1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Miami Dolphins New logo/uniforms Thread

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Rocky Raccoon, Nov 12, 2012.

  1. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    It is not ok for you to tell me I'm wrong about the execution of a logo. Accept that as the fact it is.
     
  2. Alex44

    Alex44 Boshosaurus Rex

    20,810
    8,965
    0
    Jan 7, 2008
    Hollywood, Florida
    Objectively poor to who though? The masses of humans? Yes. However another intelligent species in the universe might be all about horribly skewed lines in art. It's the makeup of our own brains that causes us to like or dislike something not some universal law.

    I completely agree logo B looks like absolute **** and that our new logo is FAR better than our old one. However when I think of good vs bad and right vs wrong or even quality vs non-quality I think of it in a highly philosophical way :lol:
     
  3. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Oh ok, its not done poorly cause...aliens. If were going to a metaphysical level, then you can argue anything.

    Look, every profession has a level of professional execution or craftsmanship. I may think all mowed lawns look the same, but a professional landscaper will see all the missed spots and mohawks instantly and say the job was done poorly. You can't on a real world level argue that lawn professional is wrong. Now a person may like the lawn cut at certain height or a certain pattern the landscaper disagrees with, that's the subjective part. But having a bunch of missed spots is not subjectively poor. It is objectively poor.

    Just because its a logo doesn't make it any different.
     
    djphinfan and Section126 like this.
  4. SkapePhin

    SkapePhin sigpicz.blogspot.com

    588
    479
    63
    Jan 3, 2008
    Fort Lauderdale

    Actually, aesthetics isn't just a purely human concept, it is apparent in just about everything. Animals have an understanding of aesthetics too. Beauty is essentially symmetry. Symmetry connotes health. People are attracted to "beautiful" people because they are more symmetrical, which is an indication that they have good health. There is mounds of scientific data to support that. And that isn't just for humans. Animals are attracted to symmetry as well. An attraction to symmetry and cleanliness seeps into our perceptions of art and design as well.

    In example B, the star isn't symmetrical. For this reason, it is oft-puting, and not a good design.
     
  5. steveincolorado

    steveincolorado Spook, Storme & Pebbles

    11,511
    3,069
    113
    Mar 23, 2008
    Colorado
    Why are you trying to stir the pot? All said was that the new leaked logo sucks and is poor.
     
    NolesNPhinsFan likes this.
  6. Joe Robbie

    Joe Robbie The Patriarch

    388
    253
    63
    Dec 24, 2008
    Miami Gardens
    Opinions are never right, or wrong.









    Except in this case, because that logo sucks. :p
     
  7. MikeHoncho

    MikeHoncho -=| Censored |=-

    52,652
    25,565
    113
    Nov 13, 2009

    [​IMG]

    Sorry, Alex. had to.
     
  8. SICK

    SICK Lounge Moderator

    72,658
    35,312
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Charlotte NC
    Miami Dolphins New Logo Thread

    Is it April 18th yet?
     
    BuffaloDolphin likes this.
  9. CaribPhin

    CaribPhin Guest

    SICK likes this.
  10. Hurricane

    Hurricane Guest

    I disagree. I understand that symmetry is typically a desirable quality, but I'd also insist that it's not the end-all factor in design.

    For example, the team with the best uniform, in my opinion, is Pittsburgh. They have a logo on only one side of their helmet (serendipitous genius) and an off-center patch on the breast. Nothing symmetrical about it. The logo, itself, has bilateral symmetry, ignoring color, but I think everyone could agree that the uniform is a great example of an asymmetrical design done well.

    To extend upon that point, I think the best uniforms in college go to Alabama. In regards to the helmets, only 0's have at least bilateral, and in a huddle on the field, no players have the same number...chaos or disarray? I definitely don't think so. It's a timeless and unique classic.

    Symmetry can help make a logo in the works better, but those who break the "rules" and break them well are the ones who end up with the coolest designs, IMO
     
  11. The G Man

    The G Man Git 'r doooonnne!!!

    7,480
    5,637
    113
    Mar 18, 2009
    I just did this with my wife and son. My son immediately says "that's the worst logo I've ever seen." My wife then says, "well, it's sleeker."

    IMHO, a lot will depend on how the logo is incorporated into the redesign of the uniform. There are other elements that could bring this whole thing together. I'm willing to reserve final judgment until thew whole thing is revealed.
     
  12. Hurricane

    Hurricane Guest

    Agreed. The Browns have a stupid logo, whether it be the helmet, the B in the football, or the elf, but I think that their jerseys are sharp. IMO, that's what matters most. If the whole uniform looks good, it's good.

    With that said, though, it DOES affect merchandise and branding. To me, the Jaguars new logo is beyond unprofessional looking, and I'd really be embarrassed to work or represent them in anyway. It looks like a Thundercat.
     
  13. Vengeful Odin

    Vengeful Odin Norse Mod

    21,837
    10,818
    113
    Dec 2, 2007
    Kansas City, MO
    Please keep this thread on topic and about the potential logo, not about other members. Thank you.
     
    Hurricane likes this.
  14. Section126

    Section126 We are better than you. Luxury Box

    47,525
    72,483
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    Miami, Florida
    guys...

    FinD is a professional graphic designer, and like many professionals, they have an idea of what good work is.

    it doesn't make him right. But it sure as **** lends him credibility.
     
    djphinfan and Fin D like this.
  15. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Again, anyone can like whatever logo/design for whatever reason they want and they will always be right, because liking the way something looks is subjective. But everything that's man made has an objective quality to it, and that's the craftsmanship that went into making whatever the thing is. The quality of the craftsmanship is not open to opinion.

    There were people that liked the Yugo. The people that liked it had their reasons and those reasons were right for them. Those reasons had no bearing on the fact that Yugo's were made poorly. They could be liked AND made poorly. But the shoddy craftsmanship of the Yugo is not debatable, it is fact.

    The same goes for the old logos. People may like them for aesthetic or traditional reasons, but the craftsmanship that went into them was still shoddy and that is a non debatable fact as well.

    Just because people like the old logo, does not mean it was crafted well or with professionally quality.
     
    Section126 likes this.
  16. Ozzy

    Ozzy Premium Member Luxury Box

    Just to be clear. I am a professional artist in the construction industry. I have designed and put together some fine works of art. Including work done on Pat Riley's old house in Coco Plum.

    I never said he is not qualified. I even agreed on part of the craftsmanship being bad. However, I said, I can make that judgement myself. That is all..
     
    Section126 likes this.
  17. apatos19

    apatos19 New Member

    38
    60
    0
    Aug 27, 2012
    As a graphic designer, I'm sure you realize that everyone is entitled to have an opinion on your work, since you are designing to please them. I'm sure you have discovered as I have, that the pride and dedication you put into your work, doesn't matter to anyone but another designer. People are very unique in what they like, and if you give them a choice, often as not, they pick the one that is 'worse' in your opinion.

    IMO, the original logo represents an average rendering of sport's logos in that time period, and is on par with many high school logos that still exist. It wasn't badly done, and is very classic to fans, because it represents when the team last won a superbowl. The uniforms are classic, and obviously 'copied' off of what most teams wore at the time. A style and logo that better represents the uniqueness of Miami wasn't asked for at the time. I'm sure Robbie just said get me some uniforms for my pro team. I think he was more interested in getting the team on the field, then how it looked. Still, that classic look is what endears to me as a fan and artist, because it represents Miami as winners.

    Now, I have no problem that Miam looked at those uniforms and said we need something that is more 'Miami' and less like what every other team wears. They tried in 97 to capatalize on the Art Deco fad that was sweeping all sports at the time, but failed miserably in my opinion. The dolphin logo went to a very cartoony look and did not utilize some of the more 'flashy' techiques that make the art deco style stand out. (See the bronc's and the pats.) Worse, they added navy and over did it especially with the stupid drop shadows on the numbers. San fran's designers did a much better job with it, though I would have preffered incorporating the navy into the numbers like the Buc's and Ravens, which would have made the phins more 'Miami' unique, than a cheap carbon copy attempt of the toughness San Fran was embodying.

    The new logo (if it's correct) is an attempt to make the logo look better, but is based off the idea of the stadium logo, and that's the assignment the designer was given. And I think he did nice job, taking that idea and making it work. To say he did a bad job of executing is wrong, and the finished one did a great job of cleaning up the first leaked concept and making it look good. I like it and especially how he cleaned it up.

    Now do I like is as our new logo? Yes and no. Yes, because it intentionally or not, looks good on the new style helmets, because the shape and countour of the helmet has changed (the ear holes aren't round, making it pointless to have the hanging dolphins tail seem inches away from grapping it.) The up turned tail makes great use of the space of the part of the helmet that is normal, befoee it stop and idents in. It also makes it seem as if the dolphin is swimming/flying, creating motion on the helmet.

    No, because I just think a much better concept could have been created if allowed. (I really like the nemo version with the orange fin, and navy in the sunburst.) That's not the designer's fault, it's the FO who was obviously giving him/her instructions to develop it from the stadium logo. I can live with it, and it will probably grow on me, especially if the uniforms look good to match. I just wish they had allowed the designers freedom to come up with concepts independent of the stadium logo that.
     
    ToddPhin, Ozzy and Vengeful Odin like this.
  18. steveincolorado

    steveincolorado Spook, Storme & Pebbles

    11,511
    3,069
    113
    Mar 23, 2008
    Colorado
    The leaked logo still sucks and was done poorly.
     
  19. CaribPhin

    CaribPhin Guest

    If I can put on my armchair psychologist's cap for a moment...

    What is most likely happening is that they're resenting the fact that someone would dare call their preference an affinity for a poorly constructed logo. The problem with this line of thinking is that it only makes them partial to a poorly constructed logo if the logo's construction is what they like most. If they like the logo because of tradition or symbolism rather than its technical construction, then that's a different matter.

    Think of it this way, this is like Seth getting angry because someone calls his daughter's logo a "hodgepodge of mismatched colors, uneven scribbles, and below basic design representative of a lack of design savvy. Also her father sucks". It would be foolish of him to get defensive of his love of the logo for the simple reason that he loves it because it's a cute piece that his daughter created and he loves his daughter. Also, Seth sucks.
     
    Fin D likes this.
  20. Hurricane

    Hurricane Guest

    Is it me, or do we have a disproportionately large graphic designer population on the board? :pointlol:
     
    Ozzy likes this.
  21. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    This logo is absolutely badly done.
    [​IMG]

    Remember I'm not saying anyone is wrong for liking the logo.


    Let's break it down.
    There's 3 parts to the logo, the sun, the dolphin and the helmet.

    1. The sun:
    The tiny straight lines that emit from the waves in the sun are not positioned consistently in each curve throughout. A professional, would have made those congruent throughout the whole of the sun.

    2. The helmet:
    The "M" is sloppy. The various parts of the "M" are not straight or consistent in width or curve. It like the dolphin, look to be a copy of a copy of a copy of a print form a ditto machine (I'll explain that more in the dolphin section.) The 'M" is also not placed correctly on the helmet, its too down and too right.

    3. The dolphin:
    I said before it looks a photo copied numerous times off of a ditto machine. Ditto machines (for those that don't know) were used a lot by schools to give kids handouts in class, before the proliferation of the copiers we know today. They were messy and had poor results from a visibility standpoint. Anyone who went to school with these remember the first few minutes of each class being dedicated to filling in the missing parts of the ditto print:
    [​IMG]
    Also notice that when small details like small type is used, the letters tend to get thick and start being non uniform in the openings of each letter or the in the kerning (space between letters).

    When it came to images ditto machines did we now call artifacting:

    [​IMG]

    you'll notice in the solid color parts (like the words in the headline or scrooge's hat) that there's a lot of spots and flecks.

    Now scroll back up to the logo and look at the dolphins body then come back down here.

    Pretty similar, isn't it?

    What we have in the dolphin's body is a mixture of artifacting and tiny detail that has muddied together (like the small type in the first ditto example) by various printing and reproduction processes. My best guess, is that this logo was quickly hand drawn thumbnail, and Joe Robbie being the old school pragmatist he was, just ran with the unpolished thumbnail.

    But no matter how you slice it, the craftsmanship quality of that logo, is very poor under any professional graphic design standard.
     
