Lol try printing that on merch, dumb dumb. That’s an awful logo. It’s really not even a logo, it’s a scene.
Reminds me of the very first Apple Computer logo:
They dropped that for a simpler logo, and then dropped the simpler logo for an even simpler one.
I would love to see a parallel world where all tech companies logos were all this detailed and old looking
And all the cases had wood paneling
Wait, is that for real?
Wow, yeah, that would be awful in most contexts. Imagine trying to print that on the front of a computer haha.
Lol “dropped”
Well played.
High tech with a 19th century sense of style? I'm sold!
Leather bound user manuals
Cases made of brass and oak
Big clicky switches and knurled knobs
Even if you took that image and used it to create a black and white illustration, it would be way too busy. The logo on the left isn't exactly amazing, but it's decent and checks all the boxes for usability and readability. The one on the right is more like... an image made for an ad which you can't put on a hat for example. The amount of times I've had to explain logo basics to a client who want to do something like the image on the right isn't great, but they usually understand why these rules are in place after explaining and they generally respect my expertise. But not everyone...
I work in an industry that deals with customer logos almost exclusively. I now get at least one person a week bringing in garbage-tier art they made in Canva or whatever that isn’t made to any standard at all, so they have tons of thin lines, gradients, blurring, etc. Shocker, AI only thinks about making it visually appealing when it won’t translate to a one-color, doesn’t have PMS tones to base it on, no simplified version, etc.
People think making a logo is just that. Just the image itself. They don’t think past what’s in front of them.
In my experience, most people have simply never thought about it before. If someone decides they want to open a bakery and they have never had a business before, they haven't thought about everywhere their new logo will be used unless they get that expertise from someone. I've gotten pretty good at explaining these concepts to people and they typically respect my expertise and take my advice, but not everyone 😆
And that’s just it. In the past, you would have contacted a branding firm and paid someone with expertise to do all that for you. Now people think, “Why pay a branding firm when AI can do it in 5 minutes?”
tbh I prefer a logo with lots of colors and gradients, depth, lighting, etc. These ugly ass flat or outline logos have really ruined things
Personal taste is totally fine, but what you're describing isn't a logo, it's an illustration. A good logo specifically must be simple so that it can be applied across a bunch of different contexts — print, digital, large, small. What if you wanted your logomark as a favicon? Depth and lighting would make it look like a smudge at that size. What about stitching your logo onto a hat?
This is the main issue. Logos are part of a brand system, and generating a logo with AI circumvents all that thought. You get something that might look good, but your whole system becomes super fragile.
Again, there's no disagreeing with personal taste, it's just a matter of thoughtful use of the system and medium.
Try embroidering your "logo with lots of colors and gradients, depth, lighting" on a polo shit and see how little of it actually translates. Or even a one color print job on a mailing. It will look like an unrecognizable hot garbage smudge.
Not only will it look terrible it'll be significantly more expensive, each color and complication is going to add to the price. A simple logo with a clean silhouette is going to look nice and save money.
That's really only suitable if the logo is going be displayed at a larger size on a screen. Many times logos will be displayed much smaller, such as when used as a favicon. When you cram too many details into a small space it just becomes noise. This also applies if people glance at the logo, since too much detail will make it difficult to work out what it is.
Also as other people have mentioned. If you are going to be printing your logo, then you do need to have a design that uses just negative and positive space since it's easier to print and will look much cleaner.
Additionally it's pretty common for organizations to have multiple versions of the logo as well. Usually a black and white one, a colored version of it, and versions with and without text. They could also have a more detailed version of the logo as well, but the other versions are more useful, so they may not even bother.
That logo is terrible.
Like, a core component of a good logo is that it’s easily identifiable at a glance at all shapes and sizes and on various backgrounds… complicated photorealistic logos basically lack all of these criteria by default.
This is why you need someone experienced not some ai slop.
Someone doesn't know what a logo is for, I see.
anyone with a year of design training will know why the right "logo" is a pile of shit.
anyone with a month of experience printing will know why the right "logo" is a pile of shit.
anyone who has had 5 minutes with genAI will think they're a design master when they create the "logo" on the right.
I disagree.
Anyone who has spent a few minutes thinking about what a logo is and what it's used for will be able to tell you that one of these is a logo and the other is... a picture.
MagicShot.ai - Al Logo Geneator
Geat work
I've seen so many commercials where a realistic scene fades into the stylized logo that that's what my mind went to.
The left is a better logo, fewer fine details, easy to silk screen, easy to laser print, hell you could make a branding iron and burn it into wood.
