Friday, November 6, 2009

Today, while on my way to the airport, my taxi passed a van with some of the poorest graphic design I have ever seen.  It was a black van with all sorts of yellow and orange stripes with white lettering that was hard to read, and a logo that just seemed like a bunch of shapes.  I don't even remember the name because I was so distracted by the horrible clash of colors.  It got me thinking about other bad logos.  I found this website that really got me laughing. 
Check this out:


Image

There's far too many things going on in this logo.  The tree would be fine...a little self explanatory, but the flower is just weird and unnecessary.  Then there's the T in the shape of the medical symbol.  Not a good idea, it looks horrible.  A different play on words could have been funnier, and the text is boring, not amusing.


I also found another hilarious website about little-known logos that are hilarious in their design.  Take, for example, the KIDSEXCHANGE.  I'm sure its supposed to be a consignment store or something, called Kids Exchange, but really, I read it as Kid Sex Change.  Wrong message? Yup, definitely.



It really makes you wonder who approved these logos. What were they thinking??!


5 comments:

  1. Haha! I hope graphics designers were not creating these logos. The use of typography in the second one definitely leads to confusion and is pretty self-explanatory for why it doesn't work. However, the first one, before I had any graphic design knowledge, may not have been so bad. After our weeks in class, however, I believe a different font could've been used that more closely symbolizes a tree and its natural feel. I think the creator would've found better simplicity in creating a tree-like image with the doctor symbol since both have similar shape. Doctor makes me think of red and white, while tree is green. There needs to be a better mesh of these characteristics. Less is more and this is a perfect demonstration of just that. More time needed to be attributed to concept.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I have seen the second one before, but it never gets old. Clearly, the graphic design could have been much better. Possibly could have used only two colors to separate the words definitively like we talked about in class. As it is now, it is all over the place so you are unsure where one word ends and the next begins. I also agree that the Tree Doctor is trying to do too much. The tree part works and is fine but the T is just a really bad pun and needs to go.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The Tree Doctor logo is just too crowded. Also, the tree illustration is too literal. They should have used something more abstract. The flower looks out of place, and they definitely could have done a better job with the typeface. The T in the shape of the medical symbol was completely unnecessary! I guess the second one shows the importance of spacing between letters. It would have been perfectly fine if there was a space between kids and exchange.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The "Tree Doctor" logo is ridiculous. There are way too many things going on, and I agree that the visuals used to accompany the logo are too literal. I don't think it was necessary to use a symbol for the letter "T" in "Doctor." However, if the image of the tree had been more abstract, I think it would have been a unique factor that would have helped draw viewers in. The typeface also needs to be changed as well.

    The second example, on the other hand, is clearly an example of the importance of spacing and coloring.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The "Tree Doctor" logo is atrocious. I am by no means a designer and even I know better than that. There is no way that a designer made that for them. If there was then I hope the "Tree Doctor" didn't pay very much for it. There are too many concepts incorporated in the logo. If they chose one concept (like the tree) then their logo would have been much more effective.

    ReplyDelete