    MAFishFan and Stitches like this.
  22. Sethdaddy8

    Sethdaddy8 Well-Known Member

    13,006
    6,368
    113
    Dec 6, 2007
    NJ
    Fact.
     
    CaribPhin likes this.
  23. fsualumizzy

    fsualumizzy Supreme Overlord

    111
    46
    0
    Jul 29, 2011
    Boston

    The Dolphin logo is cross-eyed. IMO.
     
  24. Ozzy

    Ozzy Premium Member Luxury Box


    First thing I noticed. I can see it now. Opponents fans invading our stadium just to bring signs of things being cross eyed....
     
  25. steveincolorado

    steveincolorado Spook, Storme & Pebbles

    11,511
    3,069
    113
    Mar 23, 2008
    Colorado
    That's funny right there, don't care who you are......lol
    That logo must have been made by a Jets fan...
     
    Ozzy likes this.
  26. fsualumizzy

    fsualumizzy Supreme Overlord

    111
    46
    0
    Jul 29, 2011
    Boston
    After reading and correct me if I am wrong some of you on the board feel our current logo is a reject of a Disney Logo, well I feel our future logo is a cross-eyed reject of a Sea World Logo. Some on the Board talk about how our historic logos from the past are just poorly designed. Well I think they are at least NFL Football Logos and not Amusement Park Reject Logos! I love our 72 Logo it's classic. Just like the Giants, Packers, and Steelers logo. We are a Classic team, we should stick to our roots and try not to be like the "Marlins!" Wow was that ever a F#$* up and if Ross thinks we are going to buy this crap well I know at least one fan that won't.
     
    steveincolorado and MrClean like this.
  27. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Poor from a craftsmanship standpoint which is not the same thing as poorly designed.
     
  28. apatos19

    apatos19 New Member

    38
    60
    0
    Aug 27, 2012
    You and I agree to disagree amicably then.

    The craftmanship is good, but not great, especially when you consider it was 'hand drawn' in the age before computers. (Which allow us to make everthing perfect. smile) The fine rays in the sun, are particuarly impressive, considering they were hand drawn. Pretty nice rendering, when pen and ink on paper will never be perfectly symetrical.

    The logo reperesents the basic sports logo designs and thinking of that time. (Sorry I'd post examples, but apparently I don't have permission to.) The detailing in the dolphins body makes me smile, having worked with lots of High School logos, where its obvious they struggled with ideas on how to detail with the limitations of basic screenprinting on athletic wear at the time.

    It's also shows how graphic artists are often ruled by current thinking, and locked into designing by the available references of the time they worked. It makes me greatly appreciate the computer, and how it opens up the door to doing anything. It also makes us graphic artists quite arrogantly critical, when we see a logo concept fail to properly capitalize on and represent the product, as in the case of the new dolphin logo. So many great concept logos could have been created, if the FO had just explored them, instead of (as rumored) said here: "Take the stadium logo and make that into something good." Which is what happens frequently with bosses and clients. Once they get an idea into their head, they won't look at anything else, because they're too excited about their concept.

    LOL, I guess in that way the new logo keeps with established Dolphin tradition.
     
    Ozzy, MrClean and Vengeful Odin like this.
  29. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,654
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    You know what I would love, a cool M with a cool dolphin going thru it..
     
  30. Nappy Roots

    Nappy Roots Well-Known Member

    10,191
    4,187
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Bradenton,FL
    Miami Dolphins New Logo Thread

    The more I look at it. The more I like everything except one thing. And I'm disliking that one that more and more. The tail. I think it's clear the tail is to big. It's out of proportion to the pose.
     
  31. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Well, that would make sense if any other logo was that flawed in those same ways from back then, and they simply are not.
    [​IMG][​IMG]

    I do understand what design was like back in the day. I also understand that everything was hand drawn back then and virtually nothing was as sloppy as the dolphins logo.

    Regardless of all that, a high school level of professionalism is extremely poor for a logo for a multi million dollar enterprise.
     
  32. cuchulainn

    cuchulainn Táin Bó Cúailnge Club Member

    23,698
    39,847
    113
    Sep 7, 2012
    Hattiesburg, MS

    Agreed. That damn out of proportion "club" tail, and the also too large fins, kill any aesthetics that it otherwise had going on. Hoping this is NOT the finished product.

