First we had the new flag debate, now we’ve got the Auckland Supercity Logo. It’s all fun stuff, but the conspiracy theorists amongst us should be having a field day!

Here are my thoughts …

http://www.ad3.co.nz/blog/

I agree the logo design job would be best done by a specialist, but in my experience it’s not uncommon for “design competitions” to be run for logo development projects (companies sometimes invite staff to participate in similar kinds of competitions, and then use that input to help brief a professional design company who may or may not build on those concepts). It’s hardly life-threatening surely.

In my view we’re running the risk making a big deal about something that would have been far better dealt with by DINZ face to face with the Auckland Transition Agency.

My personal feeling is that DINZ is beginning to look rather petulant and our design industry somewhat insecure and lacking in self belief and confidence.

Is it such a bad thing to ask stakeholders with or without formal design training to have a go? Do you really think this will undermine the value of high quality professional design work? Are designers the final arbiters of everything creative? I don’t think so.

The biggest threat to the profession is the poor quality of work produced by an increasing number of so called professional designers. It lowers peoples perception of the value and quality of good design, and limits the ability of the profession to make a strategic contribution to the national economy as a consequence.

That’s an issue I’d rather the industry (and design schools) talked about much more so than a logo competition that will no doubt be enjoyed by many schools and students, and even the odd design company, for a couple of weeks in an entire lifetime.

http://thefreelogomakers.com/free-services/free-logo-maker/

have fun!

http://search.twitter.com/search?q=@hamish_keith

But on the other hand – wouldn’t it otherwise be millions of our tax payer dollars forked out to an agency that might come up with something that could easily be just as bad.

They do really need designers on that panel.

He talked about the logo being the ‘door’ to the brand and the bigger picture of firstly creating a brand story.

He also pointed out that there is a lack of brief in this competition, we have been given no idea as to the strategy that should underpin the logo and what the essence of the Auckland Super City is or needs to be.

I do ike the idea of involving the community in the process, but I think it should be as a method of finding out what the essence of Auckland is.

Asking the community to design the logo undermines the years of education and experience that a professional graphic designer is working with when they come up with a ‘logo’. The moment of inspiration doesn’t come out of nowhere but from this total sum of the designers working and personal life experience spent looking through the eye of a designer at everything around them.

On another note, in a economic climate such as today, there are many qualified graphic designers out there that would have greatly benefited from such a contract and $10,000 worth of prizes just won’t cut it.

And why can’t we look to the Auckland Brand to represent the new Auckland Council? http://www.brandauckland.com/index.html

Some great interpretations of the brand have been created by illustatrors and artists such as Glennz and Penny Stotter.
http://www.brandauckland.com/the-brand-artists.html

I am stoked DINZ is showing such great leadership, looking forward to hearing Brian Richards on TVONE Breakfast tomorrow.

And besides – whats wrong with the current (brand new) City Council logo anyway?

Seriously though… I’m trying really hard to understand why they may of taken this approach. And seeing as Auckland City’s latest re-brand cost anywhere from ($25,000 – $1,000,000) this does appear to be a more ‘cost effective and open’ way of doing things as well as trying to counter-act or prevent anymore controversial Auckland City Council’s brand similarities.

[ReQuote - DINZ Statement] “Auckland is home to many world class brand strategy and graphic design firms, many of whom consistently win awards. . . . Let’s not even mention what such a competition can potentially do to the credibility of design and our international reputation as a design led innovative nation.”

I completely agree, but maybe (dare I say it) Telecom’s re-brand has something to do with why they approach this they way they are. The initial feedback on Telecom’s branding exercise from the Design community and general public wasn’t the most positive either and that *was* done by one of New Zealand’s leading Design agencies.

At the end of the day, I don’t think you can please everyone, but I don’t think this is the right approach either. The *best* Designers/brand strategist are not going have the time, energy or patience to take this one seriously, are they?

Also enjoyed the humorous debate on Public Address.