London 2012 logo. Nauseating?

[Dannyalcatraz]

The ones Hyp posted are classic- they're legible...from a distance, the message is clear.

Basically, they'd get passing grades in Designing a Logo 101.

The one they chose?

That is pretty bad.

I caught the "They're numbers!" thing pretty quickly- the designer obviously had Robert Indiana's (a.k.a. Robert Clark) LOVE in mind.

( http://www.scottsdalepublicart.org/collection/love.php )

Unfortunately, where Indiana's piece is clear, the homage is clearly too involved in its own "edgy-ness." The message is lost in the noise.

 

[Nyaricus]

Or perhaps Lisa Simpson doing something obscene...

Y'know, now that you say it... it does look like something obscene.

It sounds like the rubbish that's been happening in Winnipeg here. My gov't spent like half a million to make the equally spotty "Spirited Energy" saying the cities' motto. What garbage.

--N

 

[HeavenShallBurn]

Typical, and typically rubbish.

They could've gotten a lot better pieces if they just called an open contest for London artists and put a few thousand pounds on the winner. Given how big a response you can get even in my own area which is rural American farming country with an art contest a metropolis the size of London would net you thousands of good contenders for the logo.

 

[Nyaricus]

They could've gotten a lot better pieces if they just called an open contest for London artists and put a few thousand pounds on the winner.

I agree with this statement completely. Why don't we see this sort of thing happening more often? Let people submit their works, and then have a panel of judges par the list done to about 15 pieces, of which the public can vote on for a winner. Advertise in Newspapers, etc. THAT'D make sense, IMO.

cheers,
--N

 

[jaerdaph]

I had to be told it was supposed to be a 2012. I don't know if that makes me obtuse, or if the London Olympic committee just got stiffed.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

I really dislike it.

And 400,000 pounds for developing it is a fairly reasonable price, unfortunately. I worked for a company that was looking to update its logo. We paid about that for some company to design several ideas. Most of them were nothing special. The one the executives finally chose used negative space to create a large stylized C. When the revealed it to investors and others, the repsonse was usually along the lines of:

What does a cartoon bat have to do with the company?
A Bat? No, the lines mark out the white space that show the letter C
Huh? Where?
Right here, see?
Oh, OK, I guess I see it now.

The company closed 18 months later. With decision-making like that, I wonder why?

 

[LightPhoenix]

I concur. Absolutely awful. At least they have some years to change it.

 

[D.Shaffer]

I love some of the reader submissions.

 

[Ferret]

I'm reading the Times, some good quotes:

"I note that this is now trademarked. Will my kids now get sued by the Olympic committee every time they glue a pile of shapes on a piece of paper? Could cost me."
~Nigel, Norwich

And another:

"It brings the world together in hatred of it. Very Clever."
~Ang Ree

My favourite:

"I think the logo is great, mostly because it shows that the United States does not have a monopoly on throwing money away."
Ken Morgan, Florida.

 

[Nyaricus]

I'm reading the Times, some good quotes:

"I note that this is now trademarked. Will my kids now get sued by the Olympic committee every time they glue a pile of shapes on a piece of paper? Could cost me."
~Nigel, Norwich

And another:

"It brings the world together in hatred of it. Very Clever."
~Ang Ree

My favourite:

"I think the logo is great, mostly because it shows that the United States does not have a monopoly on throwing money away."
Ken Morgan, Florida.

Those are awesome I love it when things get bashed when they deserve it