17 Mar The 10 Most Awkward Logos and the Lessons to be Learnt from Them
When it comes to designing a logo, there are many things to consider, such as the colors, the font, and the overall design. However, sometimes things can go wrong, and you end up with an awkward logo that doesn’t quite work. In this article, we’ll be looking at 10 of the most awkward logos out there and the lessons we can learn from them.
1. The London Olympics 2012 Logo
The London Olympics 2012 logo, designed by Wolff Olins, was criticized for its abstract and unconventional design. The logo consisted of jagged, colorful shapes forming the numbers “2012” and the word “London,” with the shapes arranged in a seemingly random and chaotic manner.
From a logo designer’s point of view, the logo’s design was considered to be overly complex, lacking in clarity, and difficult to read and recognize. The unconventional design did not effectively convey the essence of the Olympic Games or represent the host city of London.
Additionally, the logo was criticized for its high cost and for being overly trendy and trying too hard to be “cool.” Overall, the design was considered to be a departure from traditional Olympic logos and was met with mixed reactions from the public and design community.
The lesson here is that simplicity is key when it comes to logo design. If your logo is too complex, it may be difficult to understand and may even offend people.
2. The 2008 Pepsi Logo
The Pepsi logo has gone through many changes over the years, but one of the most awkward was the 2008 redesign. The new logo featured a strange, wavy design that many people thought looked like a fat man with a belly. The 2008 Pepsi Logo is often criticized from a logo designer’s point of view for several reasons:
1. Lack of Originality
The new Pepsi logo was seen as too similar to the previous one, making it hard for consumers to distinguish the two. It lacked originality and failed to convey a fresh, new image for the brand.
2. Over-simplification
The designers of the new Pepsi logo attempted to simplify the design by removing the details and focusing on a minimalist approach. However, they ended up with a design that was too simple and lacked depth, making it uninteresting and forgettable.
3. Inconsistent Message
The new Pepsi logo was intended to convey a sense of youthfulness and energy, but the design failed to communicate this message effectively. Instead, it came across as a generic, bland design with no personality or emotion.
4. Unnecessary Change
The previous Pepsi logo had been successful for decades, and many consumers had a strong emotional connection to it. The decision to change the logo was seen by many as unnecessary and a misstep by the company.
Overall, the 2008 Pepsi Logo was seen as an absurd design from a logo designer’s point of view because it failed to effectively communicate the brand’s message, lacked originality and depth, and made unnecessary changes to a successful design.
The lesson here is that you should be careful when redesigning a logo. If the new design doesn’t improve on the old one, it may be best to stick with what you have.
3. The 2009 Tropicana Logo
The 2009 Tropicana Logo redesign was widely criticized by logo designers and consumers alike for several reasons. Here are some of the main reasons why the redesign was considered absurd from a logo designer’s point of view:
1. Lack of Differentiation
The new Tropicana logo looked very similar to many other orange juice brands, making it difficult for consumers to differentiate Tropicana from its competitors.
2. Confusing Messaging
The redesign removed the iconic image of a straw stuck into an orange, which had been synonymous with the Tropicana brand for decades. This change caused confusion among consumers who no longer knew what to expect from Tropicana.
3. Unappealing Aesthetics
Unappealing aesthetics: The new logo featured a plain and unremarkable font, which failed to convey the freshness and vibrancy of Tropicana’s juice products. The overall design was considered bland and unappealing.
4. Lack of Consumer Engagement
The redesign was carried out without proper consultation with Tropicana’s loyal consumers, who felt that the brand they knew and loved had been taken away from them.
All of these factors contributed to the backlash against the Tropicana logo redesign, which resulted in a significant drop in sales for the brand. From a logo designer’s point of view, the redesign was considered a failure because it failed to capture the essence of the Tropicana brand and connect with consumers in a meaningful way.
4. The City of Melbourne Logo
The City of Melbourne Logo, which was introduced in 2009, has received criticism from some designers and members of the public for several reasons. Here are a few possible reasons why:
1. Lack of Clarity
The logo features a complex and abstract design that can be difficult to understand or recognize. It consists of a swirling shape in various shades of blue, which some viewers may interpret as a river or a bird, but others may not immediately recognize or associate with Melbourne.
2. Inappropriate Color Palette
Some designers have criticized the use of blue and green as the primary colors in the logo, arguing that they do not reflect Melbourne’s cultural or historical identity. Additionally, the shades of blue used in the logo can vary depending on the medium and lighting, which can result in inconsistent branding.
3. Poor Scalability
The complex design of the logo can make it difficult to reproduce effectively in small or large sizes. The swirling shape and small details may become blurry or illegible when scaled down, while enlarging the logo can make it look too busy or overwhelming.
Overall, while the City of Melbourne logo may have some aesthetic qualities, it may be considered problematic from a design perspective due to its lack of clarity, inappropriate color palette, and poor scalability.
5. The University of California Logo
The University of California logo was redesigned in 2012, but the new design was widely criticized for looking like a flushing toilet. The University of California logo has received criticism from some designers for several reasons, including:
1. Lack of Originality
The logo appears to be a modified version of the California state seal, which is a common symbol used by many organizations in the state. As a result, it lacks originality and fails to stand out.
2. Poor Legibility
The logo features a complicated design that can be difficult to read or recognize, particularly at smaller sizes or in low-resolution formats.
