Gothamist: NYC's Olympic Logo

MG

Thu, 15 Apr 2004 10:16:15 -0500

check out www.gamesbids.com for a run down of all the bidding cities, its a bit clumsy but you can get to each of the host city bid sites from there. Amazing how similar some logos are (Rio & London) for my 2 cents the best bid logo is www.olympist.org Istambul

rae

Tue, 13 Apr 2004 01:28:26 -0500

The logo is seen worldwide and you could say that there is a perception of NYC being a dangerous place (as outdated as that is - some of us are still getting Hill Street Blues re-runs) so the whole mugging theme fits in really...so 'Hands up...'

Richard-

Thu, 08 Apr 2004 09:55:16 -0500

I agree with you: Sam at Apr 7, 2004 11:50 AM. First I have to excuse my english: I work at an design agency. The NYC olympics logo looks like it is something one of the old ADs would come up with. The people who have been in the business for a long time often insists of using tacky effects and computer style on everything. Compare it with rockstars of the 60s 70s that still is in music, now they have got so clean with their synths and multimillion-studios. Rolling Stones, Dick Dale +++ I mean the idea is ok; to combine a atlethe with a known landmark of NYC. But still, the execution of the idea is crap and looks unproffesional and unfinished. The typography is balanced and clean and looks like DIN Schrift Mittelschrift with a slight modificatiion in the boldness, a clean and conform sans-serif. This is a safe choice, but still its overused in the design-industry nowadays. The colored letters are to screaming and fruity, they should have been calmed down, but maybe still representing the olympic colors. I think the symbol in the logo (stat.of.lib. and atlethe) contains to much photographic detail to be used on really small objects (like pens mentioned earlier in the discussion). To gain motion in the symbol I dont think the colored planes work. This is not a good logo and I should have a total remake, I dont care which agency that made it and what their clients have been earlier. The agency I work for is rather small and and have had some prestigious clients (mainly graph.profiles and logos)ie. A-HA and FAST search and transfer (alltheweb), but still a lot of crap is done here at the agency I have to admit.

Zara Evens

Wed, 07 Apr 2004 16:41:03 -0500

Last night on the news, an anchor woman was commenting on how much she loved this logo, she felt it was almost too clever for our own good. My first thought was, "You are insane." As for the mascots, most of them, however cheesy and poorly thought out they may be, have a somewhat friendly feel them that most Olympic-goers can gawk at and wear on their t-shirts, without question. However, once the image of Izzy showed it's sorry face, I felt like I was looking at the mascot for the mentally-ill. Here in Vancouver we are hosting the games in 2010, I hope the committee will come up with something slightly more clever and on edge, but we all know it will be a moose/beaver/hockey player mutation wearing a red leaf.

Bruno

Wed, 07 Apr 2004 12:17:11 -0500

I'm not a fan of the logo but it's definitely different from other cities' bids. I know how much work goes on behind this sort of decision and I don't think we'll know everything the olympic committee wanted to do or has done to the final mark. Truth be told, I thought the Statue's torch and the olympic torch would have been an obvious choice.

Sam

Wed, 07 Apr 2004 11:50:31 -0500

I love the common theme from people defending this pathetic piece of shit logo: 'i actually love the logo and think it makes a lot of sense. you people bashing it obviously do not know an inch about logo design and what goes into the deciding factors'... blah blah blah. Typical AIGA member complaint to the rest of the world. As if the audience is supposed to give a shit about how many art books the designer "researched" for the logo. Where exactly is the elegance? The designer (or more likely a cluster fuck of creative directors and art directors) took a symbol with dignity and turned into a childish NOT child-like logo. I guess this is what you get when it's free.

e.

Wed, 07 Apr 2004 11:40:02 -0500

Design snobbery aside, a true test of a logo is the public's reaction, and to say the least, the people have spoken: this one sucks.

Todd Dominey

Wed, 07 Apr 2004 11:39:43 -0500

THIS IS A STICK-UP!

Jen

Wed, 07 Apr 2004 11:27:51 -0500

Good thoughts from everyone. I'd like to point out that it was clearly stated in the post that Gothamist is "no design expert" but we do have opinions. And our opinion is that the design is underwhelming. Sure, it hits certain points, but it doesn't grab us. And that's our opinion. optimus, good points about the logo being good for being blown up or shrunk down. And I don't disagree with the Statue of Liberty's power as an icon for the American people, just as I do like the video for the logo a lot. I just would have liked more of that energy in the actual logo. As for how Gothamist goes about deciding which comments are offensive, more about the issue (and let us know what you think) can be found here. The main idea is to stay on topic, but my 2 cents on personal attacks is that they undermine a person's argument.

