another bad logo redesign
- Started
- Last post
- 33 Responses
- PIZZA0
type still looks like finance, someone get comic sans in here
- ali0
has some character now
- Ambushstudio0
I dig
- utopian0
Both logos suck!
</End Thread>
- ETM0
jetSkii
- non0
@ hans_glib - What do you find "bad" about it exactly?
- Knuckleberry0
would be better if it read:
F.A.O. Schwarzenegger
- neowe0
do your thing FAO, no one here has succeeded more than ye
- gramme0
The harlequin is interesting, although the face, as Armin pointed out, is soulless (and a bit ghostly, I might add).
The logotype, on the other hand, is a downgrade. Details like the ™ and raised dots will disappear at business card size, as will "Schwarz • Est. 1862."
The letters FAO appear to have been stretched too far horizontally. Subtle widening is fine, but this is ungainly. And the high-waisted crossbars in F and A look unbalanced.
The old logo needed an update, but I don't think what they ended up with is the right direction. One nice thing about the former logo is that it had a bit of a German vibe, which in relation to toys makes me think of quality craftsmanship. I think they've pretty much lost that vibe now.
- jetSkii0
Does no one else see the sexual and perverted innuendos in the new logo?
- SteveJobs0
i like it. mozzletoff and lorem ippzle!
- randommail0
I like the clown jester mark. It's well done.
But wasn't FAO known for that teddy bear holding letterblocks? That would have been better I think.
- teddy bears are now symbolizing something else http://1.bp.blogspot…Miguex
- cannonball19780
now i know they like clown jesters. I was confused before
- citysurgical0
It's driving me crazy that the red bullets have so little breathing room in the new one, and that they are just a little bit bigger than the jester dingle-dangle (technical term) that they horizontally align with. Visually awkward and sloppy.
- literally driving you crazy? you dont have to look...bjladams
- LITERALLY.citysurgical
- One the other hand, what do details matter in design?citysurgical