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
IBM's wasn't nearly as detailed but I really like it too
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.
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...
Ai did a shit job.
-Ex graphic designer
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.
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.”
I wonder if a fucker like this has commissioned a logo, fed an initial design through AI, and then refused to pay the initial designer.
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?”
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.
No experience in printing, but I guess its impossible to Print that Logo with that Kind of Detail in a timely manner without it looking like shit?
Also, everyone who ever heard about web design and hosting will know that such a picture is impossible to scale up and down, and also that picture will take up literal gigabytes since you can neither use normal PNGs because of the quality nor vector based art (they store the picture as mathematical equasions, so the PC has to render them, but it can be indefinitely made smaller and bigger without it becoming more pixely) because that sort of detail will just be impossible to render on grandmas smart TV from 2010, so you will have to store this picture as PNG in different formats as many times as you want to display that image
MagicShot.ai - Al Logo Geneator
Geat work
This is the modern-day equivalent of Frontpage/clipart
I get what you're saying (esp low-quality clip-art), though lots of clipart was actually vector art (like autotraced from physical art, giving some prominent styles) so would probably make for a better logo than what they generated here.
Let me curse in Church for a bit:
I like the AI image more. Why? Because this "flat and colorless" trend of Windows 8 going forward has been a fucking curse. Everything is flat and colorless now :(
I've read some comments here, and I can agree that the generated image is too complex, but the original design has gone too bland for my liking.
/cursing
Eh, I mean... Boo! AI Bad!
Agreed
Looks like they are missing the plot. Logos are supposed to be simple...
"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?"
Especially since the magicsh*t ai version will be SO identifiable as a favicon
I see an old-timey ghost inside a house silhouette.
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.
Someone doesn't know what a logo is for, I see.
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.
I would NOT support a business that has an AI generated image.
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.
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.
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.
I legit thought Lemmy just got ads when I saw this post
AI generated art is the new "cousin who knows Photoshop".
This is fine, and mostly benign.
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.
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.
so sayeth artist_mariana lmao
She’s an artist the way I’m a chef when I go to a restaurant and order food.
"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.
