All,
I want to make you aware of an email that was sent to the USOF board of directors and representatives of our Senior, Junior, Foot and Trail teams on March 2:
" To the Board of Directos and representatives of the Senior, Junior, Ski-O and Trial-O teams:
"After two months of work and ongoing input from a key group of individuals, I would like to take the opportunity to share with you the final four options for our new organizatioon logo (along with a corresponding Team USA logo). As you can see from the attached sheet we have taken three distinctly different directions, along with a color change for one of the logos.
"When this assignment was first given to our designer, I had told hm that our members had told me that our old logow as "staid...boring...militaristic...nautical...governmental". While I had asked him to give us one "evolutionary" change, I also asked him to take the gloves off. I am very happy with this work and feel that he has done an excellent job.
"Each logo has its own strength: one series combines the elements of mapping in an abstract form, one focuses on the compass, one focues on the environment and route choice. Each logo will say different things to different peoole. That's good.
"You will also notice that I am recommending changing the "public facing" name of the organization from the "United States Orienteering Federation" to "Orienteering USA". Please note that the registerd organization name would remain USOF. "Orienteering USA" would be a "doing business as..."
"The reasons for the recommended name change are as follows:
1) Our current name (especially when combined with our current logo) sounds very governmental. Many times I have introduced where I work only to the reply of "Oh, you work for the Interior Department...or the Parks Service?" Quite frankly, our organizations name gets in the way of what we are trying to recommend..our sport.
2) I recommend the name change for its brevity and impact. I also recommend that we call ourselves "Orienteering USA" (vs USA Orienteering) because quite simply it puts our sport first and allows us to stand out from other national governing bodies of sport.
"Which logo do I recommend? My recommendatioons are in order from top to bottom. If I had to suggest one change I would use the top logo from the organization mark column (blue and green triangles) and match them with the Team USA mark from the second line (blue and red triangles). The only logo I'm not really enthusiastic about is the bottom set of logos (Tree). I just think that the other options are stronger.
" What do I need from all of you? By this coming, Sunday, March 7th. I would like you to tell me which logo set (organization and team) that you would vote for. Since I have recieved input from a number of individuals already, I am not opening this up to recommmended changes aside from the on that I have voiced in the above paragraph (in referenece to the team logo.)
"Once I have collected all of your comments. Clare and I will take this to the Executive Committee for a final decision. Upon this decision, we will begin incorporationg this logo into our new materials."
Again this is what was sent to the USOF board, team leaders. USOF Boardnet lurkers also received thie message.
Moving forward, I'm sure that someone will post the link to the logo. if you would like a PDF send me an email to glen_schorr@usorienteer.org.
If you would like to post your comments, I ask that you do so by this Sunday. They will be included under an Attackpoint section in the report to the Executive Committee.
In addition, I will only respond to this post if I feel that someone has stated an inaccurate fact. I will not have access to a computer from Saturday morning to Sunday evening so you will not hear from me at that time.
Let the games begin.
Thanks,
Glen
To all,
A point of clarification. The initial document was sent via Boardnet which is an open forum.
Sincerely,
Glen
Thanks, Glen, for this important message to all the clubs that their national image is re-branding from something dated and stodgy to something potentially new and exciting. Big news! We all would like to see orienteering take off nationally as a highly visible sport, and this is a big, bold step toward that. Kudos to Glen for kicking it off. I hope everyone who sees this on Attackpoint will forward his mail so our members can be an early part of this new era of orienteering.
And yet, I also feel a sense of loss...of under-realizing our potential as an organization. While a paid graphic designer is a great idea, we also have a wealth of knowledge and talent in the field, including some with significant branding and graphics experience. Imagine if we had embraced that experience by challenging the clubs to think about what orienteering means to them, maybe even sending ideas or concepts to USOF as a way of seeding the creative process. We might have had great ideas, or they might have all sucked, making the designer look brilliant. Either way, we’d have had energetic engagement between USOF and the clubs in that excitement.
Instead, here we are. We’ve got a set of concepts already created with input from a few people as a proxy for engaging the field’s talents and energy. Pick one and get on board. I’m not going to comment on the specifics of the artwork here because everyone knows that design-by-committee gets inefficient with bad results, but I will urge USOF to reconsider going all the way down the branding path without capturing any of the design experience from the clubs.
Here’s my suggestion. Hold these designs up as the standard, not the final answer. Encourage the clubs to think about those concepts, talk about them, submit anything they think is better, and then share the combined results with the clubs. Make it news. If we fall short, then we realize how good the original work was and we’re excited to get behind it. If we exceed the standard, then we’ve moved ahead and we’re excited about that. Either way, the clubs and USOF are engaged in working together.
What are 1 & 2 showing ??
I recognize none of their symbology and think they're quite awful.
I understand the AOWN "roots" of 4 but it does not represent orienteering to me.
Since these are my only choices, it's 3 by default... and it'll pull double duty during the America's Cup.
I only like the 3rd set.
The first two look like an ugly marriage between a mangled control flag and a compass needle. Since it looks a bit like Minnesota it might be a good logo for MNOC -- but not the USA.
The 4th/last is weak and implies we only O in (deciduous) forests.
I agree the first and second are pathetic (they suggest the astrological male symbol to me as well as what's been mentioned). The third one is blah. But I really like the fourth one: it suggests a lot of things:
- a branching arrow across a map: possible route choices (I would have liked to see this a little more brought out, though)
- a tree (AOWN)
- the compass, but not the in-your-face we-use-all-the-16-cardinal-points of logo 3 (we really need less compass in our image: in Texas azimuths may be involved in orienteering, but not in much of the country)
It's cool. I vote for it.
I would suggest that we continue to come up with a design that a majority agree upon. I bet there are a few graphic designers that exist in the O community. Lets not get stuck with a design that some orienteers dislike.
>>Let's not get stuck with a design that some orienteers dislike
If that's your criteria, I suggest you don't even bother. Trust me, people will complain just to complain. I've designed uniforms for orienteering clubs before, and you will NEVER satisfy everyone. If that's your goal, you'll have a disaster.
Please people: voice your opinion. But remember that some of you will not get exactly what you want. That's the real world.
I for one, think they all look very sharp. Options 1-3 especially. I would be proud to display them,
they suggest the astrological male symbol to me
Woah, I guess this is why it is good to have lots of different sets of eyes on a project. I liked the first two (still do) but hadn't noticed the (now obvious) similarity to the male symbol. Guess that just shows that I have a one track mind - I just saw a control with an arrow...
I saw lips and a straw. Others saw a sailboat going over a mountain, or a bird with an arrow for a head, or a number 7.
I like the 'Orienteering USA' as logo - but among the designs presented, I don't really get the first two, and the last one doesn't really convey sport to me. The third one strikes me as a sharp graphic, but I wonder how it would look with a something other than a compass - perhaps the stylized 'runner with map' graphic like Ken has on the AP masthead - either singly, or perhaps a series like Ken has, maybe in Red,White,Blue.
With regards to #3 - I like it much better with Orienteering USA rather than just USA in the team version - does the team logo necessarily have to be separate from the organization logo?
Esthetically, I like # 3 the best. The only complaint I have is that it over-emphasizes the importance of the compass, but that was true of the old logo as well.
I like the "Orienteering USA" as an alias for USOF. I suggest you acquire the domain name
orienteeringusa.org right away. You don't want a squatter to grab it. I don't know if that's possible for .org, but it certainly happens to .com domains. Companies often get the domain names for their new brands as soon as they decide on the name.
I read the last one as rienteering. The O being a different color throws my eyes off.
All I say is let O people choose what symbol they want. Or if a different design is more appropriate. I agree with Bob.
For various reasons, I don't really like any of these very much. However, I'm also not particularly fond of the old logo, so if one of these is adopted, I won't complain very loudly.
I don't get the symbols for the first 2...I see the arrow but nothing to suggest a flag...is this too abstract? How about a little running guy with a map in hand???
For what it's worth, I showed the logo options to some NON-orienteers (though they know me and have a vague idea of what orienteering is), and two of them commented:
Person 1: Liked #3, because it was clearly related to what orienteering is.
Person 2: Thought #1 would be good if the abstact control/compass was replaced with the 1/4 compass from #3, keeping the text outside and to the right. Person 1 overheard this then agreed that modification would be a good one.
Given that it is a fait accompli that one of the 4 proposals will be chosen without modification, the only rational comment I can make is to throw my support behind #3.
Sometimes I think I understand feet and can differentiate sincere praise from snarky ridicule. This time I'm not sure. To "really" like it? (Regardless of what 'it" is.) That amount of effusiveness strikes me as an indication something is not quite right with him.
Randy is getting game theoretic. Maybe feet is, too.
Woe is us. A veritable Hobson's choice is presented on a silver platter.
Out of these I prefer #3, second choice would be #4. Not fond of the first two at all.
I ended up deciding that of the 4, I would be least unhappy wtih #2. Don't like the "patch" look of #3.
A logo has to appeal and communicate immediately with clarity and simplicity. None of the proposed logos has this quality. This is not about taste or liking something or not. It is about communication which works or doesn't work.
#1 and 2: The triangle cluster looks like a boulder cluster, but not really. It's a pile of triangles, that's all. The V shaped arrow doesn't line up perpendicular to the thin line, why? Looks like someone didn't know how to turn an object in Illustrator. The cluster doesn't say or mean anything.
#3 is old fashioned, or to be nice, it is a retro design. No dynamic. It is hard to print or put on uniforms, since it is boxed in an upright rectangle. It might work as a little patch to be sewn on a uniform. On a letterhead or on the back of a uniform top, it is visually too bulky.
#4 is vague, the tree takes too much effort to be seen. It looks more like a symbol for recycling or the park department than a sports logo.
Thumbs down, all four them. Start over. I don't believe in voting on design. The design has to come from the vision of one mind. But it has to hold up to basic design criteria and none of the submitted logos does that.
Here is the
Swiss logo as an example. It only works with the letter i both in the words "Switzerland" and "orienteering", of course, but it is clever and simple.
The first two are well intentioned but fall well short. They are jumbled. They are broken depictions or depictions of broken objects.
And yet, they are still the best of the lot.
Do I get the sense that aside from not much unanimity on any given choice, there is little enthusiasm even among partisans of a particular design?
I mean if you are rebranding, settling on something because, "OK, it is better than what we got" seems to be a warning sign.
My vote is #4, although I agree with Samantha about reading it as rienteering because of the color, which is an easy fix. I see in it what feet already pointed out.
And for a teammark, the colors lack the red, white, and blue one might expect.
But then, I'll go with my wife's never-ending advice that I shouldn't attempt to do colors!
#3 and the heavy compass symbology is my last choice--I feel like the others above who want to de-emphasize the compass aspect of orienteering. Who leaves their house on a Saturday primarily to go fidget with an obscure and sliding-into-obselence instrument, be it a compass, a sextant, or a slide rule? (Answer: Probably some of us here on AP, but that's beside the point).
#1 and #2 say to me, in order: Minnesota, drinking from a straw, polygons, and lop-sided arrow.
My vote and ramblings registered, I would like to commend Glen for pushing the change. It will help.
The first two ... fall well short.
Just the first two?
Thank you all for your thoughts to date. They are appreciated. I will continue to monitor and will post early Saturday morning if needed. If I do not post tomorrow, remember that I do not have Internet access and will not be able to post until late on Sunday.
Sincerely,
Glen
Yeah, exactly. I think all the comments about the process are off the mark. Asking for community input is a way of getting nothing done. After all, despite all the sound and fury, does anyone really care? I had forgotten what the old USOF logo looked like until I looked it up. I will proceed to forget the new one too ;)
That amount of effusiveness strikes me as an indication something is not quite right with him.
Randy is getting game theoretic. Maybe feet is, too.
I thought the idea was to post opinions about the proposed logos, not about the other posters :)
Anyway, I understand design by committee is a bad idea. I understand that no choice will please everyone. I understand that some people will be disparaging just because that is their nature.
But, you can discount all that by looking for the positive comments. What you want is enthusiasm for one of the proposals that leaps out, not simply polite acceptance at best, or the one that makes someone the "least unhappy".
Read thru this this thread and the one on the US Team list again, and look for comments on the proposal to change the facing name to "Orienteering USA". There, you do have a preponderance of enthusiasm vs polite acceptance/negative comments. That's what you are looking for.
I understand that there is little support for the present logo. I've never cared for it either. But once USOF makes this choice on March 7th, they are living with it for a long time. This appears a negative choice simply to avoid a present sub-optimal situation (the present logo), rather than a choice of enthusiasm and positivity for a new idea.
Thus, I'd urge USOF to challenge the axiom that one of these be selected on March 7th. USOF can do better. You know you are done when you are seeing alot of enthusiasm for one of the choices.
Well, sorry for posting twice. Its not the end of my world if one of these is selected March 7th, but it certainly will be a disappointment.
BTW, what we have here is "Morton's Fork", not "Hobson's Choice" :)
cmorse: ...I wonder how it would look with a something other than a compass - perhaps the stylized 'runner with map' graphic like Ken has on the AP masthead - either singly, or perhaps a series like Ken has, maybe in Red,White,Blue.
I was expecting more.... I find none really appealing
Let's keep the green off of the team mark, unless we are perhaps thinking of a partnership with Djibouti, to take some of their elite marathoners, who probably already run quite well in terrain, given their training location, and put them onto a path to citizenship while they complete their orienteering training. That sort of approach has worked well for USATF.
If I had to choose between the four new ones and the old one.. i would reluctantly choose the old one
This process/rebranding seems remarkably similar to what happened in the UK a few years ago. I don't know who did the re-design and can't remember any consultation about the new British Orienteering logo, but I've never heard any real complaints about it either. Then again, it is far better than the previous bland, regimental version - it manages to convey what the sport is about for one.
I'd say it's about what you want to achieve from the logo, as you can form a very quick impression about something on first glance. The logo can be a very good advertising tool if you design it well.
Say someone sees some promotional material from the national federation, which will feature the logo fairly prominently. How do you want this logo to sell the sport to the general public? What impressions of the sport do you want it to convey?
Do any of the new designs manage to do this?
The
British Orienteering logo appears to be a derivative of the logo for the parent
UK Sport organization. Both are certainly graceful and memorable. But again the BOF logo features that prominent male fertility symbol....which we can't seem to get away from.
So maybe we should just go with that? After all, there IS a certain rugged macho element to our sport. And the
tee shirts are already available.
I also immediately saw the male symbol in the first two designs and am not a fan.
Well perhaps all these male symbols are not accidental? Logo designers sometimes insert a subconscious message into the graphics.
A few years ago I was visiting a retirement/nursing home, and was shown around by the director. As we came through the lobby, he slyly intoned to me with a wink, that the home's rooster logo was purposely chosen to subconsciously appeal to all the older women looking for an "active" place to live out their years.
I tend to like simple, abstract logos in general so am more in favor of the first two. I like it even better though without the "spear" going through the middle - just the two triangles.
It doesn't mean much - I don't see mountains or controls - but then I don't think it needs to. It just needs to be used over and over and over so that eventually it is associated with the name "Orienteering USA". No one is going to "get" our sport from a logo anyway, so I think the simpler the better.
I agree with Sandy wholeheartedly. Think of all the simple logos that sy nothing about the product - Apple's apple, the Nike swoosh, the Adidas stripes...
I like the 3rd one. I don't like the others. I particularly don't see anything distinctly "orienteering" in the first two graphics, but I guess if the word "orienteering" is always attached then that's not necessary. But I feel like the graphic is more or less superfluous. The 4th one looks too much like powerpoint clipart.
I agree with Cristina but find the first two aesthetically dissonant. But, I find Prokofiev dissonant, too, so what do I know? (Although he's much better to my ears than Scriabin.)
For those who like the third one, do you think it would look good in a variety of places? For instance, on:
-a hat
-a website
-a letterhead
-a uniform sleeve
-the back of a t-shirt
-sexy briefs
?