Jellyguy

Wed, 07 Apr 2004 09:56:51 -0500

BTW, I do not stand alone in my opinion on pandas. Jen, your mission is clear. You must crate a panda boot camp for the Olympics.

jenny

Wed, 07 Apr 2004 09:49:57 -0500

i was actually at the logo unveiling and think that it was all done very well. the video images really helped the whole thing to make sense. and there were different versions of the logo. i like it.

jenny

Wed, 07 Apr 2004 09:47:28 -0500

i think YOU would be more suitable for the special olympics. how immature can you be?

jorge

Wed, 07 Apr 2004 09:34:55 -0500

i think that was very well put. all the issues that go along with designing a logo of this (huge) scale have to be recognized. there is a lot more to think about than you realize. you have to be able to understand what is needed now and what will be needed in 2012, what is needed in nyc and what is needed in oklahoma. what we can all identify with. and its for that exact reason that you (the critics) have no part in projects of this size.

e.

Wed, 07 Apr 2004 09:33:15 -0500

That logo would be better suited for the special olympics.

optimus

Wed, 07 Apr 2004 03:19:57 -0500

i'm with designthug. this is a well-conceived logo. new york is well represented by the statue of liberty. no other design element could evoke NYC in the same way. a big apple is corny (and requires knowledge of the city's nickname), the skyline is emotionally loaded (and will change by 2012!), the 'NY' typeface is a type element where a graphic element is needed. the statue 'belongs' to new york, but it is also an american icon. it makes the logo locally relevant and also allows all americans to identify with it. the figure on the right gets all the other necessary visual elements: excitment, individual achievement, humanity. it's a human figure, but it could be from any sport, any gender, any race. the human figure also helps to give a global dimension to the logo. the problem with lady liberty is that it's an american icon. even as a canadian, i don't identify with it. the human figure allows the logo to be relevant to the world -- not just new yorkers. that's a tough set of things to accomplish with a simple design. i would imagine their specs included a whole pile of design goals and constraints i'm not even thinking of. the text is clever. it uses the colours of the rings to reference the olympic rings without actually *using* the rings. the bright colours are necessary, because a logo has to look good blown up on the side of a building, or shrunk down on the side of a pencil. if you can't make out all the design elements because it's really small, you have to be able to make it identifiable by its shape and colour. as for the 'dynamic vs. static' issue: my guess is that this assymetrical boxes business was to give it a sense of movement. if it was all in a tidy symmetrical box it would look very staid and static. as for the image itself, that vignette -- the hands thrust in the air in victory -- sure, it's still, but that's a movement that evokes energy and exhuberance. it's still, but it's not really *static*. gah. i'm not particularly coherent tonight, but rest well, NYC: you got a helluva logo. (and for my money, it's a nicer one than sydney's.)

neil

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 22:42:32 -0500

complete logo revealed!! http://mediafactured.com/altnyc.gif (yea, I know; I really couldn't resist though. yes, it's crudely and quickly done)

ziegfeld

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 20:31:20 -0500

Didn't have this reaction this morning, but a second or third viewing makes me wonder if the rectangles are supposed to be suggestive of the WTC towers...

carey

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 20:10:11 -0500

i happen to think the logo works. i don't really see the gay reference that everyone is talking about? i see the one half as lady liberty and the other as an olympian. what's the big deal? besides the olympic logo could never be what we want it to be, because there are too many people/opinions/issues involved. its supposed to be a somewhat ambigious symbol of success/champion.

Row

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 19:35:42 -0500

Nope, not liking the logo at all. Too many colours or something like an 80's pop magazine for this graphic designer. I thought our Sydney one was ok, not brilliant, but reasonable and it def. has great elements like movement. And Ben, dude: chill. You're blowing up at Jen for making an opinion on her own site? Eh? Disagree with the opinion not her person.

Ajit

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 18:19:30 -0500

ben, the logo make you want to high-five lady liberty, not think about the olympics. and beating up on jen and gothamist because people don't like the logo? take a chill-pill, buddy.

Simon

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 18:16:58 -0500

Oh and by the way, I'm a graphic designer, and the excuse that the designer doesnt get final say doesnt mean shit. There are plenty of designs that get approved that look good at the end of the process. This one doesnt.

