Not signed in (Sign In)

SkillShare - A place to discuss Web Standards and Web Design topics

Categories

Vanilla 1.1.9 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

    • CommentAuthormista3
    • CommentTimeMar 13th 2007 edited
     permalink

    This post about “58 creative logos you can inspire yourself from” really concerns me*. The majority of the logos showcased are generic, bland and cliched examples of the Web 2.0 aesthetic. Or should that be anti-aesthetic?

    Where has the originality gone? The thought process?

    Following a crib sheet {(i) Choose sans-serif font (ii) Apply gradient (iii) Add drop shadow or reflection} is not design. There’s no risk or excitement in most of the designs posted to CSS galleries theses days. Hell even the concept of a gallery of Web 2.0 designs is getting tired now in itself, the number of web design ‘showcases’ must be approaching three figures by now.

    It seems to be that many designers are not making the effort to look outside of their backyard (the internet) for inspiration. Is it any coincidence that huge chunks of the internet look very similar to the interface of OS X? We’re drowning in Aqua!

    What can we do to address this?

    Maybe clients come to expect a certain ‘trendy’ look and feel for their new websites, and designers have lazily started to pander to this. But we shouldn’t blame the client – it’s the designers role to come up with fresh ideas.

    (* Judging by the comments under the post, it concerns a lot of other people too)

    • CommentAuthorPettyRider
    • CommentTimeMar 13th 2007 edited
     permalink
    I'll play devil's advocate for the time being and argue that these "trends" (I'd call them design patterns) are really really good for the user. Consider the user who doesn't hardly understand how to use her OS interface. Imagine the grief she faces when every button on every Web site is slightly different. Buttons should look tangible. Aqua goes a step further than the bevel and I believe it has helped users feel more comfortable with this foreign environment.

    It would be unwise, in general application, to wander too far outside the domain of a computer interface to look for inspiration/influence. Yes, we should challenge ourselves to refine and understand our users' mental models for the basic tasks of your application or Web site, but we must respect design patterns that have been developing over the history of human-computer interaction, for the benefit of our users, not the need to fulfill our want for diversity--for 'art.'

    Just like the button went from bevel to gel-cap, flat colors go gradient, square corners go round. These devices, trends, patterns, what-have-you, are part of the Internet that users are becoming accustomed to and comfortable with. Gradients make them feel free and open, rounded corners give them room to play, and bubbly-buttons are the friends that do cool things for them. To deny that bond for any "artistic" reason would be senseless and unyielding.

    Now, getting your logo mixed up in this philosophy is a different issue altogether, and I wouldn't agree with that "trend."
  1.  permalink
    There is a difference between inspiration and copy cats.
    And seems this is what really going on people too busy or lazy to come up with something new and I can't blame them it's fast and safe.
    There are different types of developers out there but most them are not artist by the nature so this is where we getting creativity problems. If knows you ways around Photoshop it doesn't mean you are the Artist.
    Also 5-6 years ago we were limited what we could design due that most internet users were on dialup but it's not really a problem any more since most people switch to broadband connection. I don't think any standards like WEB 2.0 do any good at this point specially with a logo design. Creativity shouldn't be limited to any standards created by somebody else.
    It’s hard to define what is really inspiration is you see the line or the object and all of the sudden you have idea how to transform it to something new and unique.
    it's hard to balance creativity and productivity at the same time in this fast lane world .

