Jump to content

London 2012 Mascot Design Contest


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 740
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

LOL....on par? You've gotta be kidding. I'm quite sure these 2012 mascots won't be anywhere as popular as the 2010 mascots, though they will most certainly sell to a certain extent as come 2012 peop

I love the idea, but the animation of the cartoon is dreadful.

**** sake move on - yes you hate the mascot - logo etc etc - but are you still pissed off about the british press & vancouver?? mandeville and wenlock are on par with vancouver's mascots - get use

One final point the LA 84 picture you have shown is the poster treatment. It takes the star logo and places pics inside it. The poster is a different thing to the logo. The LA 84 logo when shown alone was solid colour not used with in-fills. There's a difference, the London logo does change, it can be solid, it can have in-fills.

But the poster is of the logo. And does the same treatment that London has.

Yeah, peeps can fill in their own images (or more like slap the logo-frame on top of a pic) anc companies can stick in their own colours. But so what?

olympic15cent-2.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Altho strictly speaking, sponsors and licensees will still have a narrow, guarded range of using and reproducing the Official Logo and all imagery of the Games -- not unless LOCOG is releasing the floodgates of creativity and artistic license. There are FULL MANUALS which specify minutely how far from the edge of a page a logo can be placed; what Pantone colors can be applied, etc., etc.,

So that might mean also the 'images' that would be filled in. Surely, they wouldn't want some X-rated images filling in "2012." Or do they? :blink:

Link to post
Share on other sites
But the poster is of the logo. And does the same treatment that London has.

Yeah, peeps can fill in their own images (or more like slap the logo-frame on top of a pic) anc companies can stick in their own colours. But so what?

olympic15cent-2.jpg

If its the logo why then place the logo in the corner of the poster. They have taken the easily recognisable shape of the pictorial element of the logo, enlarged it and filled it with images. Then added the logo to the bottom of the poster.

With the London logo you can in-fill the logo with different images and it be used as the logo, not as a pictorial element of a poster, its different, if you cant see that they are two different things there is nothing more I can say. Maybe Im just not explaining myself. Still its my last word on the subject frankly Im exhausted ; )

Link to post
Share on other sites
Altho strictly speaking, sponsors and licensees will still have a narrow, guarded range of using and reproducing the Official Logo and all imagery of the Games -- not unless LOCOG is releasing the floodgates of creativity and artistic license. There are FULL MANUALS which specify minutely how far from the edge of a page a logo can be placed; what Pantone colors can be applied, etc., etc.,

So that might mean also the 'images' that would be filled in. Surely, they wouldn't want some X-rated images filling in "2012." Or do they? :blink:

They will have a say on what images are used obviously but there is no way the brand colours of Lloyds bank were in the original brand colour pallette. The brand guidelines are altering and evolving as new partners join. I would imagine its quite refreshing for designers to work with really and very innovative despite some people denying it is innovative at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
If its the logo why then place the logo in the corner of the poster. They have taken the easily recognisable shape of the pictorial element of the logo, enlarged it and filled it with images. Then added the logo to the bottom of the poster.

With the London logo you can in-fill the logo with different images and it be used as the logo, not as a pictorial element of a poster, its different, if you cant see that they are two different things there is nothing more I can say. Maybe Im just not explaining myself. Still its my last word on the subject frankly Im exhausted ; )

You can't see the LA logo in that image? It is an application of their emblem used in a poster format, in-filled with images of Los Angeles, people, and sport.

OK, so you like this idea. Fair enough. But what do you like about the shape of the logo? Even if they wanted to just go with a stacked "2012", don't you think they could have chosen more refined and eye pleasing shapes and given a more balanced treatment of the Olympic rings and the "London" wordmark? The logo just has a clunky and clumsy treatment of shapes and words and the rings - they look like afterthoughts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You can't see the LA logo in that image? It is an application of their emblem used in a poster format, in-filled with images of Los Angeles, people, and sport.

OK, so you like this idea. Fair enough. But what do you like about the shape of the logo? Even if they wanted to just go with a stacked "2012", don't you think they could have chosen more refined and eye pleasing shapes and given a more balanced treatment of the Olympic rings and the "London" wordmark? The logo just has a clunky and clumsy treatment of shapes and words and the rings - they look like afterthoughts.

I agree, to a certain extent. The execution in not the best, yes. I couldn't really read it at first. Sometimes, when infills are used, it looks like a broken window. Etc.

However, I don't understand how many, many people totally dismiss it as pure crap and don't give it credit. For an Olympic logo, it is innovative in how it was planned to be used, on the internet, with animation, on merchandising, with the sponsors, with the public. It’s more commercial than corporate, that's the point. I think in today's world, this kind of versatile ness and transferability was bound to be used on an Olympic brand, and I would not be surprised if future hosts fallow.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually here is mine....