I ask because I don't like it at all (it looks like a government logo or an old school sew-on patch, and it features a compass too prominently, and the red needle is phallic) but it may end up being the pick. Would you really want to see it all over the place?
Or maybe it suffices to say that the first two are ugly?
Maybe the hotness of orienteers everywhere will counterbalance.
Or maybe we need an ugly logo to make people think that we're not so bad.
Clearly, our goal is to do this rebranding once, the best we can, and build on it for a long time. At least general enthusiasm is critical. If I were to sum up the positive comments in this discussion, they range from occasional enthusiasm for one concept to resigned acceptance of one or another with a general feeling of "meh...". It's a clear red flag.
We've got important timelines to make, but losing momentum with an entire re-rebranding later is far more costly than a second round of concepts. Through the years, I've personally been on both ends of creative projects where the project managers occasionally say, "Hmm. What else have you got?" Invariably, we've been glad we took another look because it took us from "meh" to "wow!"
I urge USOF to embrace the clubs and give them that chance. An extra three weeks spent now, challenging ourselves to respond to these concepts not with criticism but with something better, can make a world of difference in overall enthusiasm and long-term stability for the new brand.
(Although he's much better to my ears than Scriabin.)
Well, yeah. Or Webern.
Having thought about it more, the only one that I find has any aesthetic appeal is the fourth one, and I think that has fatal design flaws (e.g. the "RIENTEERING" problem, and the fact that the tree looks kind of like planaria slithering onto a slab of liver if you don't know the context). Reworking that one might result in something good, or maybe tossing these and coming up with a design that actually has a runner in it. My sense is that something will get picked this weekend, and I'll just shrug.
I don't like any of them - they look amateurish. My ideal logo would be something with clean, simple lines.
a hat
sure
a website
yes
a letterhead
yes
a uniform sleeve
sure
the back of a t-shirt
definitely
sexy briefs
hey, you're the one who called it phallic.
It wouldn't look so bad on sexy briefs.
Phallic isn't too much of a problem. The male symbol might be.
i second the opinion of Piutepro, as stated above.
my first reaction, upon seeing the logos, was "flat" and "not exciting"
Seems like Big guys go for
extreme simplicity
Some benchmarking:
Swimming (great logo)
Hockey (exciting and US)
Track
Ping Pong (action)
Bowling
Equestrian
Cycling (If only it were so easy to represent orienteering)
Maybe something like this?
None of the proposed logos grab me. I did some doodling and here is my favorite. It is meant to be a reentrant. You can orienteering without a compass (most of the logos I have seen have a compass needle), but you can't do it without a map.
I'm reasonably comfortable with any of the first three and actively dislike the 4th.
My wife (not an orienteer) likes the 3rd patch on the left - small, compact, nice design. Symbol on the top 2 of each side doesn't mean anything to her. Top two on left clearer but too long, Tree one not so hot... "why would there be a tree in the middle of a compass?..."
I think JeffW is a genius. The professional designer should rework these lines into something a bit cleaner-looking (less Bezier points), and end at that. He can keep the original font.
Jeffw, cool concept! It was immediately apparent to me that the red lines represent a reentrant (or maybe a spur) -- whereas my reaction to USOF proposals #1 and #2 is "huh???"
Several of you have noted that the
map is the most important element of orienteering (more so than the compass), and jeffw's design accounts for that in a clean and simple way. And, even if it's cliché, I think the logo for a US organization should definitely be red, white and blue (not green).
My only critique of jeffw's concept would be that a non-orienteer might mistake the chevron-shaped red lines for military stripes. So, maybe a different map symbol would be better (like a hill, maybe, which if it's roughly circular could also be an abstract compass-like thing?). But, even as-is, jeffw's idea is miles better than any of the "official" proposals. I like
bubo's suggestion, too.
I agree wholeheartedly with
randy's comments above. I like the "Orienteering USA" name, but the official logo candidates are amateurish and unimpressive. #3 is the best of the four, but I understand others' criticism that it looks too nautical. I will steal someone else's log comments to say that #4 looks like something for a girl scout camp -- as well as reading "rienteering".
Despite not being American, I've been following this thread to see what people come up with. None of the original 4 strike me as very inspired or inspiring. Drew's concepts are certainly an improvement but are still nothing special - not that he had much to work with of course. I do however love where jeffw is going with his logo. It's simple, recognizable and memborable. It incorporates the omnipresent American theme of your flag as well as the most important orienteering concept - the map - in a simple way. My one criticisme is that unless you're a competent orienteer the contour aspect of the logo will be completely missed. I'm not sure if there's a way to make that more obvious or not.
+1 on Jeffw's concept - nice work....
Riffing on jeffw's idea... If you right-justify the "USA" you can fill the whitespace beneath "Orienteering" with contour lines to make a night compact rectangle. Someone like kupackman can pick an appropriate font.
After considering all the comments so far (and originally deciding #4 was going to be "good enough") I want to wholeheartedly support Jeff's logo idea or some close variation thereof - I like the simplicity of the shape.
Someone I showed it to at first saw runners in the red/white stripes. I think a mirror image (reentrant poining upper left rather than upper right) would have these phantom runners heading toward the logo (rather than away). The red/white stripes also mimic the American flag. I don't think the elongated hill works as well as the wavy lines.
If forced to choose one of the first 4 offered, I like #4 the best with the caveat that the O needs to match the rest of the lettering (so we don't have to go 'rienteering'). I'd feel better if the tree in the O (green field) were made to look more like a map instead (i.e., add some contours inside the O). The Team logo's 'USA' could be blue 'U' and red/white stripe 'SA'.
Orienteering in practically every discipline is a map sport with route choice being the key (except for the Trail variety, which is more of a map puzzle) and the map and route choice should be emphasized. I think logo 4 at least provides a hint at route choice with the 3-pronged tree branches.
bbrooke's second one gets my vote for the right concept. And it's an enthusiastic vote. I don't care if non-orienteers don't get that they're looking at contour lines. I think it's excellent.
add a few stars to either of the last two and I like it.
Add a star or three to the stripes theme bbrooke has
Stars figure prominently in many of the other sports federations logos.
bbrooke's second one is awesome. One thing I'd like to see in any design is the font slanted slightly more so it looks fast. I don't like adding stars; less clutter is nice. Good job.
I like Bbrooke's second on as well. If we want a star in it why don't we use the USA that we currently have on the team Uniforms and Jackets where the A's top cut out is a star. I have to say it felt pretty cool watching the Olympics and seeing that they had the same USA as we did. They totally stole it from us :p But honestly I felt closer to being maybe considered a top USA athlete since a few people have actually commented since on how my uniform looks like the Olympians.
But well done Bbrooke!
I'd feel more comfortable referring to it as JEFFW's design, since all I did was re-arrange his original idea a little bit. :-)
Ditto what Sandy said (again). Nice ideas, Jeff and Brooke!
That's exactly why Brooke deserves her own office at work. Just look at what Jeff and Brooke have come up with! Sooooooo much better than those other designs already--they're not even in the same ballpark. Just imagine what Brooke could accomplish if she had her old office back! (I don't know anything about Jeff's office situation, so it's tough to offer up any comments about that.)
Yep, now I see something that I like (Brooke's wavy line treatment of Jeff's idea). Somebody print this up as a banner and show up at the BOD meeting.
Here are my variations on the theme:
Once the idea formed in my head I couldn't resist drawing it :) You know you're idea is good when it causes a Canadian to create an American logo. Way to go jeffw!
Jeff T we call that act of logo drawing treason.
haha, my theory is that if it helps grow orienteering in North America then it's totally worth it
I think the designs posted by drewi deserve some consideration....I don't know how to post a link but it is posted by Alison Campbell somewhere in the middle of this.
I was asked by someone who shall remain unknown to post this further collaborative iteration.
This is getting somewhere.
Much better than any of the original 4 proposed designs. There is a feeling of movement in these designs which none of the other 4 had. I just hope the board does not feel like they are limited to those 4 designs and seriously consider the last few iterations of jeffw, brooke and anonymous.
Tundra/Desert -- NICE!!!
Would it work with "orienteering" on the top, to match the name change Glen proposed? ("Orienteering USA" vs. "USA Orienteering")
I was liking bbrooke #2, but also thinking that it it would be nice to be able to work in a control flag. T/D's did that and more!
Question: Should we take a less unique name to get an awesome logo?
One possible tweak (besides the top/bottom flip) to consider:
Square off the right end of the contours to make the control flag more obvious.
I second bbrooke. I think the design posted by Tundra/Desert captures the essential elements of the sport, while keeping the simplicity of some of the earlier proposals.
I, too, like the movement in the brooke/tundra/desert designs. This is what we want to communicate about our sport: speed and excitement.
It's a fun side-effect that insiders can see contours in the design.
I also like bubo's concept!
I, too, was meh about the initial four designs.
I am generally against incorporation of compass elements into our logo, for the reasons stated by others (it reinforces misconceptions, it's stodgy/static/boring). However, the Swiss managed to depict a compass needle in a playful, non-static way that works.
I'm really pleasantly surprised. I would generally not expect this kind of collaborative brainstorming to work, and the swell of support for this RWB contour thing is significant.
The someone has been hard at work.
My favorite part of the design Vlad posted is the use of "USA Orienteering" instead of "Orienteering USA." Much more professional sounding. This was explicitly a non-starter in the first post of this thread. To me, "Orienteering USA" implies an activity, while "USA Orienteering" implies an organization. I think this is especially true when using this moniker for the team.
As examples I'll point to some other NGOs near and dear to our hearts (Sorry Glenn :)
US Lacrosse vs Lacrosse USA
US Rowing vs Rowing USA
USA Cycling vs Cycling USA
As Glenn pointed out, most of the other NGOs put the USA first and I like it better that way myself.
Surfin' USA
Truckin' USA
Orienteering USA
Putting orienteering first might make us stand out relative to the others, but I think it sounds kindof amateurish.
US Orienteering?
Sticking with the Lacrosse example, they also have a couple of nice logos using the most recognizable apparatus of the sport - The Crosse:
I think using a compass or an arrow in our logo is a fine idea. Stars and stripes are good too. I'm afraid I don't really like the proposed logos. If i had to pick the lesser of the 4 evils, I'd pick the boxy #3, but I agree that its too boxy.
@Tundra/Desert's last post: Nice!! I wouldn't try to stuff in any more symbols. In fact, I think I like it better without the o-flag. With or without, it would look cool on a t-shirt!
The other way around, it would look like:
OK, loving the last versions T/D posted. Awesome!
IMO, a subtle, but important, detail of the T/D designs is that one of the lines is thicker, i.e. an index contour. This is what makes them uniquely contours, and not just lines.
i thought they were a play between contours and the stripes from the stars and stripes...
I really like this last few logos with the contours. Much better. I don't know why there always seems to be a compass in logos for orienteering, contours make much more sense. Nice work.
I too like the concepts presented in the recent designs. I particularly like the sloped font example JJ used as it implies motion - I think someone farther back suggested that. I also thought the contours in J-J's design seemed to lack 'something' relative to Tundra's version and I think as GuyO pointed out it may be the slightly thicker index contour. On JJ's version perhaps flipping (horiz) the orange triangle to put the white space on the contour side and visually square up the lower right corner. The 'motion' of the text and contours also leads in to the control - kind of a subtle inference to the process of the sport that the general public may not 'get' but certainly has a nice feel to it. Prefer the Orienteering USA over USA Orienteering.
And it would seem (from this arguably small sample size) that there is more consensus behind something along these lines than for any of the original designs put forth. Maybe getting those marginal designs out there was just what was needed to get a few creative folks inspired to come up with the present ideas.
To all,
Thanks to all for your continued posts. I encourage you to continue the debate but want to remind you that I will be formulating my recommendation and process moving forward to the Executive Committee on Sunday night (most likely around 8 pm Eastern time). So if you have been sitting on the sidelines, now is your chance to get in the game. However, with this group I don't think that this will be an issue.
Also, starting at around 8:00 am this morning (Saturday), I will not have Internet access until late Sunday afternoon. So I will not be ackknowledging you posts.
One final comment. Some in this and other groups keep screaming about male phalic symbols. I can tell you that is was never designed, nor discussed, nor considered. It isn't there folks...unless your mind wants it to be. In that case the current USOF Compass Rose has the same issue x 8. Hmmm...
Keep talking. It is good for the soul.
See you tomorrow. I'm outta here.
Glen
A little better, trying to grab the elements that made T/D's version look more dynamic, but keeping the slicker-looking text. This really needs a good graphic designer to take it the next step and make it look professional. I like it better than the Proposed Four, but it's not very impressive compared to the Lacrosse logo.
And a try at a team mark. Putting the red in front of the blue doesn't work, changing the text to outline results in confusing lines going every which way, but the contours are much too hidden with this version, I think. Again, needs a graphic designer at this point.
For what it's worth, I completely agree with Eddie's comment above regarding the professional governing organization of 'USA Orienteering' vs the national recreational pastime of 'Orienteering USA'. When reading Glen's first post, I couldn't get past this odd point and the backward reasoning. I thought we wanted to try to bring ourselves up and be recognized as a more mainstream, professional governing body!!??
Anyway, as for the original 4 designs.. they are terrible! I really hope none of them get approved.
The latest designs are on a fantastic track other than I would love to see it read USA (or just US, but i do actually like the star in the A) Orienteering and most definitely WITHOUT the control flag. I think the symbol is cheesy. It complicates the simplicity of the logo and doesn't add anything, for me at least. and it's not the right color... leave it off! Love the rest though.. great ideas!
I'm loving the latest designs!!! I like jj's slanted text and who ever first added the star into the A thank you! I also actually like the control in the logo I feel I more easily identify it with orienteering that way and less like a knock off of the Adidas stripes. Or at least if I'm not looking at it in from my orienteering eyes. A few friends have also agreed that since they know me and orienteering they understood It a bit better with the control.
As for the name I'm not sure which way I like it better. in someways if we have the orienteering first then that is the first thing people read which i think is good. If we have the USA first we do sound more like the other national sports organizations. I think we should keep the A in the USA though because in other countries that is how was are recognized and that is the true abbreviation.
moving around some elements of JJ's creation:
separating the 'flag' from the contours
boxing out the flag
following Erin's suggestions:
with flag
just tossing 'em out there....
I AGREE WITH EDDIE'S LOGIC OF USING USA FIRST AS IT IMPLIES AN ORGANIZATION. . .AND THE LOGO LOOKS BETTER WITH USA ON TOP. IT'S MORE "GROUNDED" WITH THE LARGER WORD ON THE BOTTOM. I WOULD ALSO SUGGEST TRYING OUT THE USE OF UPPER AND LOWER CASE LETTERS FOR "Orienteering" as the eye can read u/lc much more quickly than all caps. The all caps is strong though, so can the incognito graphic designer give it a whirl?
In the first Tundra/Desert design, I love the motion of the lines.
The O marker should be more obvious though, but how do you do that without making the lines static? Could the lines begin before the "A" in USA to give even more motion and then end in alignment to form the left side of the O marker? It needs to read well when photocopied in B&W so this could be confusing, but it just might work.
I love the double reference to both contour lines and the American flag. Very strong logo.
those are all better than the first ones
Love the lower one of these. Simple, says it all. No need for extra baggage: triangles and O-bags. I hope these get consideration as the original designs lack that essential spark.
If anybody wants to fiddle around with this, by the way, I've been using 0CAD, and if you drop me an email, I can send you the files to play with.
Can I just point out that the flag is flipped from the way it should be in these... I don't have Photoshop or anything on this computer or I would try out my idea so I'll just post it in writing here. (annoying I know sorry)
Idea: Can we flip the red in the control around and then why don't we extend the top contour line so that it hits the top point of the red and then the other two straighten off like the do so that the contour lines make the other side of the flag.
I like the flag idea but we may want to be consistent with every other orienteering logo so we don't get a million "Your flag is the wrong way around"
Incorporating some of the suggestions:
At a minimum, I think there may be a bumper sticker here...
(What do you mean by "backwards"? The star is on the left, the stripes on the right...)
