What is Digg?133 Comments
- daFilms, on 03/01/2008, -1/+152Is it so wrong to link straight to the original source? where it also provides far more info:
http://www.logoorange.com/logo-design-08.php
Digg needs an option where we can amend the link. - chris9902, on 03/01/2008, -3/+153The London 2012 logo is such an embarrassment.
- inactive, on 03/01/2008, -12/+76man I hope this article is wrong cause some of those are hideous and made my head hurt looking at them
- stormgren, on 03/01/2008, -2/+34I can't look at it without seeing Maggie Simpson sucking someone off. :-(
- Joshuarr, on 03/01/2008, -2/+30Seriously, what is the point here? Abduze blatantly strips the content from the LogoOrange site, reposts it and gets dugg.. That's way too close to plagiarism for me, even with the link at the bottom.
- mds40, on 03/01/2008, -2/+30half of these so called "new" trends have been trends for almost 2 years now...
- michaelpinto, on 03/01/2008, -2/+24If your clients don't care about branding having a trendy logo that dates quickly is always a smart move because next year you'll get to redesign that dated looking logo.
- mattxb, on 03/01/2008, -2/+23Abruzeedo list their source as Logo Orange at the bottom of the article
- topgigmedia, on 03/01/2008, -1/+22One thing that inexperienced designers often forget while designing a logo is portability. How will this logo look printed in say 1 or 2 colors? Using gradients might mean sophisticated halftone techniques when printing collateral items or t-shirts. Designing a logo that can be easily simplified for all non-screen environments, without losing anything is imperative to maintaining brand integrity, consistency and effectiveness. When I see all of these gradients, drop-shadows, bitmap effects, etc. I can't help but think - good luck getting that to translate in the print world =P
- Wolfsoap, on 03/01/2008, -4/+25This is so totally copied from logorange.
I saw a link to it on smashing a few days ago.
***** you, Abduzeedo in not coming back. Plagiarist.
http://www.logolounge.com/articles/default.asp?Art ... - deadnoob, on 03/01/2008, -3/+23looks like they found 3 similar logos, put them together and called it a trend.
leaves? seriously? - wild, on 03/01/2008, -0/+19Its amazing how many of those trends appear on Logo Lounge's trends for 2007:
http://www.logolounge.com/articles/default.asp?Art ... - jawnboy, on 03/01/2008, -1/+15Yeah it's like digg using other site's content to drive all of it's traffic...oh, wait.
- DanOnTheMoon, on 03/01/2008, -1/+15I'm a designer, and I think that about 40 % of the logos posted in that article suck. We all know that the London 2012 logo is ***** horrid. I expected better from Wacom too. Some are rather nice. Welcome to the land of subjectivity.
- inactive, on 03/01/2008, -3/+15All of these logos are wonderfully designed I think, all clean and modern, but that ***** 2012 logo for london... I could've done that in Paint when I was 12. *****.
- zeroroth, on 03/01/2008, -2/+14I don't know... Some of those are horrible, especially the "photoshop" one.
- FBMGriever, on 03/01/2008, -1/+11The new Photoshop logo is disgusting.
- mimilena, on 03/01/2008, -0/+10Wow that link provides a lot more information. Why do people submit to blog spam?
- imacmike, on 03/01/2008, -2/+12When I think about the most recognizable iconic logos, none of them have transparencies, leaves, or organic 3D elements. McDonalds anyone?
- Peko, on 03/01/2008, -10/+20You see, you're head hurts because you don't know jack ***** about design. Designers all know that the crap they throw on the wall is completely revolutionary and you just aren't ready for it.
Waitasec, you think some designers are full of ***** in some communal ego jerk-off circle? Well (hopefully) they disappear quickly. Sigh. - assortedg, on 03/01/2008, -0/+9This needs to get buried if not removed entirely. He's clearly copy/pasting another blogs content. Bury this and Digg the original content and don't reward plagiarists.
- inactive, on 03/01/2008, -1/+9How does the guy who designed the London and Wacom logo (both the same designer) keep getting work? Seriously, what ugly piles of crap
- Cronikeys, on 03/01/2008, -1/+9This list is to justify their logo.
- equallyunequal, on 03/01/2008, -0/+8WRONG, swooshes are last year, waves are NOW
- tehzombie, on 03/01/2008, -0/+8This article sucks, why is this having so many diggs?
