The London 2012 Logo
The logo is supposed to represent ‘the dynamic Olympic Spirit and its inspirational ability to reach out to people all over the world’.
To be fair, the logo could be said to be dynamic as it is bold, striking and certainly attracts attention whether or not it is positive or negative, so in this respect it does fulfil the ‘dynamic’ criteria.
Moving on to the ‘inspirational’ aspect of the logo. To me, this logo doesn’t scream inspiration as it resembles graffiti that society believes to be a nuisance and an eye sore. Remembering that the event is watched all over the world, London doesn’t want to have connotations with graffiti.
The Olympics are meant to be celebratory and exciting which I don’t think this logo is. Previous logos could be said to be more traditional, with this one ‘breaking the norm’ which is in some cases an exciting and successful thing to do. However, we must not forget that the Olympics have been going on for centuries and thus an element of tradition must be kept n my opinion. The Olympic rings are recognised all over the world and in previous logos have been given most of the emphasis which I think is important in relation to the ancient tradition of these games, but on this new logo, they are faded into the design without celebrating their colour.
The main element is the year, 2012…why? Surely the rings deserve more respect than to just be placed as a small, white-out element within the design. Another issue that I have with the logo is the dominance of the location, ‘London’. London are meant to be relishing the opportunity, which wont happen again for years yet they seem to not want to dwell on this by giving the place a ‘back-seat’ in the logo. It doesn’t scream ‘pride’ like the other logos have done in the past when displaying their name.
I feel that the rings could have been used more to their advantage with their shape opportunities as well as their colour opportunities. The rings could definitely have been more incorporated into the overall design of the logo. Clichéd ideas that come to mind may be to use the circular shapes and associate them with landmarks around the destination such as the London Eye for example.
Another issue I have with this logo is legibility. The balance of the logo seems to work, with the latter 1 and 2 holding up the 2 and the 0 of ‘2012’ although I don’t really understand the purpose of the square-like shape in the middle. However, the definition of the numbers aren’t very clear bearing in mind the many different cultures that will be familiarising themselves with the logo. The ‘2’ is a different shape each time, and the jagged, rigid structure doesn’t allow for easy recognition, particularly with the white ‘shadow’ confusing things behind the shapes. I feel that there are just too many confusing elements to the logo.
After recently having done a project involving logo design, we were told that the logo should work in all sizes as well as in black and white. The good thing about this logo is that it would definately work in black and white and there are different colour schemes developed for the logo. However, if the logo were to be reduced to a fairly small size, I don’t think that it would be very effective, especially after having legibility issues with the elements anyway.
Overall, the tone of voice of the logo would probably be suited to something else, such as promoting activities to younger people, but the tradition of the Olympics has been lost in this logo and other cultures could have difficulty with legibility and layout of the design.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/olympics_2012/6722763.stm
I feel that the rings could have been used more to their advantage with their shape opportunities as well as their colour opportunities. The rings could definitely have been more incorporated into the overall design of the logo. Clichéd ideas that come to mind may be to use the circular shapes and associate them with landmarks around the destination such as the London Eye for example.
Another issue I have with this logo is legibility. The balance of the logo seems to work, with the latter 1 and 2 holding up the 2 and the 0 of ‘2012’ although I don’t really understand the purpose of the square-like shape in the middle. However, the definition of the numbers aren’t very clear bearing in mind the many different cultures that will be familiarising themselves with the logo. The ‘2’ is a different shape each time, and the jagged, rigid structure doesn’t allow for easy recognition, particularly with the white ‘shadow’ confusing things behind the shapes. I feel that there are just too many confusing elements to the logo.
After recently having done a project involving logo design, we were told that the logo should work in all sizes as well as in black and white. The good thing about this logo is that it would definately work in black and white and there are different colour schemes developed for the logo. However, if the logo were to be reduced to a fairly small size, I don’t think that it would be very effective, especially after having legibility issues with the elements anyway.
Overall, the tone of voice of the logo would probably be suited to something else, such as promoting activities to younger people, but the tradition of the Olympics has been lost in this logo and other cultures could have difficulty with legibility and layout of the design.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/olympics_2012/6722763.stm