(Oh, wait, you mean the control flag. At least 1/3 of the controls look that way... :-) )
My 2 cents: I like either USA Orienteering or Orienteering USA as a name, with a slight preference to USA Orienteering.
I was also uninspired by the original four potential logos. I think just about any of the ones proposed in this thread would be improvements, and I really like the ones that T/D put forth (with my preference being the first of the three designs he put in his March 6 post).
I liked the contours flowing through the entire logo as opposed to the isolated ones. and I don't like the contours ending with the half O flag - looks like an arrow...
Like this?
{edit} oops, I see JJ beat me to that edit - slightly different.
I like the lower case Orienteering too... it makes the USA portion stronger.
If it's "USA Orienteering", does that mean that when it's condensed further, it becomes "USAO"?
Glenn said: I will be formulating my recommendation and process moving forward to the Executive Committee on Sunday night (most likely around 8 pm Eastern time). So if you have been sitting on the sidelines, now is your chance to get in the game. However, with this group I don't think that this will be an issue.
I'm not on Board-net or any of the other O-forums but am curious if this level of discussion re: logos is taking place elsewhere. Given Glenn's imposed timeframe, has anyone cross posted any of these discussions/samples elsewhere to reach a broader audience over the next 36 hours?
JJ:s latest contribution - with the lower case letters - looks like one I was fiddling around with (it´s not as good so I won´t post it).
I like that one with one minor suggestion for improvement: Start the three stripes with the middle one lined up with the star - then you get an even better feeling of the 'stars and stripes' for the flag.
Can someone put together all of the suggested logos (final form) in one place? Would make it easier to compare...and, as scary as it may sound, send it out to all of the groups i.e. bodnet, AP, clubnet?
I thought the one by jteusch had a lot of possibilities.
I like the direction of the contour logos, but they definitely need the work of a designer who can de-eightiesfy them.
I think the elegance of the USOF Executive Director's approach to this borders on the brilliant.
Stodgy current logo. Options (tweak the current logo, redesign by committee, select by fiat, etc)--unappealing all.
Throw out some mediocre designs by a graphics "professional," impose a looming deadline, claim no ability to redesign or modify, and go off the net. The offered designs touch on some of the themes of your re-branding and vision, but not too well.
The result: lots of debate about the themes and what should or shouldn't be shown, concern of appealing to orienteers or non-orienteers, and a collectively great design that the graphics pro can do something with.
Word Court time: Surely there is a word for harnessing the human proclivity to criticize for a collectively productive result.
If there are still doubters about having a professional staff for USOF, every penny of year-one has been earned, in this exchange only. The AP community has been effectively "played" to come up with something they care passionately about, but for which none or few would have done anything about (by providing input, serving on a logo committee, or even thinking more than superficially about in the first place), and all this in mere days.
I'm left shaking my head. Lead on Glen!
Crisitna has an uncanny ability to cut to the point.
I like the recent suggestions. They show that an evolutionary process can work without a designed by committee look. However, I worry that we are focusing on these successes and ignoring some of my key issues.
1. Does the logo need to represent some aspect of the sport to the non-orienteer? I don't think the compass is the most misunderstood aspect of the sport. I think the general public thinks of orienteering as a treasure hunt based on graphic riddles, and the best courses hide the controls. So, to some extent we are going from clearly an abstract object, to an inside joke.
2. Are we willing to accept more detail to transmit a more complicated message? I think orienteers understand the concept of simplification so there must be limits on detail, but with a less educated public, maybe we should be willing to get close to the detail in the British logo.
3. Should the logo focus on the word "orienteering" or focus on a feature of the sport? I might argue for small. However, I see a consensus for emphasizing the word "orienteering". This makes it much more difficult to bring out a feature of the sport. It also leads to a horizontal logo.
4. Assuming the map is the most important aspect of orienteering, how can it be worked into the logo? I think Orienteering is the sport that owns the outline of the USA and would love to see that, but the rectangle in the Attackpoint logo might also work. I would prefer the ant hill, rotated 120 degrees, because if those contours were misinterpreted, people might think of them as the letter "O".
5. The art is most important and trumps the above ideas, otherwise you will get something that appeals to this old fart. I put together the first two clip art pictures I found, but I think it would take an incredible improvement to make the logo acceptable.
http://picasaweb.google.com/2009pct/Pct2009hikers#...
the T/D designs
They did not originate in the Gusiatnikov/Schreibstein household. Someone sent them to me who would rather remain unknown.
Inspiration can come from the darndest places it seems.
Note, that this is also in the form XYZ USA. Obviously, we're on to something.
"RECO USA Heaters and Tanks for Commercial and Industrial Applications" Has a nice ring to it, no?
What T/D means is they came from someone from another country (just my guess)
"RECO USA Heaters and Tanks for Commercial and Industrial Applications"
And here I was about to give you credit for a recreational orienteering logo.
It's also possible to still include a compass rose in a more subtle way, without it being the focus of the logo, e.g.:
The last jj contribution has my vote.
I keeps the flag and has it oriented properly -- at least in terms of fitting with the contours; no need to box it. On the lc vs UC, I could go either way.
I like the tapered and variably spaced contours in 20of70's first version above - very clean look, doesn't need the flag at all
Maybe some of you will be inspired to mess with this. The contours are from the Dutchman Flat map, because I happen to have the data for it. The eagle is lifted off the web, so it would need to be redrawn.
And the tweaks go on...
20 of 70's design: Bring back the index contour; keep the control.
I like the ideas from J-J and 20_of_70.
I think the control flag is superfluous -- it looks like an afterthought. Less is more.
I agree with guy like 20 of 70's design but it needs the index contour and the control.
Is this the same font that ONA used to have? It seems pretty familiar, with a familiar slant.
Not to harp on this, but index contours and controls are completely esoteric. They have no meaning to people not well versed in orienteering. Not that there is anything wong with that...and if we are happy with the members of our secret club.
I'm with the group that doesn't like the control and doesn't like the index contour. In addition to being contour lines they just evoke speed which is great.
I actually really like the one with the shadows.
I'm loving these new ideas. Simple. Clean.
A logo does not necessarily need to visually show what it's "advertising". Think of the Target store logo. It's either a target or it's just red circles. It does not really matter. Everyone knows it's for the store.
Someone already mentioned Nike. What's that logo show that has anything to do with shoes? Nothing. (here's the background of that logo -
http://www.dinesh.com/history_of_logos/miscellaneo...)
A logo does not necessarily have to hit the viewer over the head; it just has to be burned into everyone's brain; it has to be everywhere. So, we need something sharp that can be on t-shirts, uniforms, hats, signs, etc. And, with what I've seen here, I think we're getting closer!
I think it looks too much just like stars and stripes without the control. So if we aren't going to have a control (which i honestly think we really should keep it in the design) we have to at least have the index contour so that it looks a bit less like just stripes. And I'm totally ok with only orienteers understanding what it is and the index contour. Sometimes it is the little hidden things like that when someone from the outside learns about they feel a bit more included. Like the Outward bound blue background White box. I had no idea what it was before and then went to outward bound and I now know and it makes me feel a bit more like I'm part of Outward bound still even though I haven't done anything with the organization for almost 2 years.
I agree with Acampbell about keeping the control. It's subtle enough that I don't see anything "offensive" about it, but it adds a bit of interest without introducing clutter.
That said, I still like this logo even w/o the control better than other alternatives.
I'm not sure Acampbell's argument is the one that we should be pushing for... that's making it sound like a secret club that only the ones that join or compete, no no, PARTICIPATE, know what the heck the logo means. The point is not to alienate 'outsiders', but to provide a catchy logo that looks cool, attractive, and that we'll be proud to wear around town. People are still going to ask, what is orienteering? regardless of whether there's a awkward triangle there or not. and yes, it's awkward!
Also, the stars and stripes are the point, whether one of the stripes is a slightly different thickness is a non-issue for me. I DO, however, like the lowercase for 'orienteering' and the shadowing effect 20of70 created. (And keep it as USA Orienteering, which, yes, would abbreviate to USAO, or USAo? but is that any better/worse than OUSA?)
Couldn't we abbreviate it O-USA?
Don't need the triangle (control flag).
I also love the shadowing effect, and the darker blue. Perhaps the shadowing could be applied to the text as well.
I kinda liked JJ's subtle compass in the O... not wedded to it, but I think it balances the star in USA a bit to have a letter in Orienteering that has some kind of "serif"
The shadowing effect looks great in a web context, but will it translate to other uses of the logo - clothing, hats etc? Just something to think about.
As for team logo - is there really a need to abbreviate it? Couldn't the same logo be used for both purposes - particularly a simplified, streamlined one?
The "secret club" comments miss the point. The logo has to represent orienteering AND be appealing to a target market. Having one line thicker than the others will not necessarily detract from the aesthetics. Nor will a simple unboxed control flag.
How would including them alienate anybody??
Regarding the inclusion of the marker: Don't most of us recognize the Scuba Diving marker (which is similar to ours) ? I have always likened our orange/red triangle to the simplicity of the scuba marker--they have theirs, we have ours. Nothing says "orienteering" like the O marker. I suspect that in European countries where O has more recognition as a sport, that the marker says "orienteering" to the public.
The suggested logos, especially the 20 of 70 designs, look fabulous, but like Allison said, once you associate the marker with the sport, you know it's O, so I'd like to see that carried though in whatever design we end up with. It does look rather static in an otherwise dynamic design . .could the marker be on a slant, too?
For those who are wondering, the Executive Committee (not the full Board) will be voting on the logo design this coming week. At least three members of the Executive Committee are actively monitoring this thread.
Personally, I'm very impressed with the suggestions that have come forth.
Thank you Mary Jo for more clearly stating what I was trying to say. I think the Flag needs to be in the logo because when people see us running around in the woods they notice two things the map in our hands and the weird flags they see. The marker is a clear logo of our sport. I feel like it is the same thing as biking for the cyclers, a soccer ball, or a volleyball. People know what game they are playing by their equipment. Controls are key, just as key as a map to our sport i think.
How about this for a variation:
ONA's comments about logos are worth heeding. Logos need not be literal depictions of anything to do with the sport or brand.
While brands and logos are very different things, I urge you all to take a look
here, or at other similar lists of the world's most valuable brands.
Look at all of these well-known logos. Which ones have anything to do with the product they are selling? Not many.
I really hope that members of our secret club put more thought into powerful, attractive, and memorable imagery rather than worrying about the most clever ways to convey compasses, controls, maps, and more simultaneously.
Those blue and green trapezoids are looking so much better to me now. Seriously.
At least RECO USA didn't see the need to put a picture of their boilers in the logo.
Yes, orienteers did not invent Beisier curves gone amuck.
Windows sic
i think your point is valid Clem however you are talking about selling a product in which someone could easily see a photo or go to a store or website. We are trying to get people to join our sport though. I would say if you look at any other sport most of them have some part of their sport in the logo to differentiate is from any other USA (insert sport here) logo. I just don't want to see us do a whole rebranding and still not have people connect the dots to orienteering, especially if we cut out the Orienteering in the team logo.
Excellent work, I'm encouraged that there is now hope for a good logo.
I like JJ's latest merged with 20_of_70's last design (shadowed contours).
Too bad the contour eagle didn't get floated earlier, I really like that.
We should be careful not to conflate our problems. Orienteering is not a high visibility sport and USOF is not a high visibility organization. I don't think there are enough people that have any conception of what orienteering is (and of those, fewer that have an accurate conception) that it matters one bit whether we try to exploit their familiarity with maps, controls, etc.
We are starting with something of a blank slate, and that provides a wonderful opportunity and more power than we realize. Don't squander it.
You have some good points Clem but I would be careful not to get ahead of yourself here. While what has so far been proposed looks very good, the current favorite design is far from original. Even 10, 20 or more years down the road when most North Americans will hopefully know what orienteering is no will look at that logo and immediately say "oh, that's the national orienteering logo" (short of the word orienteering being in the logo of course. The logo being proposed is far too similar to practically every other American logo to set itself apart in that way. Without something distinctive like a control, the only thing that it really says is "we're American". If you're trying to brand the sport and not just the nationality you need something unique in the logo.
Posting from a borrowed laptop, I'll just add an agreement of ho-hum about the original logos. Loving the tunrda / jj et al designs with contours, control, and star in the A. They much more clearly (and still with a simple elegance) reflect our sport than any of the agency suggested designs. Glen's ultimatum has certainly inspired some great creativity and I sure hope that the Exec Comm will consider these alternatives, and perhaps allow a few others to emerge before settling on a final design.
Well, I don't like any of the proposed designs: the abstract male/triangle symbol has not meaning for me; the "O" disconnected from "rienteering" is nonsense. Of all the logos I've seen on the discussion board I like the British logo the best. It has style and includes the significant symbols of orienteering: a stylish runner; a control bag; a compass. All that's needed is "Orienteering USA". It would obviously have to be redesigned a bit to avoid copyright infringement.
20 of 70 - How about putting a little flag in the reentrant? ...or on the spur?
Or a surf board and call it what it looks like - a wave.
The AP suggested logos are so much of an improvement on the original proposals. Wonderful to see how Attackpoint dynamics solved this problem. Where but on AP could you get such creative and skilled input from throughout the world in 2 days?
I'm afraid that USAO is a little too close to USO and people would be confused. That's really the main reason that I support "Orienteering USA." I also like the AP proposal better with the control representation than without. I do think it's nice for the logo to include some basic elements that are sport related. Orienteering is something that constantly needs to be explained, so I imagine that people who see the new logo on stuff will ask about it. I'd prefer that it has a story to go with it that helps give them a picture of the sport.
20_of_70's latest designs are looking very elegant! Unfortunately, they are also looking less and less like contours than brooke's original sketch.
Not to complicate things. But is there any consideration of keeping the current graphic around for a much more limited role as USOF seal? I've always thought it looks more like a seal than a logo. It would make a decent watermark for official certificates or awards.
It is common among some organizations. The US Army and Air Force come to mind. Also universities, which generally have a seal, a logo, and probably a couple extra logos.
Of course, these institutions carry multiple images out of necessity. The demands range from youth advertising to the highly ceremonial. It's not necessary for a much simpler organization like USOF. Since carrying a single image has advantages in terms of brand development, I could totally see why you might avoid that approach.
Well I like 20_of_70's latest shadow logos, particularly the second. The "swoosh" to me appears to be a spur, reentrant and hillside on a 3-dimensional relief map...which is what you get if you make a topo map teaching aid, by carving thick cardboard along contour lines and then stacking the slices.
I might even like to see a
more prominent swoosh, like the first, which extends down over part of the word "orienteering" to join or integrate the entire logo more.
Alternatively the shadowed swoosh begins to look like a bird's wing and, as mentioned before, suggests lightness and flight...like the wings on the feet of the messenger god Hermes or
Mercury. A tie-in to Greek mythology couldn't hurt if we ever make a bid for the Olympics.
I really like the shadow logo too - very nice. The red lines still say contours to me and also evoke motion and the stripes in the US flag. I agree the control doesn't belong. Keep it simple.
20_of_70's designs are skillful. Of these, I prefer the third.
The italicized A with the star is subtly evocative of a compass. Can it be made even more so?
third design by 20of70 seems to be the best on this thread.
Dan - how about posting a revision of the third one in the most recent posting with the word orienteering lower case with a capital O? I think that would be a positive change. Otherwise very sharp indeed.
I agree with other comments that the 3rd logo in the last 20_of_70 entry is the best I've seen. Nice job.
If it is subtly evocative of a compass, and I didn't notice, can we please leave it like that?
If you leave nothing to the imagination... well, you know.
Glen's initial post on this thread:
"After two months of work and ongoing input from a key group of individuals, I would like to take the opportunity to share with you the final four options for our new organizatioon logo..."
Well all this has taken A/Pers only 3 days. And all for free. Congratulations everyone!
Glen may wish to consider expanding his "key group" with a few names from this thread. There's some amazing synergy and collaboration beginning to develop on A/P. Should we incorporate as a consulting firm, elect a board, and seek venture capital...?