Simon

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 18:14:09 -0500

Ben, you are a retard. Jen is hot, her site rocks, and the logo is as fucking gay as a bag of tomatoes. She looks like she's being held up at gun point, half her crown is missing, and the colored typography looks like the gay rights movement diversity rainbow. Maybe she's signaling "safe!" at a lesbian softball game? Not that theres anything wrong with that ;)

ben

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 17:49:18 -0500

i did not design the logo, but i know a lot about the process and let's just say that its not the designer who makes the final say, its the client. ogilvy simply has to rework and rework their original idea until the client accepts it. that's what happens in the advertising world.

neil

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 17:39:08 -0500

i'm guessing ben that you designed this logo because you seem to have taken this so personally? we are all entitled to our opinions, and you should know better to automatically assume your audience lacks the knowledge you claim to posses. beauty is in the eye of the beholder isn't it? I think the logo sucks, and I'm sticking to it, and I have training in said field to back up my stance. Even the mighty Ogilvy can lay an egg every now and then. It has potential, but I think it needs to be reworked. Just look at it from a merchandising standpoint, I don't think it's going to appeal to a broad audience. At least the person who posted the Salt Lake logos has given me hope. There final logo is leaps above their preliminary and NYCs.

ben

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 17:38:28 -0500

and so if you take down offensive comments....what gives you the right to bash other people....but then we can't speak up back?

ben

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 17:26:19 -0500

i actually love the logo and think it makes a lot of sense. you people bashing it obviously do not know an inch about logo design and what goes into the deciding factors. its really sad that you jealous fools have to put down other people's artwork. what do you do jen chung? you run a fucking sad website.....and you are ugly. awwwww, im sorry for you.

nkw

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 17:00:20 -0500

One more thought to share: The original logo for the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics stunk (old logo circa 2000), and they changed it (final logo) before 2002 rolled around.

nkw

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 16:56:22 -0500

As the logo is now, there's nothing about it which suggests Olympics. Now that I think about it some more, there's nothing which suggests athleticism of any kind: The blue on pastel blue silhouette has an arm over it's head, but only knowing it's an Olympic logo did I understand this is supposed to represent a finish-line moment of triumph. On the color tip, if the colors were the same primary red-blue-black-yellow-green as the olympic rings, I wouldn't hate this logo half as much as I do now. My ideas (earlier post) may represent "dormroom design", but this logo represents the kind of "design by committee" where no one designer is satisfied and everyone compromises.

Jellyguy

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 16:53:24 -0500

If it sucks, it sucks, no matter how smart and talented the O&M people think they are. Everyone I've talked to loves the Greek mascots. They are fun, funky and, above all, not a cliche. Unlike a panda for Beijing. What a glorious mascot, a semi-fertile endangered fatass that won't copulate to save its own species.

Jen

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 16:48:34 -0500

ej, thanks for your remarks. Having worked at a brand consultancy and at an ad agency, I agree that developing a logo is not an easy task. That said, I'm disappointed, either in the designers or the committee that picked this design out of whatever was presented them, in this design exactly because it shouldn't be fine - it should be great. A running Statue of Liberty would be suspect, but the idea of the Statue (as well as the five boroughs) was achieved in the NYC Marathon's logo. I would be interested to see the rejected designs.

ej

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 16:33:37 -0500

Ogilvy's logo for the NYC Olympics looks fine-- I actually work at a competing ad agency (BBDO), and I still think Ogilvy's work is good. A lot of amateur opinions are floating around, but Ogilvy's logo symbolises NYC and the spirit of the Olympics in a concise, clear and international way. That's what an Olympic logo should do. Ogilvy knows what they're doing; take a look at their client list. Someone mentioned having Lady Liberty running with a torch. To the untrained eye, it may seem like a good idea, but it would reduce the statue to a cheesy caricature and it screams "dormroom designer." Most people don't know the amount of research, time and skill that goes into the development of a branding symbol. The NYC logo has an understated classiness to it, although the color scheme for the numbers "2012" might seem a bit too "cheery" (or GAY as some people have pointed out). The logo would inspire less homophobia if the 2012 was colored something manlier, such as red (the color of blood) or black (black is always badass and very manly)--

meg

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 15:37:55 -0500

Well said on NYC will not have the olympics, we can only hope

neil

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 15:31:33 -0500

wow, we should loose the bid on the logo alone. seems like a logo designed not by an individual but by a commettee, shame. It wouldn't looks so bad in Gothamist Black (tm) but the colors are just all wrong.

nagin

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 15:10:02 -0500

i can't wait till the olympics cause my rent to go up 400%... anyway the olympic mascot should be a bobble head woody allen. or spike lee.

designthug

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 14:01:47 -0500

when you're wrong you're *really wrong*! the logo is great and unconventional - it uses the 4-color date to stand in for the tired old olympic rings. the sydney logo, on the other hand, is squiggly and contains a boomerang. zzzzzzz.