    I can grow to accept it, but can't see myself ever actually liking it.

     
  33. apatos19

    apatos19 New Member

    38
    60
    0
    Aug 27, 2012

    The Steelers, Dallas, and Greenbay logo's are classic examples of how the organization made their logos (branding) the perfect representation of their proud history on the field. In other words, the team's winning ways estabished their logos and team colors at perfect symbols that should never be changed.

    Take Tampa Bay's first logo and colors. The colors especially. Perfect for pirates, but the team's losing ways on the field marked them as the symbol of losers. So they changed, and their new looks identify them as winners.

    Denver is particuarly interesting. The old colors and logo actually looked great, but I'm sure fan's identify them with losing four superbowls. But they still looked good, and it was who shock when they changed them. Of course I'm sure while some fans would love the old looks back, they would be probably afraid to jinx their team.

    That's why in my opinion, I'm glad we're changing uni's an logo, to represent a hopeful new and great era. The 97 looks, just remind me of fiteen years of complete and utter ineptitude I'd like to forget. I can understand wanting to change back to the 72 look, but that's in our past, and since the organization changed the looks, I don't want to go back to the old and tarnish that era of winning and class.

    And yes, the new logo does sort of look like something seaworld rejected. Lol
     
  34. apatos19

    apatos19 New Member

    38
    60
    0
    Aug 27, 2012
    I didn't say the designer was good, lol. Just the craftman ship was. The logo is almost perfect considering Robbie was notoriously cheap, and probably would never had considered hiring an expensive and talented designer. The rather bizzare inconsitency of the lettering on the old uniforms. Then there was the 80's change that introduced the five strip design on the pants (Which I approved) and then marred that look with the fill gap outline on the numbers.

    I'm just saying, Robbie didn't care about the image of the team in the same way say--Al Davis did, but was just interested in getting a team on the field as cheap as possible.

    Imagine if he had paid Csonka and Warfield in 74. We might have won another superbowl or two!
     
    RevRick likes this.
  35. MrClean

    MrClean Inglourious Basterd Club Member

    I don't care if the original logo meets the criteria of modern graphic design. I don't think there is any requirement that it must. It's art. Some will like it, for various reasons, and some won't. I personally like the original logo the best. The one worn by the 1972 team that went 17-0. Whether or not it offends the sensibilities of modern day graphic designers means nothing to me. In My Opinion this is the best logo to ever be worn by an NFL football team. Graphic designers can point to any flaws they want. I don't care. I look at it and it's pleasing to my eyes. That is all that matters to me. The suspected new logo with the cross eyed dolphin with the upturned tail is not pleasing to my eyes. It's a matter of personal taste.

    [​IMG]
     
    Ozzy, ToddPhin, JimToss and 2 others like this.
  36. PSG

    PSG Clear Eyes. Full Hearts.

    9,767
    3,436
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    North of the Border
    The only thing that confuses me about the new leaked logo is that Mike Dee has said on multiple occasions that the new logo is only a tweaking of the current logo.
    Maybe I don't understand the meaning of tweak, but IMO, the leak is a hell of alot more than a tweak.
     
    ToddPhin, djphinfan and MrClean like this.
  37. Stitches

    Stitches ThePhin's Biggest Killjoy Luxury Box

    53,148
    31,935
    113
    Nov 23, 2007
    Katy, TX
    How exactly could a dolphin be cross eyed? Its eyes are on the side of its head. Pretty sure it's completely incapable of crossing them.
     
  38. 54Fins

    54Fins "In Gase we trust"

    4,464
    1,515
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    over there
    I agree.... although, it must be our old man mentality. :chuckle:
     
    MrClean likes this.
  39. Alex44

    Alex44 Boshosaurus Rex

    20,810
    8,965
    0
    Jan 7, 2008
    Hollywood, Florida
    You aren't understanding me...I think the issue is just different philosophic belief systems.

    What I am saying is that NOTHING humanity creates can be objective. Ever.
     
  40. Triggercut

    Triggercut Well-Known Member

    717
    388
    63
    Aug 12, 2011
    Did you create that sentence? sounds objective to me.

    I think Mike Dee mentioned that the colors are what are being tweaked.
     

Share This Page