Good observation, Chitownclark. Keep in mind also that we have other amazing graphics expertise in the clubs that has not yet been engaged on this issue on Attackpoint. Not out of apathy, but out of knowledge that alternative concepts from the field haven't yet become a recognized part of the formal design approval process.
Attackpoint has been a phenomenal creative brainstorming asset so far, but let's not assume that it's all-inclusive yet.
To all,
Thanks for your thoughts to date. It is appreciated. A few remarks:
1) I have not pursued Reco USA for sponsorship...yet.
2) Re: cmpllj's comments. You give me too much credit (I think). Just trying to move the ball forward.
3) I live for 200 comment threads.
Sincerely,
Glen
I really like the "contours as stripes" concept, as do many others, and it's good that the group has collaborated to move it away from the Reco USA logo. But we're in a bit of a gray zone here and need USOF process clarity.
Attackpoint is a great sounding board for orienteers, but it's still just a small subset of our orienteering community. I personally know of at least one more club-generated logo concept that hasn’t even appeared up here. Is the window for submissions closed? Was there ever an open window for concept submissions (vs. just comments)? Is three days enough time to get all interested and qualified parties to submit thoughtful logo designs? Lots of unspoken questions...
This could explain the sudden all-day silence of this thread; we're all listening.
My favorite logo is the one posted by 20 of 70 that shows the top contour forming the top of the flag symbol. I like including the flag symbol and it's the only one where the flag is integrated well with the rest of the logo. Of course that one would seem to require the name USA Orienteering. I'm pretty neutral about the name order. I agree with most that just about all of the new designs are better than the original 4 proposed ones.
To be fair, as long as this thread is (184 comments), it has only yielded 4 design
concepts, only one of which has gotten any traction (flag stripes as contours). (The other 3 being the little dipper, the running man, and the contour eagle).
It's only been 4 days since this topic sprouted, so if USOF is taking submissions, maybe we can get other design
concepts on the table. But I don't really know what the plan is. One of the original four? The Attackpoint favorite? Keep looking?
Designing by committee rarely works, so I would suggest getting a select individual or small team designers who "get it", work on some of the proposed design concepts, and then try out those designs to a small focus group of people who "get it", with a range of backgrounds (elite orienteers, recreational orienteers, non-orienteers, etc).
One of my
favorite blogs specifically deals with logo design, and the author just published a book, with one of the
most important chapters available to view free online.
I really like the designs posted by 20_of_70 as well-- there seems to be a consensus among AP'ers on that. But from what I've inferred, USOF will be picking from one of the original four designs shown which are a bit lackluster in comparison. I certainly hope that the collective brainstorming of the peoples of Attackpoint wasn't simply for naught.
So what is the verdict? Will USOF consider all of the designs proposed on attackpoint as many of us (from what I gather) assume they will; or will they be voting on only their set of 4 manufactured alternatives to the current logo?
I agree with kupackman's suggested course of action, but I was pretty sure that script was what got us to where we are now (or at least where we were prior to this thread.)
We followed the process, it produced a set of outcomes, but those outcomes didn't fly with the AP crowd and some others.
At least that was what I inferred from Glen's post kicking off the thread.
The course of action from here is in the hands of the Executive Committee. We will be discussing and deciding this week. Please be patient while we consider this very important issue.
when you meet are you going to decide from the 4 options if the board picks to just stick with them? Or do we have a chance to state our opinions on those 4 again? as i know my vote has changed after this discussion thread.
Alison, I suggest that everyone continue to work on their designs and provide feedback on them (and also the original 4). We'll keep reading.
I'm enjoying this look into the symbolism that we'd like in a logo.
The symbols don't have to be exact to convey the message.
Example - "map" - when I read early on that people might like a map to be included, I was like - ack, that's soo hard to to - it just isn't practical. But then using a set of three contour lines - that's pretty cool and conveys the right concept. (and brings in motion and patriotic images as well) Simpler is better - the fancy or extended lines don't work well for me.
The star in the center of the A - like that too - along with the color scheme it completes the patriotic theme.
Compass - if the A is compass like, that's enough of a hint for me.
Control flag - it is simple enough, and used with the contours is effective. I'm not won over, but then I haven't seen a placement of the control flag such that it looks like the A is being led through the contours to the flag... If included, it's got to be correctly aligned. (and slanting up and to the right is a good thing)
And lastly - Orienteering USA vs USA Orienteering - one or the other is good, and leading with USA is a touch stronger.
This thread is better than any of the 1-4 because it brings in stronger symbols.
I really like what 20_of_70 has done.
In particular, I strongly support using contours because I think the contours are more important to what makes the sport unique and wonderful (as compared to the compass). I also like that there is a sense of sport in the design because it looks active/dynamic.
I also like 20_of_70's designs -- especially #3. The compass-like tilt of the A/star is a nice, subtle touch.
...but I would like it even better if we could work the index contour and O-flag into it. The first should be easy, but the second would need a stylized (ie, 3-D) version of the flag that has not been seen yet. However, given the quality of what I have seen here, I suspect that it would not be too heavy a lift.
Since there is strong sentiment from the top for "Orienteering USA", producing a #3-like alternative compatible with that name is probably a useful exercise.
Be careful about looking too much like the stripes that are seen in so many logos. Not just Reco:
Would it be too much to add a little runner to the contours? A little dude (a couple of lines) holding a map, even?
Yes;-)
That's why I like the simpler contour lines...
Why so sexist? Our best orienteers are women. :)
It would be a unisex dude, obviously.
Not like many women orienteer in skirts or dresses anyway. That sort of clothing is only for going to the restroom, apparently.
We seem to be circling around a single (admittedly good) logo concept so far, so here's something completely different to re-start those creative engines.
Ideally, this would have the finesse of a designer before submission as part of a defined submission process, but maybe this other approach can get to the same end result. I know we've got some great expertise out there.
Interesting to watch the process from afar. Adoption of (a) logos and (b) club/team uniforms is one of the most difficult things for a group of amateurs to do, and has been known to come to blows...
The discussion shows that we are best at giving a yes/no tick to some prepared concepts, not at being designers. There's a lot of detailed comment from those who want the logo to be an orienteering text-book. And relatively few new concepts. Perhaps lateral thinking has been stymied because because one of the new concepts, the swooshy contours, has struck a chord. But it is surely not the only possibility which would do so.
PS In my neck of the woods, a regional squad is looking for an o-suit design. I'm keeping out of it.
I like Dan Felitsky's (20_of_70) third one the best. It has some separation in the lines, so it still has that contour line feel. I don't think there is any need to add any more orienteering symbols into the logo. I'm afraid that if you were to now send it off to a committee, it would come back with 50 other things on it--a compass, a runner, a flag,... Keep it clean and uncluttered.
I agree with clean and uncluttered - the simpler the better. But the contour lines really need to look unique (in some way) and not *just* like stripes.
I'd take some kind of abstract image over contour lines, though. Nothing wrong with something that doesn't really look much like anything. ;-)
And I will keep kicking and screaming to keep a compass out of our logo.
For those of you who don't want a compass (and I'm not saying there has to be one) because it's not what orienteering is about, try orienteering without a compass. All the time. For every course. In every type of terrain. It would not be easy. A compass is something orienteers use, so why the fuss about having it in our logo?
For those of you who don't want a compass (and I'm not saying there has to be one) because it's not what orienteering is about, try orienteering without a compass. All the time. For every course. In every type of terrain. It would not be easy. A compass is something orienteers use, so why the fuss about having it in our logo?
Don't tell Pasi Ikonen that. :)
The "fuss" is the simple fact that of all the things that are important in sport orienteering, the compass is very low on that list. I also don't feel it is attractive symbology for marketing purposes and the target demographic. The name "orienteering" is bad enough; at least you ought to make an effort to throw overboard the things you have control of :)
At least the name "orienteering" isn't nearly as bad as "rogaining".
Well, I know a place where "rogaining" is way cooler than "orienteering" - such that clubs advertise score events as "mini rogaines".
But get this - I was checking back to see the latest in the ongoing saga, and happened to glance at "Ads by Google" on the side. Top of the list: "Logos R Us $90" Made my day.
But the word "orienteering" has the same connotations as the image of the compass. To the average joe on the street, "orienteering" and "compass" both conjure the image of a boy scout.
I think this is a stretch:
Orienteering has so many aspects that have much more general appeal: nature. competition, mental toughness, freedom from boundaries, self-reliance, and on and on.
I mean, I agree that its all those things, but this notion only applies to people who already know what the sport is. Why would anyone associate orienteering with competition and mental toughness if they didn't already know it was a sport? To the average joe, orienteering = compass. There's no difference between the two. If you're going to throw out the compass on these grounds you have to throw out the word "orienteering" too.
At least the name "orienteering" isn't nearly as bad as "rogaining"
Yeah, if only the Phillip's parents had been more imaginative with their kids' names (eg. Gerry, Melinda and Warren), we could have had a sport called Germwar and a whole new image. :)
To the average joe, orienteering = compass. There's no difference between the two.
In my experience, this is a problem. People who think that orienteering = compass don't have any desire to try it. Many people who find out that orienteering = maprunning think it sounds awesome. Why promote a false image of our sport, especially if it's probably not helping us.
It's not like MLB is going to put steroids in their logo just because people associate the two...
And what *is* in the MLB logo? A person holding a baseball BAT! The single most important implement of the sport.
The equivalent for orienteering would be a runner holding a map, no?
You can't orienteer without a map. You can orienteer without a compass.
But putting contours in a logo (shaped like, say, stripes of the waving american flag) have no meaning whatsoever. No one will relate those stripes (even with one index) to a map unless they are already an orienteer. An icon of a running person holding a square? Is this a better representation of the sport than a compass?
I'd rather get the chance to explain the logo, or have the logo mean nothing at all, than have it promote a false image of our sport. And yes, a runner with a square is a better representation of our sport than a compass, since it actually is a representation of our sport.
Again, how is a compass a false image of the sport? Do you carry a compass when you orienteer? I'd guess you do. 99.9% of the time. I do.
Maybe a false image is better than a genuine image? In this case, I think it is.
The real image of orienteering in the US, as it stands now, is middle aged people wearing pajamas and getting older, carrying compasses, looking for nylon prisms.
I'd rather aim for something aspirational rather than attempt to capture whatever it is that is keeping us all entertained while our overall numbers remain stagnant at best.
Do you carry a compass when you orienteer? I'd guess you do. 99.9% of the time. I do.
You might carry one all the time, but is the compass the point of orienteering? No, the map and the course are. While I was at school some of our trigonometry exercises would be dressed up as orienteering -
"Jane is doing an orienteering exercise. She walks 50m at 180°, then turns right and walks 100m at 318°, then turns right again and walks 80m at 65°. How far is she from her starting point?"
This is technically "orienteering" but it's not what the sport is about and it sounds boring as hell. If your only exposure to orienteering is at school where they used to do crap compass exercises like that and you see a logo based around a compass, 1 + 1 = 2 and you take up extreme paint drying instead.
Juffy, thats just my point. The word "orienteering" is just as bad a symbol as a compass.
Ok, that's fine. What's aspirational? Its not a compass. Its not a dude running with a book in his face. Is it some random colored polygons? A swoosh? I would have thought a highly paid professional graphic designer could come up with something, but what we got was lame. I think its time to ask them "what else ya' got?" before we drop them altogether. We paid for a design, we should go back to them until we get something we like.
This is an interesting thread and it is interesting that is coming back to the issues with the word orienteering.
Anyway, last year GHO was looking for a new logo for our Salomon Dontgetlost.ca Adventure Running Series. We made it clear to our graphic designer we didn't want a compass or an orienteering control in the logo. What we got were a bunch of logos that while nice had no real link to the sport and believe it or not some were lamer than the lame logos presented at the start of this thread. They could have been logos used for a variety of uses. When we brought up our concerns with the designer they used Nike as an example of a good logo. The argument is that when you see that swoosh you think Nike. But people know what Nike is and they don't really know what orienteering is. So the logo had to tell the story but it had to do it professionally. So we ended up designing more of an emblem than a logo that we felt looked professional and 'told the story' about the race. It wasn't perfect but a good compromise.
http://dontgetlost.ca/index.php?option=com_content...
The real image of orienteering in the US, as it stands now, is middle aged people wearing pajamas...
Don't forget those who choose unflattering and/or revealing lycra.
Apples and oranges, Hammer. Don'tgetlost is a slogan, and the website is a nifty slideshow in which all the various things that people want are slid past the viewer in a random sequence - young, handsome athletes, national flag, control flag, snowshoe, running, jumping, team, map, and not a compass in sight. We could accompany any logo with this - and with the internet tools we no doubt should.
Hang on, maybe I'm agreeing with you - we want to "tell the story" of orienteering. Now its ludicrous to think that the logo alone will do it. The swoosh didn't, in the beginning. Telling the story involves the repeated association of several elements - logo, pictures, stories, in this "sound-bite" age slogans, even single words. The word "orienteering" is a liability, its very long on a poster etc, it has too many syllables in speech.
I think we're talking "branding" here. It's not my field, but I think its bigger than a logo. Why did you adopt the term "Raid" for your adventure events, is that the French-Canadian influence or did you objectively choose it for its short action-packed connotations in English? I notice "CP" on the maps, that's the adventure racing influence, that could be part of a branding exercise for orienteering. Maybe Glen has a master plan for branding, and a new logo is just a small part of it. I would think a graphic designer working on a print or a web project might have the horrors about the old one..
In fact the word "hammer" sounds quite action-packed to me. Hammer down the trail is used round here for going fast. So whats the background to "Raid the Hammer"?
Yes it is apples and oranges. I think my point is that the logo we decided to go with ( the silhouette with the three runners together) told the story of the race series. We could afford to do that but it is harder for national federation logo. My point was the process we went through with our graphic designer. Our first iteration had no links to the sport or race and the Nike logo was used as a defence/explanation. Just wanted to say it us a long process. Lots of back and forth.
Raid the hammer? Hamilton's nickname is 'the hammer'.
Like it or not, we're kind of stuck with compasses. 99+% of orienteers will continue to use them, and it's the only piece of equipment unique to our sport that individuals spend money on (shoes, clothing, and eyeglasses being generic, and maps are supplied by the organizer), which has sponsorship implications. Whether or not compasses should be emphasized in PR is its own question, but they aren't going away.
20_of_70: what a nice job! Despite all the objections to the compass, your new designs are original, invoke motion, are relevant to orienteering, are sleek, and yet again are the best I've seen on this thread. I like the 2nd the best in this latest posting, and 1st design is a close second. Is it possible to change the font size for Orienteering and USA, so orienteering is a bit more prominent, and USA does not dominate the design quite as much?
JJ - don't forget the ubiquitous control description holder, which would make as uninspiring an icon as a compass. I suppose the SI stick could also be employed as a common but unassociated symbol of our sport, but only in places where they don't use the bricks.
I am stealing a little space on Linda's log to comment. Lots of great work and ideas on the thread. The three unique elements in orienteering for me are the compass, detailed contour map and the orange and white control flag.
Rick Worner
The elements of orienteering that attract me to the sport are:
1. Self powered movement
2. Rugged terrain
3. Unknown courses
4. Route choice
Incorporate those into the logo
Dan Felitsky, your concepts are amazingly fluid and exciting. Thanks for your posts. Sure wish we could drop the "ing" off of orienteering. "Orienteer USA" sounds so much more action-oriented, and is less graphically challenging.
The discussion about the relative importance of different elements of our sport is exactly what I hoped for on Attackpoint. I think many would agree that some simple, stylized representation of a map would be ideal, but is very tough to do. Contours are the closest we've gotten, with much enthusiasm.
After maps, we've got controls (totally foreign to the public) or compasses (well known, for better or worse). If we do use a compass, it needs to be in such a way that the compass seems easy, or better yet, active and exciting. Dan's latest has already exceeded the current USOF logo in that regard.
