Atlanta Silverbacks Retain Name; Launch Logo Design Contest

[Brian in Boston]

Of course, in this case, the Atlanta Silverbacks have stated that they're not only conducting a logo design contest amongst fans, but they're also having another logo "designed" - presumably by a professional - "in the coming weeks". Ultimately, the "Decision 2012" campaign will conclude with Silverbacks management allowing fans to vote on whether to keep the team's current logo, adopt the most-liked fan-designed logo, or switch to the professionally-designed mark.

[dabest13]

some of the fan designs:

the rest can be seen here:

http://www.facebook....15834854&type=1

[Gothamite]

Really like this one:

[raysox]

The first one you posted was done here. Out of all of those, I think the last one is best. This one is alright too.

[STL FANATIC]

I'm late to the conversation, but here's my thoughts on spec work...

I won't participate because it's not enough of a reward for ME. I make my living as a designer, and I need to make sure I can earn enough to make that living.

But the free market is the free market and business decisions are business decisions. If a team can get a logo for a couple of season tickets, that's their prerogative. Chances are they'll be getting a less than ideal design.

Because I believe in what I do, I believe getting a less than ideal design is ultimately bad for business. We're not just in the business of aesthetics. Design is larger than that. It matters on many levels. Organizations that value that tend to be successful.

But if they don't value it, so be it. Again, that's their right. And also, they might get lucky and get a fan who comes up with something terrific or manage to get a designer who doesn't share my feelings (or needs) to do it.

My view is simple. I hold no ill-will towards those who design for spec or those who request it. But I will only work for a rate I believe I deserve, and I do hold ill-will towards bad design.

[Brian in Boston]

Of the designs submitted to the Silverbacks' logo contest, these marks are - in my opinion - the clear standouts.

[GFB]

Of the designs submitted to the Silverbacks' logo contest, these marks are - in my opinion - the clear standouts.

That top one is pretty influenced by the Brandiose Clink Kong.

[Brian in Boston]

That top one is pretty influenced by the Brandiose Clink Kong.

Brandiose's "Clink Kong" is far more photorealistic in its depiction of a gorilla. The gorilla in the Silverbacks logo I posted is more "cartoonish" in nature. If anything, I'd say that the submission resembles an angry depiction of the character Kala from Disney's Tarzan.

[raysox]

Does anyone know if the contest closed yet?

[Conrad.]

some of the fan designs:

proud owner here

also did this update of the illustrative logotype:

* moved the arm

* tilted the head slightly back

* changed chest "lines"

* went with "FC" instead of establishment year

[twi]

I like the small tweaks you made. It didn't jump out before, but when you look at the initial and revised logos together the initial one appears to be sporting quite a rack. Your logo is definitely my favorite of the ones posted, great job.

Edit: although on a second look, the hand and head positioning in the original better portray simian rage, IMO.

[Conrad.]

I like the small tweaks you made. It didn't jump out before, but when you look at the initial and revised logos together the initial one appears to be sporting quite a rack. Your logo is definitely my favorite of the ones posted, great job.

Edit: although on a second look, the hand and head positioning in the original better portray simian rage, IMO.

thanks! yeah, maybe a combo of the two illustrations would be best. i moved the arm down in reaction to someone saying that it looked like he was yawning with his fist near his mouth.

[GFB]

That top one is pretty influenced by the Brandiose Clink Kong.

Brandiose's "Clink Kong" is far more photorealistic in its depiction of a gorilla. The gorilla in the Silverbacks logo I posted is more "cartoonish" in nature. If anything, I'd say that the submission resembles an angry depiction of the character Kala from Disney's Tarzan.

I said influenced, because it's almost like the designer wanted to make the same logo as Clink Kong but they knew they couldn't make the same design, so they tweaked almost everything but left the idea the same... Yes, some things will naturally look the same because they are the same animal. It's not in any terms a rip-off, but it's copycat designing. Look at items such as the shape of the eyebrows, the gleam of the eyes, the mangy fur on the cheeks, the depiction of the fangs, the way the chin comes up the side of the mouth, the shape of the nostrils... It's the same design without being the same design. There are just too many "coincidences" in my mind.

Maybe this will help get my point across:

[Brian in Boston]

Frankly, GFB, I find that your side-by-side comparison of the logos - especially the overlay - undermines your argument.

* "[T]he shape of the eyebrows"? Aside from being furrowed, the shape of the eyebrows is distinctly different. On Clink Kong, they're rendered as smooth, more minimalist curves. On the Silverback, they're more detailed and ragged-edged depictions to communicate the idea of fur.

* "[T]he gleam of the eyes"? On Clink Kong, the gleam is rendered with larger round dots at approximately the "12 o'clock" position on the pupils; on the Silverback, the gleam is rendered with slightly smaller, more ovoid dots at the "10 o'clock" and "2 o'clock" positions on the pupils.

* "[T]he mangy fur on the cheeks"? On Clink Kong, said "fur" is part of an overall highlighting of the ape's face in one large, medium-blue shape; on the Silverback, said cheek "fur" is rendered in two separate, smaller shapes that don't extend nearly as far down the ape's face.

* "[T]he depiction of the fangs"? On Clink Kong, the upper teeth are rendered in three distinct shapes that separate the ape's canine fangs from its incisors; on the Silverback, the upper teeth are rendered in one contiguous shape. On Clink Kong, both the upper and lower incisors are rendered to show separation between the individual teeth; on the Silverback, no such separation between the incisors exists. Clink Kong's canine fangs are longer, though more rounded; the Silverback's canine fangs are shorter, but sharper.

* "[T]he way the chin comes up the side of the mouth"? On Clink Kong, the chin/lower lip is rendered as a simple, somewhat understated, crescent shape that doesn't even reach the tips of the lower canines; on the Silverback, the chin/lower lip is more detailed, with distinct notches and protuberences visible. Further, two lines extend up either side of the mouth towards the ape's upper lip/muzzle... indeed, reaching beyond the tips of the upper canines.

* "[T]he shape of the nostrils"? Clink Kong's nostrils are a rendered as a pair of rounded dots on the end of two separate lines; the Silverback's nostrils are rendered as wing-like shapes connected by a single line.

Sorry, but I honestly believe that any minute similarities that may exist between these two logos is simply due to the fact that they both depict an agitated adult gorilla from a head-on perspective.

In fact, both Clink Kong and the Atlanta Silverbacks entry in question trail this guy...

... by 16 or 17 years.

[GFB]

Frankly, GFB, I find that your side-by-side comparison of the logos - especially the overlay - undermines your argument.

* "[T]he shape of the eyebrows"? Aside from being furrowed, the shape of the eyebrows is distinctly different. On Clink Kong, they're rendered as smooth, more minimalist curves. On the Silverback, they're more detailed and ragged-edged depictions to communicate the idea of fur.

* "[T]he gleam of the eyes"? On Clink Kong, the gleam is rendered with larger round dots at approximately the "12 o'clock" position on the pupils; on the Silverback, the gleam is rendered with slightly smaller, more ovoid dots at the "10 o'clock" and "2 o'clock" positions on the pupils.

* "[T]he mangy fur on the cheeks"? On Clink Kong, said "fur" is part of an overall highlighting of the ape's face in one large, medium-blue shape; on the Silverback, said cheek "fur" is rendered in two separate, smaller shapes that don't extend nearly as far down the ape's face.

* "[T]he depiction of the fangs"? On Clink Kong, the upper teeth are rendered in three distinct shapes that separate the ape's canine fangs from its incisors; on the Silverback, the upper teeth are rendered in one contiguous shape. On Clink Kong, both the upper and lower incisors are rendered to show separation between the individual teeth; on the Silverback, no such separation between the incisors exists. Clink Kong's canine fangs are longer, though more rounded; the Silverback's canine fangs are shorter, but sharper.

* "[T]he way the chin comes up the side of the mouth"? On Clink Kong, the chin/lower lip is rendered as a simple, somewhat understated, crescent shape that doesn't even reach the tips of the lower canines; on the Silverback, the chin/lower lip is more detailed, with distinct notches and protuberences visible. Further, two lines extend up either side of the mouth towards the ape's upper lip/muzzle... indeed, reaching beyond the tips of the upper canines.

* "[T]he shape of the nostrils"? Clink Kong's nostrils are a rendered as a pair of rounded dots on the end of two separate lines; the Silverback's nostrils are rendered as wing-like shapes connected by a single line.

Sorry, but I honestly believe that any minute similarities that may exist between these two logos is simply due to the fact that they both depict an agitated adult gorilla from a head-on perspective.

