London 2012. What Would You Choose?

 
One of these logos was chosen for London's bid to host the 2012 Olympics.  If you know how this story ends—please don't give it away!  If not—which one would you select?

Comments

[Chris M.]

I do know how it ends, but of those, either 2 or 4, preferably 2.

[Cam Beck]

I'd probably cast my vote with "None of the above." They're all too cute by half, if not three-quarters.

If I had to choose one from what is available, I'd pick #2, #4, or #5.

My first instinct was to pick #5, but I can see the challenge with incorporating it into a lot of designs.

[Kristina Meyer]

I like 4 or maybe 2. I think 6 and 1 are the weakest of the lot.

[Dave]

I know how it ends and as a Brit I'm ashamed. I'd go for 4, then 2, then 5. I'm interested in what the IOC have to say, given their tight control over the five rings.

[G.B. Veerman]

4 because it leverages the equity on the five rings in a playful, clean way. But that's also a demerit; you probably don't want to mess with that equity, plus it means your logo isn't really

5 because it's the most iconic, reproducible, recognizable of the bunch and the only one that attempts a story about the host country. Solid vertical composition/weight but enough energy in the frilly banner things to lend some dynamism.

The rest are way forced; trying too hard to make something out of the date (except the derivative underground thing), and dates aren't really that interesting. I'm scared to find which one they chose. They do have designers in the UK, yes?

[maria]

i would like to see the best of these (1, 2 & 4) combined somehow. none of them really do it for me as a "finished" logo.

[Tim Siedell]

A new agency.

[Roger Anderson]

5 - First because it is conservative, which most people's taste tends to prefer. I'm not saying it is right, just saying it fits. It also incorporates the country image. It can be scaled down to fit on most any article of clothing or medal.
Second - I seem to have an affinity for the number 5.
BTW - if the logo is this bad how bad are the medals going to be? Anyone remember the Salt Lake medals? Uugh.

[Marco]

Not crazy about any of these but I'd pick 2 if I had to choose from these.

The truth however hurts a lot more...

[jPlamano]

i want 4 and 5... but more on number 4! 0_o

[Mack Collier]

Tim is right. We're all ragging on the 'winner', but which of those logos is really anything to write home about? I think #2 and #5 are average efforts, but this is far from a solid group. I can see another 3 logos that likely would have resulted in the 'what were they thinking?' response that we are hearing for the 'winner'.

[Adam Kayce : Monk At Work]

I like 2, 4, and 5 (somewhat). If I had to guess, I'd say they're going to go with #5 — it has that 'Olympic committee' feel.

If I had to pick, I'd probably go with #4.

[Mark Goren]

I think #2 is tops in this bunch. But I agree with Mack, let's see some more.

In fact, I think #2 is well ahead of any others on the sheet. The only problem I have with it – and this is no small comment given the event – is that the rings seem thrown in, an afterthought.

The type, however, is smart, fun and rewarding.

[Lisa Gates]

Start over, I say, using #4 as the basis
So easy to be the monday-morning quarterback, but anything but #6--it's perfectly hideous.

[Dan Mandle]

I can't decide from among 2, 3, or 4. Probably a sucker for 3 because EVERYone knows about London's Tube. 2 and 4 are comforting probably because I automatically equate those rings with the Olympics. Perhaps for all these reasons I should choose 1?

I'll be interested to see the results of the unofficial blogger polling.

[Justin Pease]

I know how it ends too, but..

#1 - Looks like MTV / VH1 type TV station logo.

#2 - Does that say "Zordon"??

#3 - Yawn.

#4 - A little imagination, but needs refining.

#5 - Visually appealing.

#6 - Is that font related to Comic Sans?

#7 - I've seen this one like 20 times and just finally realized that the numbers weren't JUST screwed up. They are screwed up AND make a silly running stick figure man.

Are any of theses fit to represent an world-wide event, a country, or deserving of a rumored US$800,000 budget. I think not.

[DA]

Wow, guess a bunch of you have not seen what got selected. #6 is what made the cut. I agree than none really "nailed it" though I do think 4 shows potential. And I'm with Lisa Gates on this. It is "perfectly hideous". But see my next post.

Though personally I think the "winning" logo is ugly—I also think it's a poor example of visual communication. It doesn't tell us much. It doesn't do London or the Olympics justice. It is "just a jaggy picture" to quote Seth.

[LaSandra Brill]

If I had to choose one of these I'd say #4 and #5 are the best options but I didn't really like any of them - especially the winning one.

[cubus]

Number 4 would have been a much beter choice. Really clean design.

[Michele]

I would go for number 4, but how come no one likes 3?
Hopefully those who made the final decision will come back on it - it's just unbelievable.

[Todor Christov]

As far as London is in UK, logo #5 looks best to me.

[John]

#6, but the Olympic rings and type in the logo are not working for me. The other logos are rather predictable (excluding #1), and not very compelling .

[Jessica]

I like number #4 the best although I know the winner.

[Stijn]

What a joke! I would have chosen number #4, but i know who won.

[Lori Magno]

Number 2. London in a heartbeat.

[Steven C.]

I'm a lil late to the game, but I like #4 the best.

And I really don't understand the requirement to make the design elements spell out "2012". Seems a bit cliched to me

[Instinctive Traveller]

Number 4.

[Gino]

I agree with the above commenter who said this is all rather predictable. I think they are uninspired and it is no surprise that in such a field that anything that is even just a little out of box triumphs.