Love the new logos too! Great work 20 of 70!
If "Orienteer Kansas", why not "Orienteer USA"?
Awesome logo designs on this thread. Too bad Discover Card already uses what could have been another idea for us:
here is a local store
logo
that I like.
Ahhh... one line, one color, simple... I like it. Even if it does look like a snail.
But look at the others - what do they represent. Burton? A circular arrow for a snowboard? Arcteryx? Patagonia? Mt Hardware - a nut?
And the relation of these to their products is.....?
Right. There need not be one. Isn't that liberating? No need to figure out how to get the control card holder in the logo, too.
And I like that logo, too. The color is a bit morose, but the design is nice.
I think the Burton logo is a stylized lower-case 'b'. The Mountain Hard Wear nut evokes "hardware" (as in climbing protection nuts).
The Burton logo actually looks like a half pipe to me, with the arrow suggesting the movement of someone on one of their snowboards.
The Executive Committee has met. There will be a period for submissions of outside logo concepts. The documents describing the process we will use are being finalized and will be released by early next week. Please do not send any submissions to the USOF office until then. Thanks for your creativity, enthusiasm and patience with this process.
Ahhh, pause for breath. In the meantime, could I wonder aloud what gives rise to this (perhaps subconscious) deep desire to tell a whole story in a little symbol. Does it for example go way back to Mother England and coats of arms? Thought you might have shrugged off those infuences by now. Maybe its a modern and belated recognition of indigenous artwork, the totem pole?
To all,
As USOF President Clare Durand noted in a previous post, I have reommended to the Executive Committee, and they have approved, an open competition for design of our new logo.
In the next day or so, contest rules will be posted on
www.us.orienteering.org. Hopefully they are self explanatory, but if you have any questions let me know.
Please note that logos posted earlier and discussed on various forums (including this one) must be resubmitted under the rules of the contest to be considered.
Have a good weekend.
Sincerely,
Glen
Glen Schorr
Executive Director
United States Orienteering Federation
e: glen_schorr@usorienteer.org
p: 410.802.1125
The competition rules have been posted at the top of the home page on
http://www.us.orienteering.org Look for the orange box. Let the games begin.
Glen
Wow. That looks like a great process to me.
It does look like a great process. My only question is whether the logo has to say "Orienteering USA" or whether "USA Orienteering" would also be permitted in designs.
What exactly is unclear about
The logo must contain the words “Orienteering USA”. Acronyms or other variations are not allowed.
?
Obviously I can read, but the logos people said they liked best had USA first. See comments on the Clubnet about Sharon Crawford's tweaking of Vlad's design. It's worth asking the question.
I should let feet take this one...
But, to head him off... that assertion is only really valid if every logo was varied with every combination of words. Otherwise, you can't draw robust conclusions.
My suspicion is that much of the presumed preference for "USA Orienteering" is an artifact of the aesthetics of the designs incorporating that structure, rather than anything to do with the semantics of the phrase.
The rules are out. It's a popularity contest posing as a design contest.
While it might seem like a good idea... beware! (
1,
2)
I'm not saying that this will end badly for USOF (the member-generated submissions have been much better than the original "professional" ones), but these are just some things to keep in mind when dealing with logo design contests.
The logo must contain the words “Orienteering USA”. Acronyms or other variations are not allowed.
Ok, I guess that one is settled. Not my first choice (USA Orienteering), but whatever. It's not bad, but I thought this discussion was still up in the air.
All designs from this round of competition will be reviewed by a committee chosen and chaired by the Executive Director. Members of the committee will include members from one or more of each of the following constituencies: Team USA, club leadership, club membership, marketing specialists, and graphic design experts.
Ok, this is a very, very nice step...
The primary criteria for selection will be: representation of the sport to orienteers, representation to the sport to non-orienteers, and ability to reproduce in a variety of formats. All measures will receive equal consideration.
Continuing to look very good here...
The committee will then select a final slate of logos (potentially modified to show consistent quality) for consideration of the orienteering and non-orienteering communities.
Consistent quality? Shouldn't the "final slate" all be quality already? Who's going to be potentially modifying them?
At this time we plan to use a web survey will to tally the votes. During this process, individuals will cast a vote for their “favorite” logo and also provides the opportunity to provide additional feedback in a “comments” section.
So it's a popularity contest. Note how he stresses "favorite" logo. This is
not about favorites, people. It's about the
best design that communicates the idea. Not about favorites.
Furthermore, isn't the point of having a diverse committee intended to eliminate the need for crowdsourcing? We've already seen that we can't please everyone with one design. The general public should leave the designing up to the designers and the committee. Not the users. I drink Pepsi, was I consulted when they changed their logo? Of course not.
At the same time, the Executive Director will poll approximately 100 additional individuals from the non-orienteering community (but deemed to be potential orienteers) for their votes on the same list.
Good for including non-orienteers, but again, it's furthering the popularity contest. I think the non-orienteers are best suited to have a representative(s) on the committee.
This additional feedback will be taken into consideration by the committee and the Board of Directors.... Once these votes are complete, the Executive Director will call a vote of the full Board of Directors. With the support of the committee the Executive Director will make a final recommendation.
Ok, so the committee and exec and board really have the final say. I just don't like all of this need for crowdsourcing.
The individual(s) who submits the logo from the open competition that receives the most votes in the public poll will receive appropriate recognition and appreciation from the USOF Board of Directors.
Hmmmm. That's interesting. Very interesting. This explicity states that the most
popular logo will receive recognition and appreciation. It does not say the
chosen logo. Does this mean that the most popular choice will become the final selection? Does mean that the chosen selection, if not the most popular, will not receive any recognition and appreciation?
There's also no mention of monetary compensation. If USOF was willing to pay a professional before, then I think it's unethical to ask for a better design, and then not put as much (if any) value to acquiring it. (I'm under the assumption that they hired a designer for the first batch. Please correct me if I am wrong.)
All logos submitted to the Executive Director will become the immediate property of USOF. The artist(s) cedes all rights to their logo at that time.
Whoa. Notice the word "all". If I submit a logo, and USOF doesn't choose it, it is no longer my logo. I can't re-use that logo or design for any other purpose, even though USOF
won't be using it.
This is ridiculous, if I design something and my client chooses not to use it, (and doesn't compensate me for it) I feel like I should have the opportunity to use that design later. Otherwise, I'm just throwing my intellectual and design property away.
I don't have a problem with giving away rights to the winning design. But to the non-winning ones? Come on. I might not re-submit my design on that basis alone.
All,
Upon the recommendation of the Executive Director (me) the Executive Committee has approved the change to "Orienteering USA". Semantics aside - the goal is to put the sport first before any geographic area. It also helps our organization stand out from our competitive NGB's. In this arena we can use all the help we can get.
This is only a great process if it produces a great logo for current and potential orienteers alike.
Time to walk the walk, y'all.
Glen
j-man: Glen's original message said, "I recommend the name change for its brevity and impact. I also recommend that we call ourselves "Orienteering USA" (vs USA Orienteering) because quite simply it puts our sport first and allows us to stand out from other national governing bodies of sport."
This has now gone from a recommendation to an approved change by the Executive Committee, so the matter is closed. However, I disagree that it's just a matter of aesthetics that makes some of us support the USA Orienteering logos more than the ones that say Orienteering USA. See eddie's comments on 3/6 about the order of the words.
That said, I'm fine with either wording and happy to see so many creative designs.
I don't see an Orange box or anything about the logo design on USOF. maybe i'm just looking in the wrong place?
Acampbell, just hit the refresh button. I had to do the same thing. The document is also available by clicking
here.
Allison,
www.us.orienteering.org....home page...top third...."New USOF Logo Contest" (or something like that). It is a horizontal box, burnt orange in color (on my monitor).
Glen
Yeah I had to refresh as well. Before it was just a line orange line and then after the refresh it appeared.
But, if these logos are expressly designed for "Orienteering USA" (né USOF) what other possible use will they have? Are you thinking of selling rejected concepts to Manchester United or something?
Thanks for getting the ball rolling, Dan.
But, if these logos are expressly designed for "Orienteering USA", what other possible use will they have?
Well, the text will obviously be specific to Orienteering USA, but the mark may not be.
For example, I've done graphic design (t-shirts, signage, web) for about 10-12 orienteering related projects since 2006. And I'm planning on doing artwork for the 2010 US Orienteering Champs t-shirts.
I think there can be a lot of similarities in designs for "Orienteering USA" and "US Orienteering Champs".
I don't want my best ideas for USOF to not get picked, when they would work down the line for some future event or some future club project.
I'd rather have my ideas get used and appreciated, than squandered away in the inbox of the USOF BOD, never to see the light of day.
Wouldn't that be the "Orienteering US Champs?"
...Sometimes I wonder if it wouldn't be better to give Glen a lot more rope and a lot less micromanagement..
I agree with Dan. We're all used to interacting with volunteers who work for free...not paid employees. Remember Glen's services are coming to us at a price that represents a significant part of our USOF (or OUSA...say "Oosah?") budget.
Initially we could have chosen our logo during February, and let Glen be on to the next items on his agenda. But now we've got an elaborate review process involving (a) submission period until April, (b) formation of a complex committee requiring 5 different qualifications, (c) a web voting period, (d) a separate polling of ~100 "potential" orienteers, (e) ED selection and recommendation, and finally (f) Board approval. Will we have a logo by July? All this to replace a logo I'll bet few of us even realized existed up until now.
It's kinda like working with an attorney who's billing you at $500/hr ($8/minute): you'd like to ask a lot of questions....but at $40-$80 per response, you figure you can do without, so you hang up the phone and just let him work.
As we go forward, learning to work with our new ED, I think we all need to practice some restraint, and feel more comfortable "..allowing him to make all of his own decisions."
Nicely said chitownclark.
That would have been more efficient (to have the ED select the logo), but wouldn't that have resulted in one of the four original choices, that everyone seems so down on?
That would have been more efficient (to have the ED select the logo), but wouldn't that have resulted in one of the four original choices, that everyone seems so down on?
Remember, it was USOF that solicited comments, and only when a consensus emerged that the original 4 suggestions were non-starters did usable alternatives emerge. IMHO that is the process working at its best.
nitially we could have chosen our logo during February, and let Glen be on to the next items on his agenda. But now we've got an elaborate review process involving (a) submission period until April, (b) formation of a complex committee requiring 5 different qualifications, (c) a web voting period, (d) a separate polling of ~100 "potential" orienteers, (e) ED selection and recommendation, and finally (f) Board approval. Will we have a logo by July?
Remember, it was USOF who suggested this process. IMHO, the optimal outcome would have been achieved had USOF simply selected one of the fine alternatives, worked out compensation and ownership details with the artist, and moved on. It is not the people here who are "micromanaging".
It's kinda like working with an attorney who's billing you at $500/hr ($8/minute): you'd like to ask a lot of questions....but at $40-$80 per response, you figure you can do without, so you hang up the phone and just let him work.
I don't think it is. In this example, the domain expertise is coming from the community.
If efficiency is the goal, there are far bigger fish to fry in USOF. This logo process may have been inefficient, but a higher quality outcome is likely, and that is a Good Thing.
...but wouldn't that have resulted in one of the four original choices...?
Possibly. But there was still a Board approval, which might have bounced all four designs. And if not, so what?
Five years from now, will anyone know or appreciate our logo any better than we have our old one? I believe Glen has this perspective. And we should trust his leadership here.
The real question is: shouldn't we spend our time, effort and limited resources on things that really matter? And I don't believe the logo qualifies.
To all,
To date we have 17 logos officially entered. Many thanks and keep em coming.
A question to the group, what is the all time record for number of messages on a single thread? I think that we have a chance to break this record and should go for it.
Most importantly, while I appreciate Chitownclarks and others comments, I feel that dialogues like this and ones on Clubnet and Boardnet. I just wish that there was one conversation vs three.
Please realize that as I move this and other projects forward that I am coming from the perspective of current AND potential orienteers. While I am weak (compared to all of you) on the first, I am strong on the second. Plus I did this for a living for 27 years before I came to USOF. While I can't outshout a 200 message thread, I can only express my point of view and continue to move forward. I will always listen to others, alter my opinion as necessary, but will always be pushing forward. We do not have time to look back....something many of us want to do and are good at. History is good and comfortable and important but if we don't look forward, our sport will shrink and someday we will have no history to look back on. That is something that none of us, especially me, signed up for.
Finally, I wanted to speak for a minute about the original four abused, mistreated and maligned logos. I know that they have been roundly blasted in this and other forums, Maybe deservedly, maybe not. But they did very well and were liked in a series of one on one discussions of current and non-orienteers. Are they perfect? No. But they meant something to orienteers and potential orienteers alike.
In early rounds of logo exploration, we showed "control" and the "AP runner with map symbols" to potential orienteers. A general concensus of their comments were:
About the control symbol - "Why do you have a Diver Down symbol"? I thought that you did this on land?....sorry to our CanoeO brethren.
About the runner with map symbol - Why is this guy look like he is running for a train?
This sent off warning signals to us.
I don't mean to make these comments to stiffle creativity (and I know in your guys case it won't) but I want you to put your potential orienteer hats on as well when designing. People can argue that "but Coke has a ribbon in its logo but what does it have to do with soda?" and "Chevy's logo is called the bowtie...what does that have to do with my Camaro?" In both cases, I honestly don't know and don't care. I do know that they have had years and hundreds of millions of dollars to develop their brands. We don't.
Regarding giving me more rope. I get plenty of rope from our Board of Directors. But they also give me constructive feedback when I need it.
I welcome your comments but would hope that you have an issue you would contact me privately. The only topics that are off limits are my family, my non orienteering life and my compensation. Other than that, have at it. This is the nature of our culture today. Just don't expect me to sit on the sidelines if I feel you are off point.
Anyway, thanks for listening. I'm going back to work on the strategic plan. Not my favorite thing to do on a Saturday morning but it is pouring here.
Have a good day. Keep talking and designing.
Glen
PS - the reason is that we may clean up some logos is that I don't want a person not to desgin a logo if they don't have computer design skills. Anyone can sketch on a cocktail napkin, scan and PDF it. Except me.
Finally, I wanted to speak for a minute about the original four abused, mistreated and maligned logos.
Without the original logos, we wouldn't be this close to a positive outcome.
It's only positive if we have something better that resonates with orienteers and non-orienteers alike.
Glen
Here's a two-page logo/branding proposal I submitted on Thursday (before the contest rules were announced). [Edit: link removed when I submitted final designs]
I showed this proposal and the original four USOF proposals to a small group of orienteers and non-orienteers, and the results were generally positive. I guess this post here is throwing it out to the wolves ;-)
Obviously, this was done before the final decision to go with "Orienteering USA", so if I officially submit this design proposal, I'd have to do some re-work.
I'm posting it here to gauge interest and hear comments before I commit to re-working and officially submitting.
Thanks.
Kupackman,
Thanks for your post. As an orienteer and USOF member, I find it an interesting and representative mark of the sport to orienteers and potential orienteers alike.
As the committee chair I hope that we get many submissions and remind all that the rules state that the name of the organization be noted as "Orienteering USA". The sport comes first.
As a consumer of popular culture and viewer of waaaay much reality TV...In the words of Tim Gunn - "Work with it people."
I'm outta here. Gotta go back to the plan.
Glen
Clearly there is a lot of talent and creativity out there.
Rewind...Tim sez "Make it work people."
The strategic plan is warping my brain.
That's pretty good kupackman, simpler and less chest-thumping USA is The Best that some of the other designs bring across to an upside down person like me. Easily altered to comply with the rules - a capital O and orienteering at the top. ;-)
Maybe Glen will include a sample of non-North American orienteers for feedback too..... *ducks for cover*
No need to duck Tooms, a quick visit to the OA website and there's the ideal candidate: Captain Compass!
Glen,
Could you point us to where the submissions are located so we can see what has been done, get inspiration from the submissions and create/improve/modify the existing submissions? As you can see from the AP submissions the collaborations have been very productive.
