CURSE YOU HOTLINKING!!!
This is what I meant:
CURSE YOU HOTLINKING!!!
This is what I meant:
LOL really the government is never the big payer in this industry, they are the most demanding and nonunderstanding clients who doesn't really pay a lot. Look just go through the profolio of a branding company and check how many jobs are from the private sector and how many are public.
The amount of money put in this Olympic logo is absolutely dwalfed by the budge of say IKEA's campaign, which they carry out every five year, there really isn't a lot of meat in public projects.
I am not defending my job, I am defending what I know takes a lot of effort and time to do and I really don't expect you to understand.
You can talk all you like about your ideal system, but before you put it to work and prove it in real life, you don't have an argument. Or at least, find me an example where public summited design, voted by public ever won overwhelming support in an event as large as this. Real cases with real success, because in your imagination it will of course work perfectly......
I actually did research on that, when I was doing a paper on Design Democracy, it's about letting the audience direct the design, and there aren't really cases on such scale, the best it was is some community projects, that concerns just a town's population.
Democracy won't produce something everybody likes, it will only produce something most people like, or sort of agree on. The common design practice also succeeds in that, what we have is an exception.
So again, if you have no proof of any sort of references about your system, you don't have any credibility.
p.s. Have it ever crossed your mind that by logic, it is just as possible to have a design that sucks with your practice? Or are you just content for the fact that if it turns out sucky, it is at least free?
So you do work within the design industry... go figure!
You are welcomed if you have such an ingenious plan that garuntees 100% success, hell you could be mega rich.
Cut me a slice when you make it big will you? It shouldn't be hard as it is just a pony profession which seemingly milk money out of every company without much thought and effort.
Posting the 3D intro you did would be a good start, maybe I can forward it to some studios and send them some humble pies.
(hecks whats wrong with my spelling today.)
The olympics? ...Oh yes, I remember now.
How come every single thread Intrepid comes into evolves into a massive argument... 
basically what youre saying is youve gone from thinking for yourself to being susceptible to manipulation (aka marketing)
Probrably something to do with the unecessarily patronising and smug way that he talks to people.
It is contradictory really, people who don't believe in brands but in the same time believe that marketing can actually manipulate people.
If marketing can manipulate people than hell no one should be unhappy with this logo by then, there sure was a lot of marketing behind it.
It's not always a bad thing to let the outside world influence yourself a bit you know, life isn't either free will or isolation.
You point sounds like what a 16 year old reading too much Adbuster will suggest, I read Adbuster for years and you know what I think they are as mind numbling as marketing, but it will never went too far as stopping you having an opinion.
first of all there is no contradiction between personally not being affected by branding and believing that marketing can have a manipulative power on people
the fanboy wars that have been raging on bbs' ever since the first pcs came out and continue to this day mostly as playstation vs xbox flamewars are a prime example of how brands can ignite an almost religious fervour
also marketing has tried techniques like subliminal messaging which while debateable in their effectiveness are a blatant attempt at manipulation
nothing is ever perfect and while im sure a merketers dreamworld would give him a magic helevetica wand that creates ads that cause the instant do or die desire to buy a product no real world marketing will ever be able to save a product that is shite... like that logo
as they say you cant polish a turd
ive never said that it is a bad thing to let the ouside world have an effect on you... it is however a bad thing to let those parts of the outside world that act to achieve egostical goals have an effect on you
ive never even heard of adbuster before
<BNP>
I think the two alien mascots represents the UK quite well. We're full of foreigners.
</BNP>
I think the two alien mascots represents the UK quite well. We're full of foreigners.
</BNP>
That fact that you can choose not to be affected means that it is not manupulative, it's is merely effective, manupulate is simply too strong of a word.
That was quite some years ago, which never really worked and is now illegal.
see, so it ain't really manupulative.
We people in the business also a code of conduct on what we sell, some don't sell tobacco, some don't sell alcohol, and in general if the product is way off the mark of what the company tries to project, we won't do it, because if it's not authentic people will notice.
A brand can help a good product, as well as destroy a bad one, that's the first thing we learn in college.
Marketing can't change taste and opinions, it can only guide customers with similiar value and lifestyle with the brands towards it, marketing efforts are focused on the target segments, where we already know the language and believe among those crowd, and we just project a simple unified concept that fits their bill with an unique angle.
I think you are being cynical and frankly give marketeers too much credit for their work.
Probably you should read it up, it is about the whole subversive anti-consumerism conspiracy thing.
Actually, the Beijing 2008 Olympic logo was chosen from 1985 submitted entries. The choice wasn't democratic, since it was chosen by China's Olympic Committee, but it does show that allowing public submissions for brand design can and do result in very successful brands.
The London logo, though, was simply contracted to a design company. Quite a restrictive and risky approach, IMHO. Such a public brand should have been chosen via a more inclusive selection process (such as with Beijing, or on a smaller scale, the Sydney 2000 Olympic logo was chosen from a competition among 10 designers).
The Beijing logo was accepted as a concept and finished up with professional designers, while the man who originally came up with the idea got paid one dollars, and no one really knows how much involvment he has in the latter part of design.
btw. here's a list of all the art in the history of olympic games. http://www.colourlovers.com/bl ... ing-trends-olympic-games/
manipulation (the kind thats neither subliminal nor amounts to whats basically torture) relies heavily on the subject not realising its being done to him and being susceptible to it (eg a lot of right wing propaganda requires you to have a deep rooted illogical fear of anything unknown)
the fact that its illegal now only proves my point that marketing is willing to be highly manipulative
which to me would imply that any money spent on branding would be much better spent on delivering a product thats actually good
i dont think its cynical to assume that a company trying to sell me a product will act in its and its shareholders best interests and not in mine as a customer
That's one thing I have never feel vulnerable about, if anything propaganda all smells very deliberate.
There are always rotten branch on a tree, if someone attempt it nowadays it will be damned to hell, not like there are much secrets in the trade in the digital age.
It is impossible due to the vigorous competition of exposure, however if there is an annual cap of advertising budget per company than it is possible, I have no objection of having less advertising overall, it will just make the bad ads disappear, while only the truly good survive. And creative people can free their time for more......noble causes, or at least stop working 12 hours a day.
Shareholders are not the biggest boss in a company, consumers are.
however most advertising works on similar lines by targeting insecurities about appearance and other weak points shared by most people
but thats just taking things to the extreme
that its frowned upon today doesnt mean that the basic thinking isnt still present but exectued in a less blatantly obvious way
maybe its just me being idealistic but i believe that superior quality will always rise to the top rgeardless of marketing
at least i thought that was true until the stupid epidemic hit and everyone and their grandmother bought an ipad
ever heard of shareholder value?
London 2012 Logo
(93 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG