brandIDENTITY: Bucsketball Season **10/25 Update: "Believe In Magic"**

[JayJaxon]

Nice work Buc. Have you given any thought to creating a new secondary logo to prevent the primary from being used so much?

[KennyRock]

I can't swear to it, but I think the black stroke on the home uni is thinner than the white stroke on the road and alt. The road and alt pop much better because black and red virtually never touch. I would either make the black stroke on the numbers/nob/diamonds on the home as thick as the white stroke on the other two, OR, if it is already as thick and I am going nuts, make it thicker anyway. Other than that - I love it! The red jersey is beautiful.

[tBBP]

Nice work Buc. Have you given any thought to creating a new secondary logo to prevent the primary from being used so much?

I wouldn't even know where to begin with that. I suppose I might try brainstorming some stuff, though—it'd be one heckuva challenge.

I can't swear to it, but I think the black stroke on the home uni is thinner than the white stroke on the road and alt. The road and alt pop much better because black and red virtually never touch. I would either make the black stroke on the numbers/nob/diamonds on the home as thick as the white stroke on the other two, OR, if it is already as thick and I am going nuts, make it thicker anyway. Other than that - I love it! The red jersey is beautiful.

It ain't just you. It's just the way our eyes play tricks on us. For the longest time I could've bet my school lunch that the numbers on the Redskins', Lions' and Vikings' dark jerseys were thicker than their white counterparts—seems like a similar case if what you (and I, as I was creating this) see here.

Anyone in the know: are outlines on actual NBA, or any sport's, white jerseys actually thicker than their dark counterparts? Perhaps that's something I should look into.

[andrewharrington]

Anyone in the know: are outlines on actual NBA, or any sport's, white jerseys actually thicker than their dark counterparts? Perhaps that's something I should look into.

I don't believe they are, but a really good uniform designer would take into account the tricks that our eyes play on us and make light numbers on a dark field a bit lighter in weight than the corresponding dark numbers on a light field, which should be a little heavier.

On your concept, that white trim is always going to appear heavier than dark trim of the same thickness, so you can combat it by making the white trim a tiny bit lighter in weight and bumping up the weight of the dark trim. Even if you were to take your home numerals, red with black trim, and flip them so that they are black with red trim, you'll notice that the black trim would look thinner than the red trim, even though it's the same artwork.

The Redskins' example provides us with something similar, but even further down the rabbit hole. Because the outline is a light color (gold, silver, yellow, light blue, etc.) the trim, when viewed on a white field, sort of becomes a part of that background. This makes us focus on the contrasting inner part, the main dark color of the numeral, which is thinner than the number as a whole. Conversely, when the number is on a dark background, the light colored trim fuses with and becomes a part of the number itself instead, and we focus more on the whole number/trim combo instead of just the inner part, so we get something that looks much thicker at a glance.

It's all a study in contrast and the illusion that light colored things tend to look more substantial than dark colored things.

[tBBP]

Good info. Imma have to remember and utilize that in the future.

[illwauk]

Anyone in the know: are outlines on actual NBA, or any sport's, white jerseys actually thicker than their dark counterparts? Perhaps that's something I should look into.

I don't believe they are, but a really good uniform designer would take into account the tricks that our eyes play on us and make light numbers on a dark field a bit lighter in weight than the corresponding dark numbers on a light field, which should be a little heavier.

On your concept, that white trim is always going to appear heavier than dark trim of the same thickness, so you can combat it by making the white trim a tiny bit lighter in weight and bumping up the weight of the dark trim. Even if you were to take your home numerals, red with black trim, and flip them so that they are black with red trim, you'll notice that the black trim would look thinner than the red trim, even though it's the same artwork.

The Redskins' example provides us with something similar, but even further down the rabbit hole. Because the outline is a light color (gold, silver, yellow, light blue, etc.) the trim, when viewed on a white field, sort of becomes a part of that background. This makes us focus on the contrasting inner part, the main dark color of the numeral, which is thinner than the number as a whole. Conversely, when the number is on a dark background, the light colored trim fuses with and becomes a part of the number itself instead, and we focus more on the whole number/trim combo instead of just the inner part, so we get something that looks much thicker at a glance.