3. Inconsistent Usage
The logo has been used inconsistently across the University of California system, with different variations appearing on different campuses or in different contexts. This can lead to confusion and dilute the effectiveness of the brand.
Overall, some designers argue that the University of California logo could benefit from a simpler, more iconic design that is more versatile and recognizable.
6. The 2012 London Paralympics Logo
The 2012 London Paralympics logo was criticized for being too busy and difficult to read. The 2012 London Paralympics logo is often criticized by logo designers for several reasons:
1. Lacks Simplicity
Firstly, the design lacks simplicity, which is a crucial aspect of any effective logo. Instead, it is overly complex and difficult to read at a glance, making it hard for people to remember or recognize.
2. Visually Chaotic
Secondly, the use of jagged lines and bright colors in the logo makes it visually chaotic and confusing, failing to convey a clear message or meaning.
3. Insensitive and Inappropriate
Thirdly, the logo’s attempt to depict the Paralympic spirit by incorporating a human form is considered insensitive and inappropriate by many. The design is seen as stigmatizing disabled individuals by reducing them to a mere symbol or icon.
Overall, the 2012 London Paralympics logo has been widely criticized for its lack of aesthetic appeal, simplicity, and sensitivity towards the disabled community, making it an absurd design from a logo designer’s point of view.
7. The Arlington Pediatric Center Logo
The Arlington Pediatric Center logo may be considered absurd from a logo designer’s perspective because it fails to effectively communicate the intended message of the organization. A logo should be simple, memorable, and visually represent the brand’s identity or core values. However, the Arlington Pediatric Center logo may be lacking in these aspects.
The Arlington Pediatric Center logo may be considered absurd from a logo designer’s perspective because it fails to effectively communicate the intended message of the organization. A logo should be simple, memorable, and visually represent the brand’s identity or core values. However, the Arlington Pediatric Center logo may be lacking in these aspects.
Overall, a logo designer would aim to create a logo that is visually appealing, easily recognizable, and effectively communicates the brand’s identity and values to its target audience.
8. The Brazilian Institute of Oriental Studies Logo
The Brazilian Institute of Oriental Studies logo is considered absurd from a logo designer’s point of view because it violates several basic principles of good logo design.
1. Overly Complex
Firstly, the logo is overly complex and contains too many elements, including an intricate illustration of a dragon, a large amount of text, and multiple colors. This makes it difficult to read and understand at a glance, which is a key aspect of effective logo design.
2. Confusing Visual Message
Secondly, the combination of the dragon illustration and the Latin text is incongruous and creates a confusing visual message. The use of a dragon, a symbol typically associated with East Asian cultures, in conjunction with Latin text and Western-style design elements creates an unclear and potentially offensive message.
3. Lacks Versatality and Scalability
Thirdly, the logo lacks versatility and scalability, meaning it may not work well in different contexts or at different sizes. The intricate illustration of the dragon may be difficult to reproduce at small sizes or in monochrome formats, which could limit its use on different media.
Overall, the Brazilian Institute of Oriental Studies logo is considered absurd by logo designers because it violates basic principles of good design, creating a confusing and ineffective visual message.
9. The Museum of London Logo
The Museum of London logo was redesigned in 2010, but the new design was widely criticized for being too busy and difficult to read. The Museum of London 2010 logo is considered absurd from a logo designer’s point of view because it fails to effectively communicate the museum’s identity or purpose. The logo features a jumbled mess of letters and shapes that are difficult to read and understand. The font choice and arrangement make the logo difficult to read and do not convey any clear message or meaning.
Additionally, the logo is heavily criticized for its lack of originality, as it resembles the logo of the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics. The lack of originality in the design may undermine the credibility of the museum as a unique and innovative institution.
Overall, the Museum of London 2010 logo does not meet the basic principles of effective logo design, which should be simple, memorable, timeless, versatile, and appropriate for the brand’s identity and purpose.
10. The Catholic Church's Archdiocesan Youth Commission Logo
The Catholic Church’s Archdiocesan Youth Commission logo features a strange, awkward design that many people thought looked like a sex act.
From a logo designer’s point of view, the logo is considered absurd because it lacks clarity, simplicity, and coherence in its design. The logo appears to be cluttered with too many design elements and does not have a clear focal point. The use of multiple colors and fonts also adds to the clutter and confusion in the design.
Furthermore, the various elements within the logo do not seem to be well-integrated or cohesive, which makes it difficult for the viewer to comprehend the message that the logo intends to convey. Additionally, the use of several religious symbols, such as the crucifix, the dove, and the alpha and omega, may create confusion for non-Catholic audiences.
Overall, an effective logo design should be simple, memorable, and easily recognizable. The Catholic Church’s Archdiocesan Youth Commission Logo does not meet these criteria, which makes it challenging for viewers to remember and identify the organization it represents.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the 10 logos featured in this blog serve as reminders of the importance of investing time and resources into creating a memorable, effective, and aesthetically pleasing logo design. These examples highlight the potential consequences of poor design choices, including confusing messaging, negative associations, and missed opportunities to connect with audiences. By taking the lessons learned from these awkward logos, businesses and organizations can avoid making similar mistakes and instead create logos that effectively represent their brand and leave a lasting impression on their audiences. Remember, a logo is often the first impression that a business or organization makes, so it is crucial to get it right the first time.