In fact, both Clink Kong and the Atlanta Silverbacks entry in question trail this guy...

... by 16 or 17 years.

You missed point of my post. In fact, I never said it was a direct copy or rip like we've see before... It's like seeing a Fraser Davidson logo and then seeing someone with lesser talent have to make a design, so they base their design off of his but they change everything and make a different and lesser version of the original.

The overlay was to show nothing other than similarity in the facial construction and rough highlight similarity. I'm judging the artist's intent, influence, and creativity.

[TFoA]

The first one you posted was done here. Out of all of those, I think the last one is best. This one is alright too.

This is my favorite by a mile. I'd buy season tickets for this alone...if I had money. :-(

That being said, I'm pretty sure that whatever's done professionally is probably gonna win this, if not the original logo which most of the fans still love.

[Brian in Boston]

I never said it was a direct copy or rip like we've see before... It's like seeing a Fraser Davidson logo and then seeing someone with lesser talent have to make a design, so they base their design off of his but they change everything and make a different and lesser version of the original.

The overlay was to show nothing other than similarity in the facial construction and rough highlight similarity. I'm judging the artist's intent, influence, and creativity.

In other words, you're assuming... guessing... surmising. Because, aside from the fact that Clink Kong and the Silverbacks Logo Contest entry in question depict agitated, open-mouthed adult gorillas facing the viewer, they have nothing in common.

"imilarity in the facial construction"? Well, there are only so many ways in which the face of an adult gorilla is constructed. In fact, barring a seriously deforming injury, or birth defect, there's basically one way in which the face of an adult gorilla is constructed. So, if an artist chooses to depict an adult gorilla looking straight at the viewer from said viewer's perspective, chances are that it is going to look a certain way. Further, given that professional team sports in North America are so often equated with dynamic action and aggression, it isn't exactly unusual for an artist designing a logo for a sports team to imbue a mascot for said franchise with features that would communicate such action and aggression. For example, in the case of a logo featuring a gorilla, depicting said creature roaring and bearing his teeth in an aggressive display, rather than passively staring into space. My point being, the designer of the Atlanta Silverbacks logo in question needn't have been inspired by Brandiose's Clink Kong in order to have settled upon including an aggressive, adult gorilla in his logo, or to have rendered such a creature in a manner that bears similarities in facial construction to Clink Kong.

As for "rough highlight similarity" between the two logos, much more of Clink Kong's forehead seems to be exposed to overhead light, giving the impression that the animal is jutting out its lower jaw and tilting its head back slightly while roaring. As for the Silverback, the source of light in that logo seems to be emanating from a point slightly more forward than that illuminating Clink Kong - I'd say above and ever so slightly forward of the eyebrow ridge and bridge of the nose. The result is that much of the gorilla's upper head is in shadow, as are the portions of the face below the cheekbones. As a result, the Silverback doesn't seem to be leaning its head back at all. Rather, if anything, it seems to be staring directly at the viewer.

Bottom line? From where I'm sitting, any similarity between Clink Kong and this particular Silverback submission are the result of precisely the type of coincidence that you aren't willing to accept as possible and/or probable.

In any event, I still feel that the logo submission in which this Silverback appears is one of the standouts in the contest.

[Gothamite]

The first one you posted was done here. Out of all of those, I think the last one is best. This one is alright too.

This is my favorite by a mile. I'd buy season tickets for this alone...if I had money. :-(

Not me - the monograms all leave me cold. For "Atlanta FC", something like this could be very good. But you have a fantastic nickname, unique and dynamic, lending itself to a mascot logo, how could you not use it?

[Gothamite]

The overlay was to show nothing other than similarity in the facial construction and rough highlight similarity.

I get what you were going for, but I'm with Brian - your example actually works to disprove the point.

[Billy B]

The first one you posted was done here. Out of all of those, I think the last one is best. This one is alright too.

This is my favorite by a mile. I'd buy season tickets for this alone...if I had money. :-(

Not me - the monograms all leave me cold. For "Atlanta FC", something like this could be very good. But you have a fantastic nickname, unique and dynamic, lending itself to a mascot logo, how could you not use it?

Exactly. I'm a huge fan of the last logo in the first post, it looks like a classic soccer logo. But with a name like Silverbacks, I feel like you need to have the silverback somewhere in there. Unfortunately, I don't think any of the fan submitted crests with a silverback are done well enough to represent a professional team.