I don't think they'll be posted anywhere until after April 5 (see rules on the USOF website).
Jhumberman,
Thanks for your suggestion. While I understand your point, I don't feel posting to a common site would be appropriate for the following reasons:
1) Those who post late have an unfair advantage over those who post early (i.e. looking at their work and building upon it)
2) There have been those that are calling this a popularity contest masking as a design contest. As orienteers and potential orienteers will get their vote, it is important to have design and marketing professionals (the majority of whom are orienteers) to judge the work based on the criteria as set by the contest rules, and not be swayed by public comment.
That being said. If a person wants to also post their work as a link to this site (like Dan did) that is his or her right.
Sincerely,
Glen
To jhuberman....
Sorry for the typo on your name. My bad.
Glen
Those who post late have an unfair advantage over those who post early (i.e. looking at their work and building upon it)
Isn't the idea to get the best possible logo that meets the requirements?
I must admit that I thought the collaborative aspect rather cool and productive. The competitive aspect not so much.
Finally, someone has gotten to the heart of the issue. Chitown Clark (and 20_of_70) correctly point out that the logo design is a very minor issue compared to the larger more important issues such as growing membership, finding sponsors, etc. The logo is only significant to the extent that it advances those more important issues. In the same way that most people don’t buy a car based on the cars logo (“I was all set to buy a Brand X sedan but then I saw the Brand Y logo and knew I couldn’t buy anything else” rather than “I’ll buy the car based on reliability/gas mileage/ appearance/ price, etc)I don’t think there are many people out there who say “I was all set to try orienteering but the logo is so uncool, I just couldn’t bring myself to do it” IMO, no logo, no matter how cool or how much collaboration went into it, will have a major impact on important issues of finding sponsors, etc. Others, notably marketing types, obviously disagree.
The troubling thing to me is the amount of time spent on a process that is unlikely to produce significant results. With the new “contest”, Glen is now going to consult with not only the BOD, exec com, club net , AP etc. etc. etc but 100 other people. Personally, I would rather see him pick a logo and then pick up the phone to make 100 calls to potential sponsors,instead. That could lead to some real beneficial results.
Glen’s been on the job almost a year and has attracted one minor sponsor but I hope he has laid the groundwork to ramp up membership and sponsorship income in the coming years. As I understand the strategic plan for hiring an ED, donations from the large private donor decrease in years two and again in year three and are eliminated thereafter. This means that USOF income has to increase by about $100,000 just to pay for the ED and his expenses. If income falls short, the budget “discussions” of last year will seem like a walk in the park. Is all this effort expended on the logo getting us any closer to our income goals? If this were my company, I would end the contest, have Glen pick a logo (that’s why we pay him) and let him get back to the truly important issues.
Let's give Glen the benefit of the doubt and assume that he's not wasting too much of his time on the process here. He's done a great job of coalition building on this logo ordeal and I, for one, think that he's capable of working on building sponsorships, growing membership, and in general taking USOF forward all at the same time as allowing a logo competition to occur.
The logo may be a small detail, but small details can make a big difference. Even if we just attract enough attention with a logo to have a potential orienteer read whatever orienteering message is written below, we have won. And of course a prospective sponsor is going to want their name associated with a better logo, this is why we're going through the process of changing the logo we currently have.
if it matters enough to change the one we have, it matters enough to pick one that is at least better.
sammy--it is great to have you back. Where have you been?
To all,
Thanks for your posts. To date we have 20 entries. Keep em coming.
I'm going back to the strategic plan.
Still raining here - yuck.
Have a good day. - Glen
I think that JeffT's designs are cool. Also, I think that 20_of_70's design postings just before giant contour eagle are outstanding.
I also don't like the eighties-looking/bumper sticker looking logos.
While they represent, they look sorta cheesy, and I don't think that they would look to good on uniforms (or other apparel).
j-man: Been here, lurking and didn’t feel I could add much to discussion. Thanks for asking.
Rosstopher: Sometimes process is confused with results and here’s my concern:
When private money runs out in two years (if not sooner), the BOD will have to decide whether to continue the experiment of having a paid full-time executive director. I assume they’ll sit Glen down and ask him about his accomplishments over the preceding three years. If he points to the nifty logo and strategic plan and how they were great team building exercises and really brought the O community together, I hope the BOD says (politely) “BFD.”
UNLESS he immediately follows up with “and that contributed to a 50% increase in membership and $200,000 in annual sponsorship.” (or whatever the appropriate targets are.)
Otherwise, I don’t see how USOF (or OUSA or USAO) can afford to maintain a FT ED without continuing to underfund the teams and all the other items that were discussed during the last budget process.
I think everyone wants USOF to succeed with this experiment and Glen seems to have the benefit of the doubt and a freehand (more or less) to proceed as he sees best.
In my view, the near-term goal has to be bringing in money. They’ll be plenty of time for team-building and other “soft” issues when USOF is in a better financial position. It just looked like the evolution of the logo process was shifting attention on the latter at the expense of the former. If Glen is now going to poll 100 people about the logo, it’s 100 people he’s not contacting about sponsorships ( well probably not exactly 100, but you get my point)
Of course, Glen knows best how to allocate his limited time and resources but just my observations.
Seems like a lot of people are making a lot of (well-intentionsed) assumptions - what if some of aren't correct and some people forget that they're only assumptions and treat them as facts? That might produce even more tangential discussions while the ED gets on with what's not being discussed in the background. (my assumption)
The logo is an outward facing item that is worth some attention. How much? It depends - and I'm not in a position to micro-manage it.
In the world of sales, you've got to have something to sell. It wouldn't make sense to bring new help in and say "here, sell this - I know the last people to try didn't have much success, but that's because they didn't have the right skills."
We collectively went "really?" over the first set of options - that would have been a low time investment, partial improvement. Now we get a higher time investment, good improvement.
Better to make specific changes and run some more, and get some more information before relocating and re-planning again - especially when the map is a bit sketchy and the destination less defined than a specific point with a flag...-)
Dont know if i am going to send it in but here is a idea...
A PDF.
Image of the logo:
*The base of the design is a o-flag.
*Of the 4 first my favorite is #3.
To Hollowell,
Thanks for your thoughts. As with all of the logos posted and linked, I encourage you to officially enter this. (note only a few from this site have been done to date.) Your input and design are appreciated.
Sincerely,
Glen
To my eye, Hollowell's design above has the same weakness as many of the other submissions: from a distance all you see is "USA" and the US flag. The word "orienteering" with its small font and unwieldy length fades out by comparison. So unless you're up close, the logo appears to be just another patriotic USA emblem. Shouldn't "orienteering" be more prominent? And the flag looks a lot like the
flag of Puerto Rico.
I think the answer is to use nearly equal-sized fonts for both words, as 20_of_70 has done with some of his earlier designs. And then fit the colors into the remaining rectangle, with possibly an overlay of the colors over an edge of the font, to pull the logo together.
Not too close to this, but it's what it made me think of initially! Otherwise a classy logo Hollowell...
Or (credit to Juffy) is it more an inverse of this island?
Hollowell,
I like your logo a lot. It would be great if it were also submitted, so that it would be considered for the final.
Can you ditto a ditto? If so, that's what I want to do.
Not that I'm American, but Hollowell's design is my favourite so far. If people want orienteering to be more prominent, how about increasing the size of USA to the height of the flag'o'flag and then have orienteering at the bottom stretching across both the flag and USA. (That also makes it look a but tidier as the G of orienteering will align better with the wide base of A in USA). The use of softer colours works well too.
Wasn't the whole point (and in The Rules) to call the sporting body "Orienteering USA"?
Hollowell,
Great concept. I hope that you submit it...in one form or another.
Tooms,
You are correct. It is "Orienteering USA". Thanks for the reminder.
Still sitting on about 20 entries folks. Many entries that have been discussed here have not been submitted. Remember, ya gotta play to win.
Sincerely,
Glen
Never let the rules get in the way of a good story.
Hollowell's design is totally winning me over, I'd move to Texas to be closer to that logo.
That's right ,Juffy. Nothing to prevent Hollowell submitting as-is, as well as with Nixon's suggestion. Could also increase the size of USA as Nixon suggests, but have orienteering along the top of both the flag and USA. In most cultures, that would still read "Orienteering USA". A different font might help the form a little, too.
As with any logo, you'd have various versions for various situations. It might be worth having one with orienteering written at the top for all domestic based media, such as website and on letter heads. Then the international team could have one with orienteering at the bottom (most teams at WOC don't have orienteering as a big part of their logo / team name, the fact you are at WOC gives away what sport you're doing!).
There are indications of Texas in that logo, for sure, but it is also less threatening than that fair state.
Or maybe Puerto Rico.
Nice flags y'all.
Seriously, I need to give you an update. Based on dialogue on this and other forums we have ammended the rules as follows.
Change from:
"All logos submitted to the Executive Director will become the immediate property of USOF. The artist cedes all rights to their logo at that time."
To:
"If one of the submitted logos is selected and approved by the board of directors, that logo in both its original and any altered forms will become the immediate property of USOF. The artist cedes all rights at that time. All submitted, but unselected, submissions remain the property of the artist but can't be used to represent Orienteering USA in any form."
Just trying to be kinder, gentler y'all.
Back to the flags....
Glen
My logo was submitted today. Thank you for the feedback!
To all,
Thanks for your entries to date. So far we have about 25, but there is room for more. Please send PDF's to me at glen_schorr@usorienteer.org. Note the revisions to the "ownership rule". Entries close April 5th.
Have a good day.
Sincerely,
Glen
To all,
No new entries in the past day or so. Sitting tight on 25. Just so you know, a lot of the logos posted/ attached to thread have not been entered yet. I encourage you to do so.
Thanks,
Glen
Action is quite different from opinion isn't it?
Saturday the 27th: Today's count: 25
To all,
Sunday the 28th: Today's count: 25 (still)
Entries close at 5pm Eastern, Monday April 5th (a week from tomorrow). Send to me at glen_schorr@usorienteer.org.
Visit
www.us.orienteering.org for the rules...modified per your request.
Sincerely,
Glen
Monday the 29th. Entries to date: 26
Entries are due next Monday by 5pm eastern time.
Glen
Monday the 29th. Entries to date: 27
Glen
I find it interesting that the logic to get to the new entries at the bottom of the page seems to have problems with this thread...-) [firefox 3.6.2 if it matters]
Probably the large size plus embedded graphics and other junk.
It gets there eventually...
It goes to the bottom, then the images load which extends the page...
All,
Tuesday the 30th. Entries to date: 31. Still some good stuff on this site that have not been submitted.
Entries are due next Monday by 5pm eastern time.
Glen
All,
Tuesday the 31st. Entries to date: holding at 31.
Entries are due next Monday by 5pm Eastern time.
Glen
All,
Wednesday the 31st. Entries to date: 32
Have a good night.
Glen
All,
Thursday, April 1st. Entries to date: 32. Entries close this coming Monday.
No foolin'
Glen
All,
Friday the 2nd. 33 entries to date. Entries close in three days.
Glen
Saturday - April 3rd. Entries to date: 34. Entries close day after tomorrow.
How about something in the promo material that reads:" Not just a sport---a way of life". Comment from conversation with Judy Karpinski during trail run at Jr. Training Camp last weekend.
Yes we all know it's a way of life that tends to suck you in and suck the moneys out, but do *THEY* need to know it? if we put it forward, they'll think we're just another travelling cult of sun worshippers.
Sunday, April 4th. Entries to date: 37. Entries close tomorrow.
The "way of life" phrasing used to be in the O-pamphlets that USOF produced. It was removed from the last printing because it was believed to be offputting.
All,
Entries close at 5pm Eastern time today. To date we have about 50 entries. A committee will cut this list to approximately 5 finalists and will be posted on or around April 21st.
Let's go talk about something else. See you at the Pig.
Glen
Entries are closed. Thanks to all. More later.
All,
It's baaaack.....
Logo survey with 5 choices is posted on
www.us.orienteering.org. Please vote, tell your friends who orienteer to vote, tell your friends who you think would orienteer to vote.
Voting closes April 30th.
Enjoy,
Glen
Two things:
1) Full disclosure, Option D is one of my proposals. Only the logo is shown on the voting site, but
here's the entire design philosophy and branding concept behind it. Granted, if selected, USOF's intent may be to only use the logo shown on the voting site. I just wanted everyone to see more of this proposal, should USOF choose to use it. If any of the other designers of the finalists have more to share, feel free to post here!
2) This is from a few weeks ago, from an interview posted on one of the top
logo design blogs. I found it relevant to the USOF situation, so I'll copy it here:
If you ask people in the US what logos they like and recognise, they’ll name Target or Nike. Target for example, is just a dot with a circle around it, that’s all it is, so if you want a logo like Target, you don’t need to hire a designer, you barely need to know how to operate a computer program, the logo may as well be anything.
I think the best work in the area comes down to what most designers would agree on: the obvious thing, it’s not the actual logo but how it is used.
The Nike swoosh that cost $30 and was designed by a Portland State University art student was probably worth that when she first showed it to them. At that point it had no equity at all. None of the guys commissioning it particularly liked it... They just built so much messaging around the logo and associated it with a lot of good products as well; then it became a ‘strong’ logo. The logo itself is really nothing, it’s just two curves, and it’s not hard to do.
I think that you could design a terrible logo for a good company with great people and they could build it into a great program. Alternatively you could design what seems to be a brilliant logo for people who are not smart or energetic or are incapable of associating with anything positive and it would become a terrible logo.
So we can (and have) quibbled over all sorts of things on this topic, but keep in mind that in the end, it's all in how USOF chooses to use it.
I've spent a good while thinking about the finalists, so here are my thoughts about them. It's hard for me to be completely objective about them for two reasons. A) one of the finalists is mine, and B) I don't really know how extensively USOF plans to use this re-branding effort.
Option A) Since this design was one of the finalists last go 'round, I'll just paste my earlier thoughts.
At a quick glance, I like this one the best, if nothing else because I understand it quickly. But it just seems like a more modern version of the current USOF logo. I think it doesn't lend itself well to a one-color format, because it has three dark colors: black, navy, and red. Also, because of the heavy use of the navy coupled with the compass, this one has a strong nautical theme to it. So much so that I think the navy should be replaced by green.
In my previous reaction, I went a little further to nitpick at some smaller kerning issues and other slight irregularities. However, upon seeing my proposed design presented here, I see some of the same irregularities with mine (likely a file conversion issue or something). I won't nitpick those sorts of things here, as they are likely file artifacts, not design intent.
From the previous USOF logo, I don't see this one as a re-branding effort, as it's essentially an evolution of the existing logo. That said, there's not a deal-breaker here for me.
Option B) A lot of thought went into this one, and I think this one represents the most things about orienteering: a runner with map, a control flag, and a compass. From a graphics perspective, this one would be tough to render or make legible in a one-color or gray-scale format. There are also some really small details here that may not work as well in a small presentation (the small N for north, and the tiny orange compass points). But those same details give a larger presentation some nice complexity. I also like the use of negative space for the map.
A quibble that's easy to fix? The logotype is way too small in relation to the logomark. By the way, I like the use of the two-tone, one-word OrienteeringUSA (I used the same format in one of the variations of my logo, which isn't shown on the survey site).
Another quibble of this specific design: if you look at this from far enough away, it kinda looks like a guy running in the sights of a sniper rifle or something (am I being too morbid?).
Option C) Very similar to B, but without a lot of visual clutter. Focus on running with a map, with an arrow and italic type to indicate motion and direction. I really like the simplicity of this one, but I think maybe it's too simple for the governing body of our sport? It's really hard to tell without a complete understanding of how USOF intends to use the design.
And two additional comments that pertain to both B and C.
Orange. I think that for most governing bodies in the US, red and blue is the way to go. But orange is the orienteering color. If embraced properly, using orange could be a good way for orienteering to stand apart. When used with branding, orange represents warmth, energy, and enthusiasm. Used in the proposals here, the orange text for USA becomes lost when you see it from a distance, though. It's just not dark enough.