Don't see it?

This is it! A personalized mascot… a Dæmon that reflects each child’s inner self… could be changeable and invisible too. This will match the brand pretty well. And the guy who wrote that novel is British so there’s some connection.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This is it! A personalized mascot… a Dæmon that reflects each child’s inner self… could be changeable and invisible too. This will match the brand pretty well. And the guy who wrote that novel is British so there’s some connection.

U got it, babylon!! See. It works!!

(And yeah, in a way, I was paying homage to H.G. Wells with this idea!!)

BTW, welcome back. Haven't seen you in awhile.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree, to a certain extent. The execution in not the best, yes. I couldn't really read it at first. Sometimes, when infills are used, it looks like a broken window. Etc.

However, I don't understand how many, many people totally dismiss it as pure crap and don't give it credit. For an Olympic logo, it is innovative in how it was planned to be used, on the internet, with animation, on merchandising, with the sponsors, with the public. It’s more commercial than corporate, that's the point. I think in today's world, this kind of versatile ness and transferability was bound to be used on an Olympic brand, and I would not be surprised if future hosts fallow.

People dismiss or don't like it because they don't get it and they find the shape, colour, and execution unfitting for the event. Many people first saw ZO-R on the day it was released or thought it was a joke. And they don't see themselves in it or their aspirations for what the Olympics should be. Plus, people don't give logos "time to grow or evolve". They see 3000 a day. Ya got about 20 seconds.

I do give LOCOG credit for not slapping on a crown or a union flag or another running stick figure, but they just seemed to try too hard to make a different mark and forgot completely about hitting their mark...so this is not "everyone's logo".

Edited by Kendegra
Link to post
Share on other sites

Im leaving it now, I aint gonna convince people that hate it, not to hate it, its personal taste. That's what makes the world such a special place, we are all different. I am not a fan of the Beijing logo, I dont hate it but I find it dull and un-inspiring, it wont effect my enjoyment of the Beijing games.

Love the logo or hate the logo, Im hoping for a spectacular 2012 games

Link to post
Share on other sites
People dismiss or don't like it because they don't get it and they find the shape, colour, and execution unfitting for the event. Many people first saw ZO-R on the day it was released or thought it was a joke. And they don't see themselves in it or their aspirations for what the Olympics should be. Plus, people don't give logos "time to grow or evolve". They see 3000 a day. Ya got about 20 seconds.

I do give LOCOG credit for not slapping on a crown or a union flag or another running stick figure, but they just seemed to try too hard to make a different mark and forgot completely about hitting their mark...so this is not "everyone's logo".

people (and i mean the media - as it is they who have driven all the bruhaha on this) don't like it because it is soooo different to what has gone before. they expected something tres conservative and red white and blue.

our media is incredibly conservative in the uk and from the moment we got the games have knocked and criticised everything to do about it !

the logo from day one has been designed to be multimedia (christ this is the end of the 1st decade of the 21st century) - it's not a static emblem representing a runner - stars etc etc etc. it is also the 1st logo to be used for the paralympics and the olympics together. it is also the 1st logo to be designed with the whole look of the games in mind (not the other way round).

ok for people outside of the uk (and some in the uk) would like to see something more traditional - but London ain't about that!

it's a brand that has grown on me and has by and large with the general population in the uk - nothing that logoc presented would have been good enough for the uk media and therefore the general population as a whole.

i still believe time will tell and i applaud locog for having vision to create something that is not so generic like LA - Atlanta - Sydney and Beijing. that's my view but of course most people here won't be satisfied with whatever locog do - it's almost as if people here are willing the games to be a f*ck up - for whatever reason! and yes it is cheap to criticise the "everyone's games" message - but they are - not just london's - not just the uk's - but the world's and i far one would love to see you all in 2012 - you are all most welcome - just bring the sun with you!

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can blame the media all you want, but they don't have as much power as you think or as much as they used to. Have you not seen the blogs, petitions, facebook groups all started up by regular people? This isn't a mass media conspiracy. Media these days just pick up on trends and report the sensationalism.

But again, you look at this with the eye of an Olympic fan. In the broad world of branding, it is not a great brand.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You can blame the media all you want, but they don't have as much power as you think or as much as they used to. Have you not seen the blogs, petitions, facebook groups all started up by regular people? This isn't a mass media conspiracy. Media these days just pick up on trends and report the sensationalism.