It's all a study in contrast and the illusion that light colored things tend to look more substantial than dark colored things.

This is why whenever working with yellow and white, I always double-outline the numbers (to allow dark-colored separation between them) or just go single color.

[Mike_Duplux]

I like these a bunch Buc. Keep it up, especially considering your a Buccies fan!

[mattb6]

this is pretty cool

[andrewharrington]

Anyone in the know: are outlines on actual NBA, or any sport's, white jerseys actually thicker than their dark counterparts? Perhaps that's something I should look into.

I don't believe they are, but a really good uniform designer would take into account the tricks that our eyes play on us and make light numbers on a dark field a bit lighter in weight than the corresponding dark numbers on a light field, which should be a little heavier.

On your concept, that white trim is always going to appear heavier than dark trim of the same thickness, so you can combat it by making the white trim a tiny bit lighter in weight and bumping up the weight of the dark trim. Even if you were to take your home numerals, red with black trim, and flip them so that they are black with red trim, you'll notice that the black trim would look thinner than the red trim, even though it's the same artwork.

The Redskins' example provides us with something similar, but even further down the rabbit hole. Because the outline is a light color (gold, silver, yellow, light blue, etc.) the trim, when viewed on a white field, sort of becomes a part of that background. This makes us focus on the contrasting inner part, the main dark color of the numeral, which is thinner than the number as a whole. Conversely, when the number is on a dark background, the light colored trim fuses with and becomes a part of the number itself instead, and we focus more on the whole number/trim combo instead of just the inner part, so we get something that looks much thicker at a glance.

It's all a study in contrast and the illusion that light colored things tend to look more substantial than dark colored things.

This is why whenever working with yellow and white, I always double-outline the numbers (to allow dark-colored separation between them) or just go single color.

I see the logic, but you still get the same problem, because now you have the illusion of a super thick number with a dark stroke around the inside on dark jerseys, and you still have the illusion of a thin, dark number on the white jersey because the outline is light enough to blend a bit with the white jersey. If you're trying to avoid the illusion, it doesn't work, but if you simply don't like the gold against the white, I guess that works, except on the white jersey, where the problem is now exacerbated because the gold is surrounded by white instead of just on the edge of the number.

Double outlines can add a lot of clutter if they're not treated with care. Personally, I don't mind the illusion that's created in the Redskins example, and I certainly don't think having gold against white is an undesirable look. It's more subtle, but it's not like it looks bad when white numbers have gold or silver or whatever light color trim. Uniform theory makes my head hurt. Everyone has their own little 'rules' and we all think our own rules are the right ones.

[tBBP]

Well...I guess I can see I got some editing to go back and do—when I can go back and do it, of course.

For now, though...here's part two of this thing.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Part II: Sounds of Wasatch

I think I finally figured out what it was that I was trying to do with the last Utah Jazz concept I put put about a year or two ago. Back then, I knew two things: 1) I wanted to retain the "mountainball" era identity of the back half of the 90s, and 2) base that around colors more evocative of the Wasatch front (look here, here, and here). Well, this one revisits those, but in what I believe is a much more streamlined and cohesive manner. I'd like to think it mixes the simplicity of the 70s/80s/current identities with the distinctiveness of the '90s...with my own special blend of colors, that is. And I achieved this by pretty much following the lead of those short-lived black alts. I also retooled both the jersey scripts and, though less apparent, the number set. I even threw in an alternate set here. And before I show these frames, I will say now that I'm still not too sold on that J-note logo...but I'll leave it as is for now, pending feedback.

Aiight that's enough blabber...on to the frames. Here y'all go.

There they is...talk to me.

~Buc

[cohenj21]

I love the color scheme you picked, it's very fitting for Utah. The blue alternate jersey looks really sharp and the court also looks good. I like everything about this set except for the alternate logos. I think the new J-note is a downgrade, it looks less like a J and less like a note than the retro one they currently use, maybe a recolor of that would be more fitting. The other alternate logo is just one I was never a fan of in the first place, it does look better with the new color scheme. All that being said, a very solid job on the set, particularly the primary logo and the alternate jersey. I look forward to seeing what you do with the Knicks!