    Cheers, DS
    • CommentAuthorMatt
    • CommentTimeMar 14th 2007
     permalink
    Yeah, I think a large part of us saw that post, and was disgusted by the amount of diggs it received. The problem lies mainly with the population of digg have little variety. Either they are marketers or they are high school kids who think a gloss effect will make a bad design work. I think pepsi did a great job on their logo, because it is distinguishable.
    • CommentAuthorkyko
    • CommentTimeMar 14th 2007
     permalink
    3stripe,
    I agree with you to some extent and I am myself already getting tired of this so called trend. When it comes to design, I expect more than web 2.0 crap...it just doesn't do anything for me. Coming from a business/marketing perspective, you shouldn't want a logo that has gradients all over it and some cute aqua icon looking thing. You want something that sets itself apart from the rest and can be easily recognizable...not something that will change styles in 3-7 years. But a company also shouldn't want something overly artsy, boring or intricate either. They need something trademark-able, simple, and something that will work on all medias (print, web, billboard, tv, etc.). Actually a few of those logos on that page are quite good and something that would work for companies that want to advertise on various medias (I think my favorite on that page is Fabre). There are others on that page though that only work for web and for that reason are not a good example for inspiration in logo design.
  2.  permalink
    Anytime I see a post on Digg or del.icio.us titled something like this:

    X Number of Super Groovy Design Things


    I do my best to avoid clicking the link.

    When did it become an economically feasible business model to post lists of a bunch of "Web 2.0" things, be they blogs, logos, buttons, whatever, on a blog with TONS of advertising? I'm really sick of this kind of Google baiting content, and wish that people would avoid those types of mindless list posts. If you absolutely have to see the list - just promise me you won't click on the ads.

    /rant
    •  
      CommentAuthormringlein
    • CommentTimeMar 15th 2007
     permalink
    I will say people love lists. Easy to scan and fast to read. I know many of you that blog know that some of your most popular ones have been a list of 5 or 10 things. I only comment b/c I am in the middle of writing a post right now that starts of with "The best 10 ...."
  3.  permalink
    No Martin!

    You're right. Lists are popular because they are easy to scan. I'm just criticizing the people who are trying to make a living at posting nothing but lists of crap and then throwing Google ads between numbers 3 and 4, 6 and 7, an interstitial ad page that users must pass through to see numbers 9 and 10... not to mention the usual sidebar, footer and header ads.
    • CommentAuthorMatt
    • CommentTimeMar 15th 2007
     permalink
    digg.com/design/8_Reasons_Why_Idiot_Masses_Love_Lists

    :-)
    •  
      CommentAuthormringlein
    • CommentTimeMar 15th 2007
     permalink
    HA HA!
    •  
      CommentAuthormringlein
    • CommentTimeMar 18th 2007
     permalink
    This is for your Scott, another list: Six most uniquely creative business cards of SXSWi 2007
  4.  permalink
    I took a look back on some designs i did about 10 years ago, I was a beginner and most of the designs \ logos were candy-ish very similar to web2.0...

    web2.0 makes me want web3.0sp4
    • CommentAuthormista3
    • CommentTimeMar 27th 2007 edited
     permalink
    Uh-oh!!! http://www.stripegenerator.com/ DANGER DANGER
    •  
      CommentAuthormringlein
    • CommentTimeMar 27th 2007
     permalink
    I saw this in my morning news and thought it was hilarious!! Will never design another site without!!!
  5.  permalink
    wow someone has too much time on their hands.
    • CommentAuthormista3
    • CommentTimeMar 27th 2007
     permalink
    And clearly doesn't own a copy of Illustrator or Fireworks :)
    •  
      CommentAuthorAvean
    • CommentTimeApr 23rd 2007
     permalink
    Logoes dont need to follow any standard, it can be the easiest of shapes and even then become the most famous logo.
    A logo is a logo, i dont see the point in this beeing Web 2.0, Web 2.0 is just a phrase someone is using to categorize clean design in my opinion.
    •  
      CommentAuthormringlein
    • CommentTimeApr 24th 2007
     permalink
    Logos do traditionally have standards -- there are many, but some obvious ones: you need to ensure they work in color and black/white, you need to ensure they maintain solid quality when being photocopied or faxed. Not to mention that the format should be vector based and you should be considering your Pantone colors as well. You want to ensure your logo (identity) is recognizable when being sized down and you should take vertical and horizontal placement into account (just keep it back-of-mind).

    Everything has standards -- not that we have to follow them.
Add your comments
    Username Password
  • Format comments as (Help)