[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/gd/ - Graphic Design

Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • Additional supported file types are: PDF
  • There are 16 posters in this thread.

05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
06/20/16New 4chan Banner Contest with a chance to win a 4chan Pass! See the contest page for details.
[Hide] [Show All]



File: lmaoo.jpg (72 KB, 640x714)
72 KB
72 KB JPG
2012 London Olympics
>>
>>366396
Not even a bad logo
>>
>>350007
>>
>>366396
I actually really like this one. No clue why it gets so much shit
>>
>>366396
>>
File: graphic-design.jpg (136 KB, 460x290)
136 KB
136 KB JPG
>>366411
it's very interesting on its own, but IMO it was not appropriate for the context. something so edgy couldn't fly well with a global event for general audience which your average Joe watches. and IMO it doesn't say "London" at all.
>>
>>366417
It was relevant at the time. There was a lot of olympic branding and advertisement all over Britain in the year leading up to it, the design became pretty common and seemed to attract public eye.
>>
>>366444
relevant? maybe, depends on what you mean. appropriate? wouldn't say so. many hated it for how edgy it was. could as well slap brutalism there next time.
>>
>>366396
Every time I doubt my talents, I remember this shit exists
>>
I don't hate it, but it feels like something you'd see on a Nickelodeon t-shirt from 1995.
>>
>>366417
>doesn't say "London" at all
It's right there
>>
>>366396
I can't tell what it's even supposed to look like. Unless it's a dude getting sucked off.
>>
>>366415
How sneedesque
>>
>>366537
I mean the image itself. compare it to most other identities, they reflect the location quite well. London 2012 doesn't do it at all.
>>
>>366587
Sydney 2000 and Beijing 2008 are the best ones.
>>
>>366587
>Atlanta 1996
This one is nostalgic for me, personally. It's nice to know it's a good design on top of that.
>>
>>366587
Pretty much every other olympic logo looks like it's been taken off some generic stock logo website.
>>
>>366590
you like that lil guy running huh
>>
>>366614
that's a dumb opinion. nearly all these logos are relevant to their locations and reflect olympics well. and yeah, they're simple, duh. welcome to graphic design.
>>
>>366396
The second 2 is trash but it's not that bad.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.