London 2012 Olympic Logo Problems
The worst Olympic logo ever? Or a modern master piece?
How can we avoid the latest news hype around the new London 2012 Olympic logo. It seems every newspaper in the country wants to stress how horrible it is.
So the newspapers aren't into the new design, but what do you think?
Feel free to leave us your comments.
Some people have stressed concern that it doesn't show any London landmarks and the traditional attributes used in previous Olympic logos. However, design has move forward since the last London Olympics (see logo) in 1948.
Truthfully, it feels like this is a way for people to further vent their anger at the costs associated with London hosting the 2012 Olympics. The logo cost a whopping £400,000 to produce, alongside the £9.3 billion it will cost to host the games.
However, if we put aside these qualms and look at the actual design aspects of this logo, it might not be all that bad. Firstly, a lot of people are moaning about the visual impact this logo has on them. Logos aren't always about colour and shape. They can be about much deeper things and having spent £400,000 on the logo you'd expect design firm Wolff Olins to have considered the deeper meaning around what the Olympic games should be communicating (i.e. the branding). It's not about the logo but what we will do with the branding associated with it. The logo is modern and colourful and brings forward ideas of getting involved, the colours evoke excitement and infusion and for this reason it works with the branding that 'the London 2012 Olympics should be inviting so that everyone takes part and everyone is involved'. This message is conveyed in this video and article . We think it's a grower, feel free to leave your own comments.
How can we avoid the latest news hype around the new London 2012 Olympic logo. It seems every newspaper in the country wants to stress how horrible it is.So the newspapers aren't into the new design, but what do you think?
Feel free to leave us your comments.
Some people have stressed concern that it doesn't show any London landmarks and the traditional attributes used in previous Olympic logos. However, design has move forward since the last London Olympics (see logo) in 1948.Truthfully, it feels like this is a way for people to further vent their anger at the costs associated with London hosting the 2012 Olympics. The logo cost a whopping £400,000 to produce, alongside the £9.3 billion it will cost to host the games.
However, if we put aside these qualms and look at the actual design aspects of this logo, it might not be all that bad. Firstly, a lot of people are moaning about the visual impact this logo has on them. Logos aren't always about colour and shape. They can be about much deeper things and having spent £400,000 on the logo you'd expect design firm Wolff Olins to have considered the deeper meaning around what the Olympic games should be communicating (i.e. the branding). It's not about the logo but what we will do with the branding associated with it. The logo is modern and colourful and brings forward ideas of getting involved, the colours evoke excitement and infusion and for this reason it works with the branding that 'the London 2012 Olympics should be inviting so that everyone takes part and everyone is involved'. This message is conveyed in this video and article . We think it's a grower, feel free to leave your own comments.
Permalink at Wednesday, June 06, 2007