[The_Admiral]

This hurts, because I usually love your work, but I'm really tough on Bulls concepts. Changing the typeface above the primary to Rockwell doesn't work; it looks like it's trying to approximate the original lettering without having that font on hand. (It's not just you: I hate Rockwell Black anywhere I see it.) The tweaks to the primary itself are pretty good, though. As for the uniforms, they suffer for losing the striping pattern from the cuffs and waistband. I know it's probably hard to do on the Rev30, but I think those are the little details that really make the uniform a classic.

I'm glad you took the stupid basketball off center court, and that you're not using Futura on the baselines anymore (never understood why they did this when they had a distinctive typeface right in their famous logo) but I'd prefer the entire lanes to be red. We don't really need the extra four bulls on the court, another flaw of the current court. I think your center circle might be a little big, too. Not sure.

I like what you're doing with the Jazz quite a bit. I'm one of the few people who really loved that 1996-2004 set, though even I must concede that it had to evolve. I think this does that well, though I would have maintained continuity with the New Orleans holdovers and the original mountain jerseys by making purple the base color. Other than that, I really like it, especially that "Utah" script.

[mbannon92]

Love what you did with the Jazz. The color scheme is killer, and the retooling of the scripts/numbers looks good. I like the simple unis as well.

Not a fan of the J-note logo...IMO you should just drop it. It doesn't really fit with the return to the mountain scheme.

[BrandMooreArt]

Anyone in the know: are outlines on actual NBA, or any sport's, white jerseys actually thicker than their dark counterparts? Perhaps that's something I should look into.

I don't believe they are, but a really good uniform designer would take into account the tricks that our eyes play on us and make light numbers on a dark field a bit lighter in weight than the corresponding dark numbers on a light field, which should be a little heavier.

On your concept, that white trim is always going to appear heavier than dark trim of the same thickness, so you can combat it by making the white trim a tiny bit lighter in weight and bumping up the weight of the dark trim. Even if you were to take your home numerals, red with black trim, and flip them so that they are black with red trim, you'll notice that the black trim would look thinner than the red trim, even though it's the same artwork.

The Redskins' example provides us with something similar, but even further down the rabbit hole. Because the outline is a light color (gold, silver, yellow, light blue, etc.) the trim, when viewed on a white field, sort of becomes a part of that background. This makes us focus on the contrasting inner part, the main dark color of the numeral, which is thinner than the number as a whole. Conversely, when the number is on a dark background, the light colored trim fuses with and becomes a part of the number itself instead, and we focus more on the whole number/trim combo instead of just the inner part, so we get something that looks much thicker at a glance.

It's all a study in contrast and the illusion that light colored things tend to look more substantial than dark colored things.

This is why whenever working with yellow and white, I always double-outline the numbers (to allow dark-colored separation between them) or just go single color.

I see the logic, but you still get the same problem, because now you have the illusion of a super thick number with a dark stroke around the inside on dark jerseys, and you still have the illusion of a thin, dark number on the white jersey because the outline is light enough to blend a bit with the white jersey. If you're trying to avoid the illusion, it doesn't work, but if you simply don't like the gold against the white, I guess that works, except on the white jersey, where the problem is now exacerbated because the gold is surrounded by white instead of just on the edge of the number.

Double outlines can add a lot of clutter if they're not treated with care. Personally, I don't mind the illusion that's created in the Redskins example, and I certainly don't think having gold against white is an undesirable look. It's more subtle, but it's not like it looks bad when white numbers have gold or silver or whatever light color trim. Uniform theory makes my head hurt. Everyone has their own little 'rules' and we all think our own rules are the right ones.

all good points Andrew, all those contrast and color/weight (dark objects appear heavier and smaller; light objects the opposite) things mentioned are things im always aware of when designing, especially when using yellow and white. theres so many variables there though, i can't make a generality about yellow and white but im a fan of contrast and readability when it comes to numbers and logos. so if we're using the Redskins and athletic gold as an example thats okay, it dosent cause so much visual vibration that the numbers are hard to read, and theres enough space around the numbers to still make them very readable.

