlander, Von Glitschka, etc. its one thing for an NFL team to have a poor concept but theres no excuse for an NFL team to have a poorly crafted logo with a ton of tangents and bad pen tool use.

even if Fraser has missed on the overall tone of voice for a professional sports logo (more suited to NCAA?) he certainly has not missed of craftsmanship and proper perspective. but like i said, if it were up to me the logo above would be the new mark. not even close

While I'm supremely pissed you left me out of your list , you're spot on with your second paragraph. Fraser's style is a bit whimsical/cartoony for my tastes, at least for professional sports, but his craftsmanship is second to none, and that's the one thing that no one can deny you as a designer. People can moan about how you missed the voice of the fans, about how this imagery isn't a good fit, about how they don't like the concept, but a great illustration and great craftsmanship can never be denied in identity design.

Unfortunately, regarding your first paragraph, you'd be surprised how many graphic design programs don't 'teach' vector drawing. Sometimes they expect students to just stumble into it. I'll point out that a program that doesn't teach and expect excellent vector drawing is one in which the staff isn't well versed in vector drawing. This should be a huge priority, as craftsmanship is as important as concept/approach in my opinion.

To speak into both of your points...

@BMoore, I think we're all aware of the fact that it's not necessarily the most talented that get all the high-profile work, and there is no real "rite to passage" into the upper echelon of sports identity designers... if there is, I'm sure as hell not aware of it! A lot of times, it's who ya know, and having a decent eye for design... not necessarily world-class, but decent. I believe this was a Shandon Melvin work, so although this wasn't his strongest work from an execution standpoint, I believe he's also responsible for the Chargers rebrand, which is pretty tough in my eyes. It's great to see that the Panthers recognized there needed to be a change, but they did fall a little short of the mark on the primary. The thing I'm :censored:ty about is that wordmark!!! It's so uninspired and corporate... at least the one they had had some character!

@Harry, I agree with you when you say there's not enough time invested in making sure designers have a decent grasp of vector software, but speaking for myself, a lot of my development did happen in the trenches with other talented designers. There is no replacement for observation and trial-and-error, along with some solid mentoring along the way. I also think you have to have a genuine concern for precision, making sure lines and curves are clean and fluid and cleaning up any excess points due to merging objects and whatnot. What I think is starting to get lost in the shuffle is having tight, refined sketches to start with as a base for vector works. I wouldn't be half the designer I am if I didn't use my background in traditional illustration, but I think it's becoming the fashionable thing to do to hop right in and get crackin'. If that's your cup of tea, it's all good, do what you do... some people are automatic like that... but speaking for myself, I eliminate so much guesswork by taking that little bit of time to really flesh my ideas out on paper. I think that has a huge effect of the cleanliness of my work too, because I try to make sure everything has purpose in advance. Not saying I'm some sort of authority figure on this subject, 'cause I'm not... just my two cents.

[Davidson]

Here is what I would have done:

Here is a full body version.

[BrandMooreArt]

the flaws are painfully obvious and infuriating to those who care enough to notice. They are signs of an amateur designer. i can tell you even while i was in school, if someone made this as a project they would get a pat on the back for a nice run. then torn apart for its poor craftsmanship. the tangents and poor paths/vector shapes are month 3 stuff. its those things that separates those youngins from the professional talents of Fraser, Kris Bazen, joe Bosack, Marc Verlander, Von Glitschka, etc. its one thing for an NFL team to have a poor concept but theres no excuse for an NFL team to have a poorly crafted logo with a ton of tangents and bad pen tool use.

even if Fraser has missed on the overall tone of voice for a professional sports logo (more suited to NCAA?) he certainly has not missed of craftsmanship and proper perspective. but like i said, if it were up to me the logo above would be the new mark. not even close

While I'm supremely pissed you left me out of your list , you're spot on with your second paragraph. Fraser's style is a bit whimsical/cartoony for my tastes, at least for professional sports, but his craftsmanship is second to none, and that's the one thing that no one can deny you as a designer. People can moan about how you missed the voice of the fans, about how this imagery isn't a good fit, about how they don't like the concept, but a great illustration and great craftsmanship can never be denied in identity design.

Unfortunately, regarding your first paragraph, you'd be surprised how many graphic design programs don't 'teach' vector drawing. Sometimes they expect students to just stumble into it. I'll point out that a program that doesn't teach and expect excellent vector drawing is one in which the staff isn't well versed in vector drawing. This should be a huge priority, as craftsmanship is as important as concept/approach in my opinion.

To speak into both of your points...

@BMoore, I think we're all aware of the fact that it's not necessarily the most talented that get all the high-profile work, and there is no real "rite to passage" into the upper echelon of sports identity designers... if there is, I'm sure as hell not aware of it! A lot of times, it's who ya know, and having a decent eye for design... not necessarily world-class, but decent. I believe this was a Shandon Melvin work, so although this wasn't his strongest work from an execution standpoint, I believe he's also responsible for the Chargers rebrand, which is pretty tough in my eyes. It's great to see that the Panthers recognized there needed to be a change, but they did fall a little short of the mark on the primary. The thing I'm :censored:ty about is that wordmark!!! It's so uninspired and corporate... at least the one they had had some character!

@Harry, I agree with you when you say there's not enough time invested in making sure designers have a decent grasp of vector software, but speaking for myself, a lot of my development did happen in the trenches with other talented designers. There is no replacement for observation and trial-and-error, along with some solid mentoring along the way. I also think you have to have a genuine concern for precision, making sure lines and curves are clean and fluid and cleaning up any excess points due to merging objects and whatnot. What I think is starting to get lost in the shuffle is having tight, refined sketches to start with as a base for vector works. I wouldn't be half the designer I am if I didn't use my background in traditional illustration, but I think it's becoming the fashionable thing to do to hop right in and get crackin'. If that's your cup of tea, it's all good, do what you do... some people are automatic like that... but speaking for myself, I eliminate so much guesswork by taking that little bit of time to really flesh my ideas out on paper. I think that has a huge effect of the cleanliness of my work too, because I try to make sure everything has purpose in advance. Not saying I'm some sort of authority figure on this subject, 'cause I'm not... just my two cents.

great points from two of the best. (of course ive got you on that list too Andrew, lol). i also see Fraser's style as mre suited to NCAA most of the time. because his marks have a lot of energy and the illustration style is very youthful. Id make his Panthers logos the team's identity in a minute in this case though

i guess i cant compare 1 schools education to any other in the world. ive only been to 1, but i feel very lucky to have gone through there. the instructors were very honest and sometimes very rough (which is probably why im often so rough on topics like this Panthers logo. im not actually as much of a jerk outside of poor design talk, lol) and i think some designers need that sometimes. because theres people out there like Fraser and Kris and Andrew and the bunch, that are setting a very high standard for design. i feel its a slap in the face to those guys, when the NFL comes out with a logo that a lot of students can do better than.

Fraser, i think all Panther fans hate you now!

[DeFrank]

Here is what I would have done:

Here is a full body version.

Why do you have to be so good at design?

Like, this just is so much better than what NFL Properties came up with, it's not fair.

[TheOldRoman]

The head, neck and left-front paw are huge in proportion to the rest of the body. Also, that paw looks like it is either coming out of his neck or he is doing a breaststroke. It should be lower.

[Davidson]

The head, neck and left-front paw are huge in proportion to the rest of the body. Also, that paw looks like it is either coming out of his neck or he is doing a breaststroke. It should be lower.

its just a rework of this:

http://sportslogos.net/logo.php?id=342