MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: Karen on June 01, 2016, 13:57
-
Fotolia new logo:
https://blog.fotolia.com/us/2016/05/31/10946/?scid=social_20160531_62205976&adbid=737566469521702912&adbpl=tw&adbpr=7456542 (https://blog.fotolia.com/us/2016/05/31/10946/?scid=social_20160531_62205976&adbid=737566469521702912&adbpl=tw&adbpr=7456542)
-
Wonder how much they paid for that. :o And I wonder why it doesn't have the red Adobe A in it.
-
Who cares - just sell images.
-
Such a logo for (and from) someone who is creating products for millions of designers... it's an understatement to say I expected more.
They could have just outsourced it to some of their customers and there's a high degree of probability it would look better. Hell - they could have paid 5$ on fiverr and gotten a better logo.
-
Probably the laziest logo any company can do. They probably debated for weeks over the logo font.
It lacks any type of branding, but maybe that's what they want. They want it to be part of Adobe and not its own product.
-
That's a good logo actually.
It fits into the Adobe brand, much better than the old one.
By the way a logo doesn't need to be made of a icons and symbols.
Logos made out of typography are timeless. Think about it.
-
That's a good logo actually.
It fits into the Adobe brand, much better than the old one.
By the way a logo doesn't need to be made of a icons and symbols.
Logos made out of typography are timeless. Think about it.
Right.
Logo, from the greek logos: word, speech (so typography, and not icon or symbol)
-
That's a good logo actually.
It fits into the Adobe brand, much better than the old one.
By the way a logo doesn't need to be made of a icons and symbols.
Logos made out of typography are timeless. Think about it.
Right.
Logo, from the greek logos: word, speech (so typography, and not icon or symbol)
Wrong.
If it were directly from the greek it would be logos not logo. Logo is the combining form of the word and was first used in the 1930s in logogram or logotyoe, so either symbol or typography, and subsequently abbreviated to logo.
-
That's a good logo actually.
It fits into the Adobe brand, much better than the old one.
By the way a logo doesn't need to be made of a icons and symbols.
Logos made out of typography are timeless. Think about it.
Logo, from the greek logos: word, speech (so typography, and not icon or symbol)
Wrong.
If it were directly from the greek it would be logos not logo. Logo is the combining form of the word and was first used in the 1930s in logogram or logotyoe, so either symbol or typography, and subsequently abbreviated to logo.
You are partially right but you also should understand well how the languages evolve…
If all words from greek origin (or other origins) had kept their original forms we all speak completely different languages today… :D :D
It is obvious that the sense of the words evolves and even changes completely in time, but logo comes from logos whose meaning is word, and you cannot change nothing to that.
From Wikipedia:
"In the days of hot metal typesetting, a logotype was one word cast as a single piece of type, e.g. "The" in ATF Garamond (as opposed to a ligature, which is two or more letters joined, but not forming a word).[2] By extension, the term was also used for a uniquely set and arranged typeface or colophon. At the level of mass communication and in common usage a company's logo is today often synonymous with its trademark or brand."
And hot metal typesetting is very anterior to 1930 so your affirmation "was first used in the 1930s" is wrong.
-
I am not partially right, I am totally right.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/logo (http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/logo) - a more authoritative source on etymology than Wikipedia. You are missing a step in evolution, logo did not come directly from logos but instead from logotype and logogram which themselves used logo- as a loanword. A logo is meant to convey words symbolically: it does not need to be a word itself.
I am more interested, though, on whether it will help sales. Last month Fotolia sales were 5% of SS sales for me and even behind 123RF.
-
It's like "iStock by Getty". I'm not sure anyone cares.
-
I am not partially right, I am totally right.
[url]http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/logo[/url] ([url]http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/logo[/url]) - a more authoritative source on etymology than Wikipedia. You are missing a step in evolution, logo did not come directly from logos but instead from logotype and logogram which themselves used logo- as a loanword. A logo is meant to convey words symbolically: it does not need to be a word itself.
I am more interested, though, on whether it will help sales. Last month Fotolia sales were 5% of SS sales for me and even behind 123RF.
I never told that logo came directly from logos. I told that it came from logos. period.
I have also told that the sense of words change in time.
And if you take the composition of logo-type it is logo: word and type: type… (so nothing to do with any graphic symbol).
The fact that today we consider that a logo is a graphic sign (and not only text) is only a diversion from the original sense of the word, precisely due to the changing (evolution) of the meaning of the words.
And maybe the oxford dictionary is a a more authoritative source on etymology than Wikipedia, I could agree with this, but this does not mean that what they say is absolutely right.
By the way your Oxford dictionary gives 2 lines about "Logo" while Wikipedia gives the equivalent of 2 or 3 pages… I don't know which one we can define to be more precise and authoritative (even if the reputation of Oxford is higher that the one of Wiki)…
And to conclude, I have always thought that only arrogant and stupid people think that they are totally right.
So, okay, you are totally right…… (your own words) :p
-
That's a good logo actually.
It fits into the Adobe brand, much better than the old one.
By the way a logo doesn't need to be made of a icons and symbols.
Logos made out of typography are timeless. Think about it.
You are right, let's look at Coca-Cola, Levi's, wait, no, there is a symbol too there. Ok, then Pepsi, ups there is symbol again. Maybe Chevrolet, Mercedes, VW, ....
-
The old symbol and the green in the old logo always looked off to me, so I'm glad they got rid of that. But to say that this is a major upgrade, no. Rather a lazy one.
-
It does the job of looking like the other adobe products. I never liked the rebranding when they did it with all the other programs. So its successfully bad to me... =)