Jump to content

What do you think of the London 2012 Logo?


ben3001

Recommended Posts

Just incase you have been in hiding for a few days and have not heard about Londons 2012 logo. Here it is:satellitemy9.jpg
What happened, did the designer drop it on the floor and then take a picture of it? Did someone actually receive payment to create that? I'm in the wrong business, I need to create a random image generator and start selling "logos".
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok, you guys do see that it is:2012right?And ben3001, I imagine that is not your creation - my first impression is that it might cause more discussion that the original logo - implied and underlying messages can easily be drawn from that "process".I'm keeping an eye on this - any hint of offense to anyone, and I'll have to remove the post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats correct, skemcin. I didnt create either of the two other images...In my opinion it doesnt show anything to do with London, apart from graffiti. The 2nd image i posted is clean and shows everything british.Something as big as this should have recieved public consultation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw that it is supposed to say 20 12, but I had to look at the date, then go back and look at the logo to determine it said that, that's not what I saw when I looked at the logo. I seriously just saw an abstract shape. Also, there's that little square in the middle, that doesn't really go with anything. And the fact that the two 2s look different doesn't help.As far as the swastika goes, I don't think that's offensive (then again, I'm not Jewish either), and I doubt the original author meant it as that. A swastika is just what the image claims - a well-known logo. The fact that it is composed of easily broken-apart pieces makes it more desirable to use for that purpose. I don't really see that as linking nationalistic fascism with anything related to the London 2012 olympics, it's just an example of something falling and breaking up (which is what I also thought when I saw it).i guess it got removed..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i removed it myself. i believe users shouldnt really be forced to see it if they dont want to.However if you want to see how some people think the logo was im you can click the link below.http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/2852/olympiclogobm8.gifThe logo for the 2012 London Olympic Games was removed from the organisers' website on because there were concerns that it could trigger epileptic fits.Most people are not happy with this, 31,771 people have signed the petition to get it changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The logo for the 2012 London Olympic Games was removed from the organisers' website on because there were concerns that it could trigger epileptic fits.
I don't care who you are, that's funny.And there's a link:http://www.usatoday.com/sports/olympics/20...417557402_x.htm
It cost $796,000
:)
London's Design Museum founder Stephen Bayley said the logo was "a puerile mess, an artistic flop and a commercial scandal."
Good use of the word "puerile", whatever that means.
of or characteristic of a child; "puerile breathing" adolescent: displaying or suggesting a lack of maturity;
indeed..
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ben3001 - I appreciate the gesture in voluntarily removing the image you had. I think most people probably would not have had too much of an issue. And, in fact, for those who know the real origin of the swastika would know that its origins are much more positive and even represents good will and love. Its unfortunate that its connotation is quite the opposite. In any respect, I think its good idea to have removed it from this discussion since the topic itself is more on the outside of the focus of this forum.As for the logo, I can see how by itself it can be viewed as quite a disappointment. But if you look at it in the context in which it is used it has a distinctive way of standing out - obviously. But When you use that "font" in your web page content headers and through the various print and media pieces, there will be no question what is being discussed. That is what makes the logo effective. Again, I can see why people are disappointed, but if you step back and look at it a little more and then from a practical stand point or just look at for what it is and not just what you see - you might just appreciate it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in the first one the "2012" part is barely legible, if it wasnt for the olympic rings and the text saying london it looks like an abstract jumble of shapes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

haha 94% of 20000+ votes hate the logo! Maybe the idiots who chose it should get a clue and stop giving these contracts to friends and family members and actually pick someone with talent!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...