- insllvn, on 03/01/2008, -2/+10Sorry to hijack, but this story was stolen from another site (although "sourced" at the bottom). Here is the original site's digg page: http://digg.com/design/Logo_Design_Trends_2008
- brocklese, on 03/01/2008, -1/+8Yeah I swear every year is the year for "web 2.0 and swooshes" :/
- pengas, on 03/01/2008, -0/+7Digg it down then.
- assortedg, on 03/01/2008, -0/+7Oh, and here's the actual article's Digg submission:
http://digg.com/design/Logo_Design_Trends_2008 - BaronVonZ, on 03/01/2008, -1/+8Buried for being a plagiarized POS
- Joshuarr, on 03/01/2008, -0/+6IS less important than your terrible grammar.
- bryceman111, on 03/01/2008, -0/+6Maybe a "User Suggested Alternative Link" area somewhere. Or something.
- xpose, on 03/01/2008, -0/+6Too bad half of those logos were more than a year old. LOL
- Joshuarr, on 03/01/2008, -0/+5Yeah, we just reworked a big nanotech lab and they wanted leaves. It used to be globes...
- gidd, on 03/01/2008, -0/+4Have you seen the London 2012 Paralympics logo? They managed to make it even worse:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Summer_Paralympi ... - Ultra99, on 03/01/2008, -2/+6Thank you for the first insightful comment in this thread so far! Aside from producing very impractical logos (wouldn't want to be the guy who tries to convert one of those "organic" logos into a t-shirt embrodery), what bugs me about this method of categorizing logo designs into trends, memes and categories is that it just makes it easier for mediocre designers to get paid by simply regurgitating "safe", generic designs and waiting for others to come up with the next "trend" to copy.
Sure, many will argue that this is simply "what clients want" and go on doing it. Hell, buy a few decent fonts and get an istock account and anyone at all can be a designer these days. This is why, in spite having 7 years commerical design experience and a fine arts degree, I jumped ship into the marketing side of things - the huge glut of untrained, mediocre talent out there is just pricing decent design out of business. It's a hard place in between the hugely paid "celebrity" designers who actually gets to be creative and the bottom end of the market that will copy paste together an entire corporate identity for a couple hundred bucks. Sad, just sad. - GalacticRerun, on 03/01/2008, -0/+4A good logo but then lots of iconic logos have the money behind them to be rammed down our throats at every turn. Which is why we remember them.
- Thorpe, on 03/01/2008, -0/+4Bless.
- skyshock1, on 03/01/2008, -1/+5Just so long as the ***** glass-base reflection dies a horrible death.
- inactive, on 03/01/2008, -3/+7This list/article is horrible, I hope a designer isn't writing this garbage.
- korea, on 03/01/2008, -0/+3Buried for plagiarism without any original contribution. Lifting the images directly off the source and only linking to the original at the very bottom of the page when you've added nothing to the content is absolutely awful. This is a website I will never again visit. I'd rather be rick rolled.
- bthug7, on 03/01/2008, -1/+4Looking for trends to create an original design is just disgusting
- sparkmonkeyz, on 03/01/2008, -1/+4I'm into that ugly 80's look. I guess it looks like a lot of digg isn't though. I don't know, it's kind of how I dress and everything now. Guess I am just following yet another trend... damnit.
- renegadeafk, on 03/01/2008, -0/+3Oh my!
- positron, on 03/01/2008, -1/+4The somebody somewhere you refer to would be the tax paying residents of London.
- inactive, on 03/01/2008, -0/+3Tildes are the "wave" of the future.
- TheKingInYellow, on 03/02/2008, -0/+3well, the company that designed the 2012 logo (aka "the lisa simpson blowjob logo") also designed the new wacom logo so what do you expect?
- bradcrc, on 03/01/2008, -1/+4It's the brown coffee ring of quality.
- Buckeye17, on 03/01/2008, -2/+5Basically this page lists all the different possible types of designs. Obviously all the new logos will look like those listed, because there's nothing else they COULD look like. Awesome.
- actorboy, on 03/01/2008, -2/+5Am I the only only person who still believes logos need to work in black and white first? Half of these don't look like they'd fly on a fax or photocopied letterhead.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 131 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is