The running man. While I really like the concept of the running man, this version is *really* dated, with its roots in the
1972 Olympics. I think if we want to attract new people to a sport, using a 40-year-old image isn't going to seem modern in an age with the increasing use of technology, GPS, etc. The shorts may be longer these days, but the NBA logo is timeless because it's a real silhouette of a real player.
Option D) This one is mine, so I don't feel right commenting on it. That's your job. :-)
Option E) I really want to like this one. I like the contours-as-flag-stripes concept. I like the fact that the AP community contributed to this one. I like and respect the guy that drew this.
And design-wise, there's a lot to like. But I'm a guy that likes things as a whole. I listen to albums, not singles. I like things to be cohesive. And this one doesn't give me that feel.
I love the stripe logomark. They have double meaning, plus the way that they are drawn conveys motion. I love it!
But I don't love the logotype. And I don't love how it's integrated with the whole. First off, it's in all caps, which, combined with the dark colors, gives off an intimidating, stand-offish corporate feel. If we're trying to get people into our community, we want to take a friendlier approach. Say what you want about Wal-Mart as a store, but their recent re-branding (all caps to lower-case) certainly makes them seem a lot friendlier and approachable. Also, since this concept is very text-heavy, I'd suggest something other than the Arial typeface. Gotham would be a killer font to use.
Also, since we read left-to-right and top-to-bottom, the ORIENTEERING USA positioned as such puts a lesser emphasis on the logomark. It seems like it's tucked away in the corner, when it's actually the strongest selling point of this logo. And because it seems like the logomark is tucked away in the corner, it feels like the mark and the type are awkwardly integrated. I'm just not feeling the flow.
There are some things I like about the logotype. I like the addition of the small star, giving a hint at a compass. I also like how the negative space of the U lines up with the I above.
Logotype criticisms aside, this is a good choice. And if it's selected, it's not that hard to tweak a few things to make the logotype more integrated and approachable. (The logotype in Option D, for example, is a lot more integrated, and it would be difficult to tweak).
hmmmm... Minor issue - after having voted, I can no longer view the images on the survey. Are they someplace else to look at?-)
I tend to agree with what kupackman has written about A, B, and C. I couldn't get over the symbolism of A, but liked the color setup. B just doesn't seem workable as a logo (Don't know if you ever tried to get logos embroidered on a shirt...) and the colors of B and C while O-specific just don't work for me - for Orienteering USA... The runner with map does present an image, but doesn't seem "logo-ly" enough for me.
k deftly avoided commenting on D, and I just don't get the symbol - though I looked at it for a while. Perhaps it was the powder blue, but more it was the empty circle. Looking at the site referenced above, I like all of the ones with something in the circle better, but they are not on display (And still probably wouldn't surpass E).
In the end, I like the simplicity and implied movement in the contour swoop of E, and voted thusly... The contour swoop is distinct, can be used in any media, and even when asked about, allows a conversation on what it means. It can be uniquely identified with Orienteering USA.
I wish I had thought of all this to comment when I took the survey - sorry - I drew a blank;-)
@ ccsteve
just doesn't seem workable as a logo (Don't know if you ever tried to get logos embroidered on a shirt...)
It's great to see that you're looking at things from the workability, printability, and legibility of the designs!
and the colors of B and C while O-specific just don't work for me - for Orienteering USA
One of the logo design books I read mentions that when you're proposing multiple designs to a client, you shouldn't include color at first. Let the client choose based on design-first, and then talk about colors. We tend to be very biased with colors, so we might pass on a good design just because of the colors. I hope that B and C don't get demerited on color choice. B and C could just as easily use blue and red...
it was the empty circle. Looking at the site referenced above, I like all of the ones with something in the circle better, but they are not on display
As a stand-alone logo, Option D is no better than any of the other four. It's the most abstract, and it probably has the biggest "huh?" factor. My intent was to have the "blank canvas" logo as the overarching O-USA logo, and then allowing the USOF/O-USA folks to paint that canvas with whatever they wanted for various applications (similar to recent rebrands by
MTV and
aol.). That was the original intent, anyway. Presented here, either USOF doesn't want to use that concept, or they intend to use, but couldn't find a way to share that concept as a voting option. I guess I shouldn't presume. I'd say vote on the merits of the five finalists shown, not on whatever else may or may not be behind the curtain.
I was very disappointed with all five logos chosen as finalists.
Here are my reasons why: 1) Orienteering is the sport of map reading, not the sport of how to use a compass. 2) The universal symbol of orienteering is the control flag.
Any really great logo for orienteering should incorporate elements of both the two.
In addition, for a country's orienteering logo, I also think: 3) It should incorporating elements of a country's flag and colors.
Let us look at the five finalists:
A) This is an attractive logo, incorporating elements of 3) - a country's colors. But - it has too much emphasis on the compass, and does not have any elements of 1) map reading or 2) control flag. In addition the lower design is too large and complicated in comparision to the words.
C) The running stick figure is really dated and obsolete, from the 1972 Olympics. Also it puts the emphasis on orienteering as a running sport, to the exclusion of orienteering as a recreation that can be enjoyed at a walking pace, or on bikes or skis or as Trail.O. Also, the square the runner is holding looks like a book, not a map, and there are no real elements of 2) the map or map reading other than the book in the runners face, or 3) - country elements.
B) This is also an attractive design, it has an element of the control flag as background. But again the stick figure is outdated, with too much emphasis on running, and there is no element of a map other than the "book in the runner's face." Also there are no elements of 3). Without the words "USA" it could be any country's logo.
The one thing that could be said for B) is that if one were walking on streets of Moscow, or at the airport in Japan wearing a jacket with logo B), at least one would be recognized as an orienteer because of the background control flag. Again, I emphasize that the control is the worldwide symbol for orienteering. On the streets or train or bus stations of any city in the world, if you see someone with a jacket patch or logo incorporating a control flag, you know instantly that they are an orienteer, even if the rest of the logo is unreadable in Cyrillic or Japanese or Finnish.
D) The light blue arrow with the hole in it does nothing to suggest orienteering. It might as well say "Fishing USA" pointing to a fishing hole. It does not have any elements of 1) map nor 2) control flag. At least it does have navy blue and red elements of 3).
E) How disappointing that this variation of several proposals along this line were chosen. It does come closer than the others in two respects: 1) map - the red wavy lines suggtest contour lines on a map. 3) USA - navy blue and red colors, a star, and the red wavy contour lines also suggesting strips from the USA flag.
However, it lacks elements of 2) - a control flag.
In other variations of this logo as submitted, a control flag existed to the right of the red wavy contour lines, suggesting that in this sport of map reading, reading the map - the contour lines - leads one to the control flag.
Also the word "ORIENTEERING," as a big long word in capital letters, is too overwhelming and intimidating. Would be more inviting as the name of the sport to be in small caps
"Orienteering." (Look at B,C, and D to compare.)
So in summary, it is hard to vote for any of the five proposed logos to represent the US federation governing the map reading sport of orienteering. Too many of them misrepresent the sport with too much emphasis on running or the compass, too little or no emphasis on map reading, and exclude the unique world wide symbol of a control flag.
So sorry. I was hoping for better.
- Sharon Crawford
I agree, Sharon. Not much variety among the panel's choices. This just reflects their own personal preferences. Disappointing. Choose F) None of the Above. There were some really great designs posted here on this thread, none of which made the final 5. I really liked Will's design:
(putting the "USA" on top would make it even better)
I am not American so maybe this doesn't count, but Sharon sure summarized things well I think. Good luck. Not an easy task.
I like C. Some of the concerns above could be addressed if the orange lettering was eliminated and replaced with red and blue letter, the arrow was eliminated and replaced with contour lines above the text leading towards a control box in orange.
I don't really mind the stick figure. There are only so many ways you can draw a person running:
http://www.history.org.uk/library/0910/0000/0162/o...
Of the choices, I prefer C - and chop off the figure and it makes quite a good image. Color is a detail.
Not USAian, but sad to see that Hollowell's design didn't get a run as a finalist.
I was surprised that Hollowell's design didn't make it, either. I liked it, too.
Here's an animated GIF file that captures the flexibility of Option D more than what's shown on the voting site.
The images here are
examples of what you could put inside that little window, depending on the situation, audience, or event. At least, this was in
the proposal I submitted. Maybe they only wanted the arrow with the hole in it...
Just who was on the commitee that chose the five finalists?
Re: committee
"Members of the committee will include members from one or more of each of the following constituencies: Team USA, club leadership, club membership, marketing specialists, and graphic design experts."
That was from the contest rules. I know nothing more.
Hollowell's design still rocks!!!
Hollowell's felt too texas to me and none of my friends understood why the flag was presented that way. To me that is a bad thing if they don't understand it is orienteering when they are all at least familiar with it from my obsession.
Three things:
1) I added my comments to Option E to the other comments I made above. (I wanted to keep all of my comments of the options together.)
2) Pardon my defensiveness here, but for those of you criticizing the final choices here, what did you expect? It was a logo contest with no monetary incentive, with most, if not all, entries submitted by amateurs. (Amateurs from a population that, as a whole, is not known for a sense of style, fashion, or marketing.)
For all of the great designs we had in this thread, there were really only two that had any traction: the contours-as-stripes, and the control-flag-as-USA-flag. And one of them made the final, and the other was polarizing ("I love it" or "It looks too much like another flag!"). We also don't know what the other 45 submissions were, so maybe some of the favorites weren't submitted, for whatever reason.
3) I'm not a big fan of using a control flag as a logo. To me, it's a static item. It represents a destination. It doesn't suggest motion, choice, or the journey in between. Other sports choose more dynamic symbols: baseballs, basketballs, footballs, hockey sticks, soccer balls, bicycles, etc. You rarely (or never) see home plates, hoops, or goalposts (all of which are destinations where success is determined).
The control flag symbol is also insider-y. We all know what it is, but others don't. If our governing body wants a brand/logo that encourages non-orienteers to come and try it, I think that's more important that being able to recognize an orienteer on the streets of Moscow.
(Similarly, I'm not a big fan of the "diver down" flag used as a logo/brand for SCUBA stuff.)
Since the committee supposedly had a significant non-orienteering element to it, maybe they shared my sentiment. There aren't any control flags in the bunch, and only one makes reference to one.
Option B definitely has a control flag behind the compass, but I agree that a control flag in and of itself is not such an exciting thing, it sits there.
I'm not saying that someday an imaginative person won't find a way to display it in an exciting fashion, just not today...
The contours speak to me. Not many other running sports go up, over and down like we do - in fact, they throw tracks out if they don't get them perfectly level;-) Contours drive our navigation, and confound us at times.
The best seem to flow through them.
But hey - you might see things differently - and that's cool too. I love hearing about how others saw better routes than I;-)
B has a control flag referenced, for sure. I was meaning that none of them explicitly had the square shape with triangles.
I think the Obama 2008 campaign logo would make for a nice orienteering logo. Flag stripes as terrain? Check. Giant letter O? Check. (Plus the circle carries its other orienteering symbolisms: compass bezel and control circle (on the map).
also very disappointed with the big 5. as per Sharon. and of course, expressed that on survey with - "is this the best that came in????"
My beef with E the swoop for contours is that they now look more like a duck on water! and they were the only connection with maps.
so maybe this is just to get the 'general' choice, and then maybe listen to the changes suggested around that one. Maybe.
To all,
I thank you for your continued comments but want to remind you to include your comments with your vote as that is what will be forwarded to the board. A forum has been provided. Please use it.
I wanted to reply to GuyO's question regarding the committee make up. As multiple individuals have requested anonimity I will share with you their credentials in aggregate:
- There are 10 judges including me.
- 7 of the judges are active orienteers, abilities range from blue to yellow
- 5 of the judges are active in their club program some in club leadership
- 2 of the judges are active in the national team program
- 4 of the judges have extensive pracitcal and/or educational marketing experience.
- Of the 3 judges who are not orienteers: one is a tenured professor of graphic design with 30+ years design and teaching experience, one is a former VP/Marketing for a Forturne 1000 company and the other is a Director Of Communications for a national governing body of sport
- The following regions of the country are represented: New England, Mid-Atlantic, Mid West, Heartland, Southwest, West, Pacific Northwest.
Moving forward, I will not be responding to this post until the committee has made its recommendation and the board its decision. If you would like to reach me with a question, please call me at 410.802.1125 or email me at glen_schorr@usorienteer.org.
Have a good week. Don't forget to vote.
Glen
And let's not forget that the slate of things you are voting on is arguably a (hopefully discerning) sampling from a population of submissions. I expect that if you are somehow underwhelmed with what you have to vote on, that you didn't submit anything better yourself or didn't induce anyone else to. That train has left the station now, so to speak.
I can find something to like here. If your submissions didn't make it to this stage, that is too bad. If you didn't have a submission, I don't think there is much grounds for complaint. Everyone complained vociferously after the first go around, torpedoing the initial four candidates for the most part.
Here we go again - I want it to represent this, and this, and this, and this... I'm impressed by Glen's even-handed handling of the process. My country changed its logo without consultation, don't care much for the result, but the sky didn't fall in. In fact no-one has even commented, just got on with mapping, planning, training, orienteering.
Unfortunately orienteering is a complex multifaceted sport. It is effectively impossible to represent orienteering in single image, yet everyone tries to do so anyway. A logo needs to be simple and thus cannot be an all-encompassing representation of the sport.
The trick is going to be in making a simple logo that can be implemented in a variety of creative and attractive ways to advertise and market the sport. Look at the whole, people, not the small aspect of the logo itself.
Yes. Glen has handled this process with arguably too much accommodation. He has taken the high road.
I don't have to.
He listened to everyone whine, complain, and do their own arts and crafts projects. Then, to propitiate the mob, he implemented this other process, expending his valuable time and effort to channel this crowd's enthusiasm. Maybe that was a good idea. But, now we get here... after Glen's daily calls for more submissions across multiple fora... and people are still complaining. For shame! No wonder orienteering is a fringe sport. With our crowd in the US, it deserves to be.
Sorry.
Exactly right gruver and jteutsch.
Almost all orienteers I know are left-brain in the extreme (myself included). The left-brain folks I have worked with tend to be just too literal for this kind of thing. Having worked mostly with mathematicians, statisticians, physicists, engineers and neuroscientists for the past 30 years, I have to say we were really useless at corporate identity design issues. In the end, we would just hire an industrial/graphic design firm and they would just talk to us for a day or two and would come up with great designs which we loved but didn't really know exactly why! Anyhow, the discussion has been fun to follow.
Having said all that, check this out:
http://www.britishorienteering.org.uk/index.php Literal in the extreme. Love it or hate it? Why? And, does the uniform ever clash with the control!
I will say that Red White and Blue would seem to be a must - as in so many things American. No? (Full disclosure - I was born in Canada and grew up in the UK but am American now).
I believe there were 35 or so submissions, were there not? We (the paying USOF membership) get to see only 5 arguably poor designs selected by an anonymous blue ribbon panel. I think this whole process has been backwards from the start. We paid for a pro to make some designs, decided we didn't like them and *then* had a design contest?!? And now I'm not allowed to complain because I don't have my own crayons? I don't remember anywhere in the rules where it said ALL USOF members must submit a design or forever hold their peace. I've had just about enough of giving the ED and the Board the benefit of the doubt and free reign to do as they please.
What happened at the board meeting 2 weeks ago? We haven't heard a word. What were the results of the member survey done back in Feb? We're being kept in the dark while being asked to give give give. Don't we deserve some information here?
@Charlie-B: it needs to be red, white and blue to distinguish it from the colours of the UK, France, Puerto Rico, Chile, Laos, Western Samoa, etc?
Well, what US national organizations use colors other than red, white and blue in order to distinguish themselves from similar organizations from those countries?
@Eddie
I'm really struggling with you here on this thread.
On March 5th, you said this: "I think using a compass or an arrow in our logo is a fine idea. Stars and stripes are good too."