Jen

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 13:35:06 -0500

jake, this is exactly what I'm saying - why isn't Gothamist in the business of handling the design work for the Olympic bid? And, deanh, you're so right about Cobi from Barcelona. I bet the Beijing Olympics mascot will be a panda!

nkw

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 13:32:30 -0500

BAD in so many ways: The Statue Of Liberty is a perfect symbol for the NYC Olympics, but what a terrible use of her here. She's carrying a torch, fer Crissakes! How about get Liberty running with the torch? ALSO, what do the blue and green rectangles have to do with anything? ALSO, where are the Olympic colors? Last time I looked, there aren't two shades of blue in the olympic rings.

nkw

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 13:32:21 -0500

jake

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 13:12:07 -0500

i think we should celebrate our new york city identity with an olympic logo made out bagels- that shit would be dumb fresh! other ideas: 1. a little heroin baggy with the olympics logo on it, or an e pill with the logo stamped in, celebrating nyc's colorful history of drug abuse. 2. a few nyc cops with their guns drawn, firing at one of the olympic sprinters- it would celebrate reject police improprieties, as well as marksmanship- is that still a sport?

deanh

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 13:11:53 -0500

In my youth i lived in atlanta during the 1996. i have to say that this logo is very nice. nothing to complain about. Just be careful of the mascot: Atlanta's Izzy was a indeed bit of an embarassment. I knew 8-yr olds who though Izzy was stupid. but hey - you try and live up to the standard set by that adorable bear-thing from the Barcelona games. It ain't easy. so be careful that the NYOC doesn't try and force on you a big red apple with googly eyes as your international embassador for the games. which, by the way, will not be in NY anyway.

Rafael

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 13:09:24 -0500

I think I like the giant rat as mascot idea.

doshin

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 12:50:11 -0500

Another vote for Homer's spring. After all, there is a minor league team named after the Simpson's Albuquerque Isotopes. http://www.albuquerquebaseball.com/

Eliot

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 12:42:55 -0500

I don't think a bid logo can use the rings. I actually like the concept of the graphic, but I don't like the execution. And the fruit-stripe lettering is a disaster.

liz

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 12:31:58 -0500

what about the olympic rings? shouldn't they be prominently featured? i thought logos were supposed to be familiar and easily identified with what they're representing... of course, i'm no ogilvy & mather.

matte

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 12:16:48 -0500

Robert's right, but I think we'll be alright because I hear the NYPD's been specially trained to tell the difference between a gun, a molotov cocktail and a liberty torch for the upcoming Olympics.

Ajit

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 12:15:32 -0500

it'd make a damn fine deoderant logo.

yojimbot

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 12:02:34 -0500

as if our fair city isnt a big enough target for terrorism...maybe they should make that an olympic event...the 200meter grenade throw, the wmd heptathalon or my fav, the kalashnikov relay. maybe the saudis wont be such haters if they win some olympic gold!

Leslita

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 11:49:15 -0500

i had totally fogotten about Izzy! maybe Domino's will sponsor the whole thing, and we can resurrect The Noid.

Don Willmott

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 11:45:15 -0500

So far the best Olympics branding is that NBC hardbody montage with the great music. Hubba hubba. Some people probably think it's a commercial for a new series called "Baywatch: Mykonos." Note: female shotputters do not appear in this commerical.

Kojak

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 11:37:39 -0500

lol I don't like it. Its Boring and does look a tad fruity. If we win the 2012 games, remind me to take a two week vacation during that time. And you think NY has enough people now . . .

Robert Daeley

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 11:35:53 -0500

I don't know, but it looks like the Statue is surrendering. And that doesn't seem quite the message you'd want to be sending. ;)

whatisee

Tue, 06 Apr 2004 11:29:06 -0500

I guess the Panda as a mascot is not really playing to any of NY's strengths. It could be a giant rat though! We already have the inflatables which could save a few bucks.