Did you seriously think the freelancer isn't capable of creating something like that? Like, do you think that FedEx uses their name with a hidden arrow in the "Ex" because they couldn't hire anyone to draw them a photorealistic delivery truck with a box on it or whatever? Microsoft can't figure out how to make a window with reflections so they use the squares?
The simplicity isn't an accident.
Right?!? I wonder what happens when the business with the AI logo has to pay for full-color printing for all of their materials because their logo is so visually complex.
This isn't an issue if you solely operate digitally, but a storefront needs signage. Advertising becomes much more expensive in process color than 1 or 2 spot colors. Most physical businesses need things like business cards, invoices, purchase orders, packaging, ...
A professional designer will usually create a 1-color or 2-color logo to use for some of those things even when you have a full-color logo design to use on the most "important" materials. AI won't give that level of service, for sure.
Logo on the right is what you give a marketing team so they can tell you the 600 ways it won't print right, cost too much to display, and ultimately rework it into logo on the left.
Looks like they are missing the plot. Logos are supposed to be simple...
AI generated art is the new "cousin who knows Photoshop".
This is fine, and mostly benign.
Imagine the printing costs of putting variations of the right on all your products? Just the color variety alone would add to the production costs.
Reminds me of German Designer Kurt Weidemann who redesigned the Logo of German train company Deutsche Bahn in the 90s. He inverted the colors, got rid of one outline — and still saves the company millions over the years because of the paint that is saved putting the logo on all trains. All while modernising the typography, but remaining true to the brand.
This is what design is about — everything else is decoration.
Ai did a shit job.
-Ex graphic designer
The one on the right is prettier (not necessarily better. I've read some comments by people that know more than I do with some valid points). However, to create the image on the right, they probably fed the AI the image from the left, made by a designer.
Considering they probably fed the left image into the ai to make the right image, it’s rather silly.
“I made this logo with only an ai model, and can-do attitude, and a logo.”
"Guys I turned your Nike logo from a swoosh to wind blowing dust in a vague swoosh like shape also there's a foot there so you know where it came from and we'll stitch that on AAAAAAALLLL your products and guys... Guys? What do you mean I'm fired?"
The one on the left is superior for a massive number of reasons.
Simple and easy to print, make copies of documents without becoming illegible, and other paperwork related reasons.
Easy to recognize at a glance. The one on the right is really hard to make out at a small size. Just a bland beige blob.
There is a reason most familiar logos are monochrome or only a few colors, and simplicity is one of them. The one on the right looks like overly bust clipart.
The one on the left is a couch inside a house with a lamp, all of which make sense together. The plants overlap the wall and there is a chandelier over the couch on the right one. Who puts a chandalier over a couch?
Ugh, I know it is obviously awful but I had to get it out.
so sayeth artist_mariana lmao
She’s an artist the way I’m a chef when I go to a restaurant and order food.
I legit thought Lemmy just got ads when I saw this post
This is not an AI vs professional human issue, this is an issue with taste. You cannot prevent someone from pointing to the right option and saying "I want that to be my logo because it's a pretty illustration"
You can easily get ChatGPT to generate logos that are at least functional, give it a try. Start with
I'm not saying it comes close what a professional will give you, but it's a million times better than what your worst DIY client brings to the table.
That's fair. I think the biggest problem with AI logos is getting the AI to calm down. It can't help but to fill the slop bucket completely full; even if you tell it to keep things simple, it has an overwhelming urge to just keep pumping in more detail.
Imo, the left hand logo is better. Can you imagine trying to get the right side logo on a hat? Probably the best you could do for a reasonable price is a shitty screen print job that'll fall apart soon.
I decided to see what would be made following your prompt. Here's the image.
Seems decent. Doesn't really have the warmth of a home, but that's more on the prompt specifying house without further detail. I took it a step further and told it to add a couch and a lamp like in the logo in the op.
I definitely prefer the freelancer one but I don't think it's bad. Certainly better than the logo in the op lmao.
Edit: given where I am I should probably specify I think it's not bad compared to the trash fire that is the ai logo in the op. Design wise it's very lazy and looks like someone threw in a pair of icons from an icon pack into a house in a generic way. The two assets in the house do not feel like they exist within the same space.
Especially since the magicsh*t ai version will be SO identifiable as a favicon
What is up with the weird soft look that so many AI images have?
It’s probably trained on a fuckton of Thomas Kinkade paintings, just statistically, since his output was so huge. He also had that kind of lighting going on, so it wouldn’t surprise me if that’s just baked into AI image generation now.
"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
