[Lickszz]

Has anyone seen the New logo for London's 2012 Olympic bid?

It was unveiled a couple of days ago at the Tate gallery. The logo is the result of a competition winner.

There is a picture of it here with related story:


http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/o...ing%20Standard

What are peoples thoughts about it? I don't think much of it to be honest. Of course if successful this would be on all merchandise and promotional material, you would not be able to get away from it. Back to the drawing board I think.

[alchresearch]

What a load of garbage. The bid should be coming from the North of England.

[Lou]

Hmm, it's not particularly inspiring. I'm not sure that the swoosh of the ribbons will be recognisable as following the Thames to people outside of Britain either.

[Belle]

I dont much get excited about logos, but this is quite pleasant

It is nice to know that the ribbons are meant to echo the Thames's meandering, but I suspect they still look pretty even if you dont know what they are about

The bit I dont like is the black word beginning with L

No I am only joking, dont want Zamo on my back

[rickmiles85]

I read on the BBC that this was the winner from about 10,000 applicants or somethng like that. Id hate to see the ones which were declined if this is the quality of the winner. Its absoloutly c$$p! With the quality of some photo and graphical programs such as Adobe Photoshop im almost certain they could design a better logo than that! Definatly back to the drawing board. I also wondered what that ribbon was at first, it wasnt until I read down the page and it said that it was mirroring the thames through london. also, there building an olympic stadium!!! WHY? I thought that was the reason for wembley being so expensive and brash because it was able to accomodate any olympic games which ever came to london!

[rickmiles85]

When I clicked the link above to look at the logo again it didnt work so ive got the link off the bbc website for people who havnt seen it. Here

[Phanerothyme]

Originally posted by rickmiles85
I read on the BBC that this was the winner from about 10,000 applicants or somethng like that. Id hate to see the ones which were declined if this is the quality of the winner. Its absoloutly c$$p! With the quality of some photo and graphical programs such as Adobe Photoshop im almost certain they could design a better logo than that! ...

Using high quality computer software does not make anyone a better designer. It just makes it easier to beam your crap designs worldwide!

Take a moment to think of the technical aspects of creating a logo that will be displayed on everything from supergiant billboards to matchboxes, and the problems that entails.

Then take a moment to think of all the different colour reproduction methods that will be used to recreate this logo on all these different media.

There is more to logo design than simply 'something that looks good'

I think it has a lot going for it. Not overly fanciful or complex, easily recognisable from a distance, will work on flat and curved surfaces, still legible with colour dropouts, doesn't require close registration for colour separation etc. etc.

It's not going to make everyone go "wow what a logo" but that is not the purpose of logo after all.

[rickmiles85]

Yes but you see a good logo or advertising campaign = profit/money! A Logo is everything! If its good then its reconisable world over, a good logo helps to promote the products!a good example being McDonalds!

[chill]

I think it is really good.

[matsalleh]

When I went to the link, I thought the logo was excellent when I first saw it.The ribbon through the black 12, looked good to me.
How disappointing to go down the page and find the real thing.