But again, you look at this with the eye of an Olympic fan. In the broad world of branding, it is not a great brand.

yeah but that's a chicken and egg scenario - is it not? i am not saying that this is a mass media conspiracy! having worked in media and brands for the last 15 years i thought that it was interesting that most of the criticism found its starting point on the bbc news website and the rolling news channels. then low and behold most of the press followed suit. then all the blogs and then facebook etc etc.

the most interesting issue on blogs etc are that they are generally a conduit for naysayers (and on any topic) - people who are happy / don't have an issue on it - generally don't comment - alas they have lives (unlike me lol)!

at the end of the day - you hate the brand of 2012 and so be it - understanding branding as i do (as you feel you do) - then i see it as brave and unorthadox. you are correct that i am an olympic fan but as a some one who understands brands - i feel that what has gone before in the olympic world (except mexico 1968 and the look of LA84) does not set the world of brands alight! the london 2012 brand is here and still physically 4 years away!!! am off to bed now before a very big saturday in london - loving your work!

bonne nuit! xxx

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm the complete opposite. The Logo makes the Games. :wacko: What's a spectacular games without a Brilliant Logo? Who cares about the Games; they're secondary!! :lol:

absolutely baron! but if you do come to london in 2012 bring us some american sunshine!

Link to post
Share on other sites
U got it, babylon!! See. It works!!

(And yeah, in a way, I was paying homage to H.G. Wells with this idea!!)

BTW, welcome back. Haven't seen you in awhile.

Thanks man! I was busy with the grad school thing!

Link to post
Share on other sites
yeah but that's a chicken and egg scenario - is it not? i am not saying that this is a mass media conspiracy! having worked in media and brands for the last 15 years i thought that it was interesting that most of the criticism found its starting point on the bbc news website and the rolling news channels. then low and behold most of the press followed suit. then all the blogs and then facebook etc etc.

the most interesting issue on blogs etc are that they are generally a conduit for naysayers (and on any topic) - people who are happy / don't have an issue on it - generally don't comment - alas they have lives (unlike me lol)!

at the end of the day - you hate the brand of 2012 and so be it - understanding branding as i do (as you feel you do) - then i see it as brave and unorthadox. you are correct that i am an olympic fan but as a some one who understands brands - i feel that what has gone before in the olympic world (except mexico 1968 and the look of LA84) does not set the world of brands alight! the london 2012 brand is here and still physically 4 years away!!! am off to bed now before a very big saturday in london - loving your work!

bonne nuit! xxx

I think you have to give credit to people for being able to make up their own minds about an issue and express their own opinions.

And let us clarify this...I don't hate the London brand. And remember, a brand is not a logo. London's brand is an inclusive and inspiring games that impact youth and changes people to get involved. That is a broad but admirable brand position. A logo is intended to be a graphic representation of the brand position. I don't see how these hot pink, jagged, square-ish shapes accomplish that. There are other touchpoints for the London 2012 brand to bring forward, and those ultimately are more important than the logo.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought this thread was about the London 2012 Mascot, but has we're on the subject of the Logo, here's my two pennies.

It was shyte, it is shyte and it will always be shyte. Popular opinion decree's it to be exactly that. People pussy footing their way round making excuses for it, in a spiritual or radical sense, need to open their eyes and take a good look at again.

It’s interesting to know that the logo only works with photographs of famous London landmarks, or the Union Jack serving as the background to the retarded 2012 numeric’s and it’s crass styled font. So perhaps the traditional values that everyone recognises may yet save the idiots responsible for bringing the monstrosity into existence.

However, saying all that, it won’t have any bearing on the outcome or success of the 2012 Olympic Game, and I for one can’t wait.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's an innovative style that will quickly wear out its welcome. After you've seen a few applcations, it's 'ho hum.' So what? As I've said before it's like broken pieces of a mirror. But then you don't keep broken mirror or glass around forever. You sweep the shards to the garbage can quickly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought this thread was about the London 2012 Mascot, but has we're on the subject of the Logo, here's my two pennies.

It was shyte, it is shyte and it will always be shyte. Popular opinion decree's it to be exactly that. People pussy footing their way round making excuses for it, in a spiritual or radical sense, need to open their eyes and take a good look at again.

Excuse me, but if I told you to "take a look again" becase you were "wrong" you'd be annoyed. Accept that things like this are subjective please and don't be so patronising.

:mellow:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it IS ****. And I agree with Baron, that it's so unrepresentative. They tried too hard to be innovative, and they manufactured that thing in the process.

Here's to hoping that the London mascot will be much better.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Excuse me, but if I told you to "take a look again" becase you were "wrong" you'd be annoyed. Accept that things like this are subjective please and don't be so patronising.

:mellow:

I wholeheartedly second that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...