the Pacers are one i some issue with. looking at their blue jerseys, the numbers are thin enough and have enough space around/between them to be very visible. i was noticing this just last night at the Magic game, the Pacers numbers are great even from the middle seats in the arena. but, the wordmark on the front i dont like. i dont think theres enough space/negative space for the "INDIANA" to work. not for my liking any way. the "A" gets filled in too much with yellow and the kerning is tight. i hate to say it dosen't "pop", but that is actually the best way to describe it.

on topic, Buc the latest version of the Bulls i think is fantastic. when you're ready to share that template, im going to be doing some basketball concepts myself! the Jazz, im not digging as much. i'll probably be in the minority here, but im not feeling that Tulane-like color scheme. i dont really like green anyway, but i give you points for doing something unique to the NBA. the numbers actually have the issue Andrew, Illwauk, and i discussed above, the shadows and trim are making them really thick and you're losing some of that space around them that actually creates the form of the number. i would suggest dropping the blue drop shadow.

[andrewharrington]

I really like what you've done with the Bulls. I understand some might be hesistant to see the really classic striping go, and I guess the charming slab lettering as well, but those are two acilliary parts of the identity that could be updated without totally abandoning the team DNA, at least from an outsiders perspective. I like how the black diamonds on the shorts work, how the trim works with the lettering, and how much cleaner it looks as a result. I love vintage stuff, but a contemporary, clean uniform is equally as great.

[Lights Out]

The Jazz concept looks nice, but a bit plain, IMO. I'd use the "Utah" wordmark on the away jersey and work in the old mountains somewhere - maybe on the shorts?

[illwauk]

I see the logic, but you still get the same problem, because now you have the illusion of a super thick number with a dark stroke around the inside on dark jerseys, and you still have the illusion of a thin, dark number on the white jersey because the outline is light enough to blend a bit with the white jersey. If you're trying to avoid the illusion, it doesn't work, but if you simply don't like the gold against the white, I guess that works, except on the white jersey, where the problem is now exacerbated because the gold is surrounded by white instead of just on the edge of the number.

I usually solve that problem by going dark-gold-dark on the white jerseys. It seems counter-intuitive, but it's actually symmetrical when you consider how the dark jersey uses light-dark-light numbers and the white jersey has dark-light-dark numbers.

Double outlines can add a lot of clutter if they're not treated with care. Personally, I don't mind the illusion that's created in the Redskins example, and I certainly don't think having gold against white is an undesirable look. It's more subtle, but it's not like it looks bad when white numbers have gold or silver or whatever light color trim. Uniform theory makes my head hurt. Everyone has their own little 'rules' and we all think our own rules are the right ones.

Agreed... that's the last thing I'm gonna say about it... I promise!

Re: Buc's Jazz Concept

Not sure I'm feeling this one... I get that you tried to blend different eras with this, but you should probably stick with the original colors if you want to base their identity on the Mountain-ball set (which I also think was their best era logo-wise).

Love the package-appropriate J-Note, though!

[henburg]

The Jazz concept is solid, a vast improvement over what they have now. It looks kinda 90's, but in a good way. However, I agree with Lights Out in saying that mountains on the shorts would be a nice addition.

[The_Admiral]

I understand some might be hesistant to see the really classic striping go, and I guess the charming slab lettering as well, but those are two acilliary parts of the identity that could be updated without totally abandoning the team DNA, at least from an outsiders perspective.

But going from the original slab-serif to Rockwell Black is like going from Helvetica to Arial. It's a reasonable facsimile, but with flaws that jump out to a conditioned eye. If you're going to change the lettering, it has to be a full change.

I forgot to mention that I did appreciate the consistency of the black diamonds on the road uniform, by the way. That's one of the few changes I would make to the Bulls (I vacillate on whether the road uniform should say BULLS or a single-outline CHICAGO).

[tBBP]

Ehh...my own personal opinion, the mountains would've just been too much, although I did LOVE them on the actual '90s set. I figure with a color set as "unique" as the one I got here, that (should be) enough to carry the set...didn't want to overdo it, which now that I look back at it is what I think I did with my previous Jazz concept with the gradient side panel and all. That said...there's a piece of me that wants to revisit and retweak that J-note logo...I may just go ahead and do that, and scrap the, well, mountain ball one entirely.

(By the way, illwauk, if you see this in time...check your PMs. I got a drop up outside Green Bay for Monday morning, so I'll be up that way tomorrow.)