Two of the five finalists explicitly have a compass. Two of the five explicitly have arrows. One of the five explicitly has stars and stripes!
And then on March 10th: "The word "orienteering" is just as bad a symbol as a compass. and What's aspirational? Its not a compass.". Wait, now you don't like the compass?
Also from March 10th: "An icon of a running person holding a square?" and "putting contours in a logo (shaped like, say, stripes of the waving american flag) have no meaning whatsoever." And you apparently don't like contours (even though you'd like to see stripes) or the running man, either....
And then from Friday: "I really liked Will's design." Agreed, yeah, it's a nice design. But wouldn't a logo with a control flag in it have no meaning to a non-orienteer, similar to using contours?
And Not much variety among the panel's choices. This just reflects their own personal preferences.
We don't know what the variety was of the 50 submissions. The five finalists show: a compass, a running man, a control flag, an arrow, stars and stripes, pretty much matching the variety discussed here on this thread.
And from today: We get to see only 5 arguably poor designs and There were some really great designs posted here on this thread.
Option A has a compass. You like compasses, I think. Option B has a compass. You like compasses, I think. It also has a running man, which you don't like, I think. Option C has an arrow. You like arrows. It also has a running man, which you don't like, I think. Option D has an arrow. You like arrows. Option E has stars and stripes. You like stars and stripes. It also has contours, which you don't like.
There are elements that you supposedly like in all five finalists. And apparently, there's only one design that you think is "really great". You're a really tough cookie to please.
My only quibble with the finalists is that we have two very similar entrants (B and C) and we don't have Will's. I would have put Will's up there instead of C, I think. But from the credentials on the committee, maybe they know what they are doing. I, for one, like the fact there are marketing/design types on the panel.
Yeah, I probably went too far. Sorry, eddie. My apologies.
I just get frustrated that as one of the amateur designers who volunteered a lot of time and effort for this cause, that we're being panned some by our peers.
Sure, none of the designs are perfect. But they are all workable, and I appreciate all of the effort that went into them. j-man said it best, I think: I can find something to like here.
I can find something to like here.
I can't, so I accept that I will be lambasted for stating so. There were plenty in this thread that I liked, they just didn't make the final cut, for whatever reason. It would be stupid to say the reason isn't important now, because if the best outcome wasn't achieved, it would be valuable to understand why.
I am of the opinion that a) the best outcome wasn't achieved, and b) I have an idea why, but I only have so much capacity to be lambasted. I will say that I find the outcome likely an improvement over the original choices (well, a nominal 60% chance anyway, which I guess qualifies as "likely" :))
So, I'll let Clem blast me for stating this opinion, abstain on the vote, and go back to my hole, and know that the best logo in the thread won't win.
And, going forward, if you don't want people to state their peace, don't hold the discussion on a public forum. No one asked the ED to "expending his valuable time and effort" on this project (that was his own choice), and I don't find a causal relationship with opinions being stated in this thread and orienteering being a fringe sport. If I'm wrong, lets all shut up now, and watch it grow thru the roof :)
It will be hard not to wade in deeper here, but I will try to abstain until much later in the day. Perhaps I am myself on the fringe of the fringe and therefore really outre. Or maybe someone else who has had a taste of similiar processes in other sorts of (more mainstream) organizations will step in to provide some context.
Seems that it's not possible to respond to the survey with a comment without actually checking one of the logos. My comment, therefore, will go unheard.
I was especially surprised to see A in the set of 5, since it was the lack of enthusiasm for the original 4 logos that prompted the contest. In hindsight, I guess I shouldn't have been surprised by this...
Unfortunately B and C have the running man, which I really don't like for the USOF logo. More importantly, these two look look like the AP logo - colors and all. Not sure if Ken submitted these or not, but I believe the rules stated we shouldn't use logos that are already in use. There's nothing wrong with the AP logo, but I think it would be bad form to make the USOF logo look so similar.
Also, B and C are essentially the same logo - one with a compass rose and the other without. Two spots taken in the limited set of 5 are nearly identical, when just one would have sufficed.
I agree with Sharon's point about D, despite the demonstrated utility of the hole.
E is a good concept, but its not my favorite rendition of that design. My fav version of that one is the bottom one
here, posted by danf.
If I had to pick among all the ones I saw it would still be William's stars'n'bars control flag. Wish there could have been room for it in the final 5.
...
Oh, the humanity.
I liked j-man's succinct analysis of this discussion. As most probably know, he quoted Herb Morrison, a famous Chicago broadcaster, who in 1937 reported live on the slo-mo, ponderous,
Hindenburg disaster in New Jersey. I thought the comparison with this logo discussion was apt - here's a bit more of Herb's emotional report:
"....It's practically standing still now. They've dropped ropes out of the nose of the ship, and they've been taken a hold of down on the field by a number of men. It's starting to rain again; it's—the rain had slacked up a little bit. The back motors of the ship are just holding it just, just enough to keep it from — It burst into flames! It burst into flames, and it's falling, it's crashing!...It's fire—and it's crashing! It's crashing terrible! Oh, my, get out of the way, please! It's burning and bursting into flames, and the—and it's falling on the mooring-mast and all the folks agree that this is terrible, this is the worst of the worst catastrophes in the world. Ohhhhh! It's–it's–it's the flames...oh, four- or five-hundred feet into the sky and it ... it's a terrific crash, ladies and gentlemen. It's smoke, and it's flames now ... and the frame is crashing to the ground, not quite to the mooring-mast. Oh, the humanity...."
@randy: I, for one, would be quite intererested in hearing why you think "the best outcome wasn't achieved".
@randy: I, for one, would be quite intererested in hearing why you think "the best outcome wasn't achieved".
Because I don't feel the proper incentives/process were/was in place for the best logos to make the final cut.
Like everyone else, I'm burnt out on this. I'm sorry I ever posted initially, or later. I have nothing more to add, and hope the selected logo meets the goals of the organization.
danf, very nice.
This directly addresses my survey comment about E, that the stripes/contours were too small and misplaced to have impact. For me, this version above has the best graphics, and would be difficult to top. My only question is whether the stripes-as-contours works for non orienteers, but even if the contour connection is not made, I think this is a strong, appropriate, and optimized visual image.
I could live with C or D if significant modifications were made. The less said about A and B, the better. Somebody(ies?) is simply not paying attention.
Now in danf's design above, just add a small control flag in the empty space to the left...
And doesn't the word "Orienteering" look much more friendly in small letters, than email-shouting ORIENTEERING?
...Now in danf's design above, just add a small control flag in the empty space to the left...
A control in the middle of the empty space? Weak course setting Sharon! How about hiding the control in the lower part of the reentrant instead?
If this is selected, please do not add a control. It's subtraction by addition. You just can't keep adding what I call "bumper stickers" to a design. After you add a control, somebody will want a guy running to that control, somebody else will want a tree.
This rendition is simply graceful as is. Dan got it just right. It could use a little bit of kerning in "Orienteering", and maybe the font could be a little warmer, but those are tiny nitpicks on an otherwise classy design.
Ooooh, a tree. That's a good idea. Can we have a tree?
Oh come on Juffy, what if some people prefer orienteering in autumn, others in spring? Maybe someone's favourite map is covered in conifers and that just wouldn't do - so we'd have to use a deciduous tree. If it was us we'd have to us a eucalypt (or a grass tree - but definitely not a native cherry tree!).
Tooms - there's only one option here and you know it: a snottygobble.
I actually know what a snottygobble is.
Nobody gobbles snot like a West Australian.
Nobody other than a west Australian would want to gobble a West Australian's snot. I stick to Victorian.
To all,
Voting closes today. Visit
www.us.orienteering.org. Trees and controls should be placed in the comments section. ;)
Out
Glen
So which logo won the "popular" vote?
As I understand it, the top two vote getters will be submitted to the Board for a final selection to be announced on May 10.
Will we get the results of the logo contest before we get the minutes of the Board meeting that took place a month ago?
To all,
Thanks to the over 700 of you for taking the time to vote. The voting has closed. The results have been forwarded to the committee for recommendation to the board of directors for final decision. This is consistent with the rules as published when we started the contest earlier.
Have a good day.
Sincerely,
Glen
@eddie, I just got the minutes today, and will get them posted soon.
At a teleconference Board Meeting last night, the USOF Board of Directors approved the adoption of the logo we have been calling Arrow/Helvetica. Glen Schorr will now be working with this logo's designer to finalize any refinements of this logo and it will be released on our website for the membership when we have established the final version.
Thank you to everyone who participated in this process, especially those who submitted logos to the contest. The Board felt that the result greatly enhanced our options for the best possible logo. Thanks also to everyone whose active participation, either in discussion or by voting helped us to determine which logos best meet our needs.
Clare Durand
USOF President
So, for those of us who only know the logos as A through E, which is "Arrow/Helvetica"?
To all,
Allison and Peter are correct. The selected logo design is Logo D as noted above. It was designed by Patrick Nuss of COC.
The board has requested some refinements (many of which have been discussed here). I will be meeting with Patrick in the next day or so to discuss. Once that work is complete, we will announce the new logo on the current USOF site.
Thanks to all of you for your participation. Whether you submitted a design, offered your opinion, or both - it led us to a strong conclusion.
Sincerely,
Glen
"Once a member, always a member."
Should say Patrick Nuss of OK/COC. :-)
Are we ever going to see the full results of the online survey -- including that of the "100 non-orienteers"?
Is it available as an OCAD file?
I could whip it up in 0CAD in a jiffy if I knew what to put in the circle. Although I'll wait until the refinements are done.
I made final refinements to the "standard" logos last night and sent them to Glen in the following formats:
.eps (vector)
.pdf (vector)
.png (raster)
The standard set includes:
primary logo, 3-color
banner logo, 3-color
primary logo, 1-color (black on white)
banner logo, 1-color (black on white)
[Edit: link removed. Contact Glen for files.]
The plan going forward is that we'll have the standard logo (shown here), a version specific to the US Teams (one was proposed, but it's likely going to be reworked), and the "blank canvas" version. With the "blank canvas", clubs, members, and event directors can put whatever relevant image they want inside the blue circle, replacing the red circle (see the animated .gif that's floating around out there).
I'll be working on a style guide for proper logo usage, etc, too.
To all,
I have initial files but am waiting on clarification of a few points. If you have a pressing need (I am aware of a few out there) please email me at glen_schorr@usorienteer.org. Please do not request via Attackpoint.
Sincerely,
Glen
Please visit
www.us.orienteering.org to view the new logo and release. You have to click to a link off the home page.
Have a good weekend.
Glen
I've got the logo done in 0CAD (0CAD 8), feel free to drop me an email if you'd like a copy. It uses no fonts, and is therefore completely scalable. I wonder what the first map will be to have the new logo on it...
JJ
Thanks for your energy and initiative. I still need to register the mark which I will do next week. Please hold off on distribution. Email me at glen_schorr@usorienteer.org
Glen
OK. I'll take requests for the logo if anybody asks, but won't send anything out until Glen gives the go-ahead.
JJ
I have the logos ready in various formats. Send me an email at glen_schorr@usorienteer.org and I will send to you.
Glen
Below is a direct quote from the designer:
"I still don't know who all was on the committee, though I didn't ask. It's amazing to think that even though my logo finished 5th of 5 in the popular vote, that five people on the committee basically pushed it hard enough to have it recommended to the board.."
Could someone please explain to me what the purpose of all the voting was???? The "winner" was the 5th out of 5??? Come on! And so the democratic vote is totally disregarded, and we are dictated to by some feckless unnamed politburo committee...
My hunch is that the comments that people left were more important than the vote tally. Quite frankly, it doesn't matter which one the orienteering population liked best. That may have absolutely no correlation to which one *works* best and suits the purposes of the organization. To figure that out, you need to know how people feel when they see a logo, and for that the comments are probably quite telling.
I guess I know who one of the lurkers to my log is now... Since it's been asked here, I'll answer here.
Could someone please explain to me what the purpose of all the voting was????
Read the
original logo competition rules.
Basically, the popular vote is only a factor, and "with the support of the committee the Executive Director will make a final recommendation and provide appropriate background support."
And here's the
final recommendation with background support.
Here's the final comment from that document:
The committee recognizes that we have selected a design that did not win the popular vote. We accept that.
We also accept that the additional work submitted by the artist did a great deal to carry this concept further. This additional work was intentionally not published as part of the straw poll as to create a level playing field and the committee did not see this work until the final round of voting.
It is important to note 50% of the judges scored this logo first of the final five. No other logo received more than two first place votes.
Finally, the two judges that would be most respected by orienteers across the country for their orienteering skills voted this first. That counts.
Should the board accept our recommendation, it may not be a popular decision, but it would be the correct one. None of the five finalists received a clear majority in the straw poll so any decision will be met with some protest.
We just met our "some protest."
From Glen's log:
Later this week the Orienteer Survey results will be posted on the website.
Great! Will the minutes of the BOD teleconference be available soon?
Survey results are in my e-mail inbox, and I'll likely get them posted tomorrow (ran out of time tonight--good night!). I did get the teleconference
minutes in my e-mail today, and posted tonight...along with a few other updates (see Home page). May has been a busy month!
I must admit that the chosen logo design was not my first choice (although the finalized design is an improvement over the surveyed one). That said, I hope that it does all that we hope/want/need it to do.
However, there is one aspect of the process, alluded to by crawfordsl, that I found disturbing: Logo committee anonymity.
In my almost 28 years of orienteering, I consider one of the most positive attributes of the community and organization to be openness. And negative responses to attempts at non-openness have been notable.
Given the sometimes heated nature of the discourse here on AP, requests for anonymity regarding the logo committee are understandable. However, I would respectfully submit that willingness to serve openly as a committee member should be a condition of membership. On the other hand, given the short time frame and the need for a focused discussion, holding off on disclosing membership until after the recommendation was made would have been acceptable.
Anyway, I certainly hope that this was an exception, and that, going forward, anonymous involvement will be discouraged -- if not prohibited.
I don't know if the committee is purposely anonymous, or that it played out that way. Maybe if someone asks, then we'll be told. I never asked, so I'm not too upset about not knowing.
(I'm most interested in what the design/marketing guys had to say about the five finalists, not who their identities are.)
Like kupackman, I would also like to know what the marketing/design folks had to say. Glen's memo included sample comments, but did not indicate which, if any, of them were attributable to experts in the field.
First map to display the new Orienteering USA Logo: Miami University Natural Areas (Orienteering Cincinnati) updated version used on Sunday, 23 May 2010, for the 80m competition of the 2010 US ARDF Championships.
The Billygoat map had it too, so perhaps a tie for first?
fair enough - a US Champs and The Billygoat... - sounds like a pretty impressive pair of first uses.
Did the ARDF map use the standard logo (with the circle in the circle)? The Billygoat took the option of dropping something else in there:
(Yeah, I did screw up the color on the word "Orienteering", partially because I forgot, and partially because I'm colorblind. The "Gruff" sprint map, used in the afternoon, had it in red.)
We've created a monster! ;)
Looks like all of the colors are faded, not just the red.
The blue colors came out (somewhat) stronger on the paper than they do on the screen, but the red is 50% brown.
Very nice, We wanted to insert the ARDF logo (Foot-O symbol except the runner is carrying a receiver antenna) but did not have the USOF logo in ocad yet and ran out of time to play with it. We got the colors in Orienteering and USA right, but the arrow was a little off due to having to convert file formats and open it as a background image. I expect the map will be up on OCIN's Route Gaget pages soon.
What is that thing in the circle? Is that an unhappy member of the Republican Congressional delegation getting ready to shout: "You lie!"? Or is it just one of those flying dragons in Avatar?
On next year's Flying Pig maps, I would expect to see everybody's favorite porcine aviator in that hole. :-D
JJ: Could you send me the logo (RLShadow@aol.com) in OCAD format? Our club is updating a number of our maps this year, and of course I'd like to use the new logo. (Sorry for using this list for this request, I wasn't able to easily find your e-mail address to e-mail you privately.)
This discussion thread is closed.