FIRST Email - Introducing Evolution of the FIRST Logo

[Kevin Sevcik]

Originally Posted by Courtneyb1023

maybe they are only doing this to make us realise how great the other logo was. They'll use this new one for a while, then go back to the old one that everyone knows and loves, and call it "retro"...i am going to choose to beleive that...

So the new logo is like New Coke?

[Venkatesh]

Last time they changed the logo (last year or the year before), the edit was a minor one, which some people favored and some opposed.

This time, I can't see any praise for the new logo. The old one was clean, elegant, and extremely effective. The message I got from it was that from the simplest building blocks of shapes, the triangle, circle, and square, anything that could be imagined could be built. The straight-line approach and the bold lines and colors on them indicated simplicity, not a new "suaveness". I will continue to use the old logo whenever and wherever I need to use a logo.

[Dorienne]

I kind of like the logo. It's just more different and FIRST has become warped -- in a good way. =D

*grumble* Now I need to change my avatar... *grumble*

[Alexander McGee]

Personally, I think it's awful. I like the old one much better. Maddox's article about "extreme advertising" sums up my feelings for this. It doesn't even look better with the circle completed. The words FIRST shouldn't be offset, and there shouldnt be a difference in lettering position. And, I am just not a fan of the angled triangle, circle and square.

Oh well. Things change. We've just got to adjust I guess.

[dlavery]

Considering the alternative logos designs that they COULD have used (), the new one isn't so bad...

-dave

[JoeXIII'007]

Originally Posted by dlavery

Considering the alternative logos designs that they COULD have used (), the new one isn't so bad...

-dave

VERY TRUE!!!! But, I look at the old logo and I think 'FIRST is really something' and then I see the new one and I think . In fact there is a lot that can be done to the new logo to make it look much better:

-Outline the corners of the triangle, square, and circle to give it a nice, tech look.
-Space out the 'FIRST' letters and center align the word.

Otherwise, I'm willing to accept the new logo.

[roboticsguy1988]

I agree with a lot of the topic replies in this thread. The new logo is worse than the older one, and it does look like a cartoon, and it does look like something meant for FLL. FIRST could have made a better logo if they really wanted a new one. The old one really looked more professional, and a lot more attractive.

I also feel that the standards are somewhat strict , however, i do realize that they have to be to a certain extent. Also i think that they should have two separate logo's one thats animated for such things as websites, animations, videos, etc. and then another thats still for things like Shirts, Printouts, Banners, etc.

[ShadowKnight]

I would like to say that for whatever reason, FIRST feels that this new logo embodies how FIRST has changed. FIRST has changed and they want their smbol to represent that change. As other have said, FIRST has not commented on why they have made this change, however I am certain FIRST has its reasons and they are valid. The important thing is not the symbol but what the symbol stands for.

[dez250]

Please as an effort to explain why the change has occured, read the Q&A section of the Evolution of the FIRST Logo and see why FIRST has decided to change their logo. Also The transition period for the new logo to be introduced is an expected year. To get the new graphics for print and electronic uses please visit the FRC Resource Center and to see the new logo standards for use and regulation, please see the Logo Standards Documentation .

[Billfred]

Originally Posted by dlavery

Considering the alternative logos designs that they COULD have used (), the new one isn't so bad...

-dave

I want to point something out. Look at the O and S in Microsoft. Then look at the S and T in FIRST.

I'll give you all a minute to shake in your boots.

[Alexander McGee]

Originally Posted by Billfred

I want to point something out. Look at the O and S in Microsoft. Then look at the S and T in FIRST.

I'll give you all a minute to shake in your boots.

Wow. You're absolutely right. That is frightening.

I think the new logo looks a lot like: Someone attempting to recreate the old one, having only seen the old one for a split second, and having NO graphical experience whatsoever.

I am frankly bewildered with the seriousness that FIRST has placed on this. I understand the importance of creating a new logo, but it is as if they expected us to hate it, but demand us to adapt regardless.

As someone who has been involved with FIRST since the conception of FLL, I have grow quite attached to the old logo. It means something to me. It brings back memories. Very good memories. This new logo probably wont upset people who haven't been involved as long as I, but you who have been in this as long as I know the feeling.

I just don't like it.

[Alexander McGee]

Is there somewhere we can write letters to, or a petition, to a specific person at FIRST to change it back to the old one?

Just a thought...

[Joe Ross]

I think it's fairly clear what's happened.

Think about the evolution of the FIRST logo. First they added a TM symbol to it, then SM. They new logo is a Registered Trademark.

Years ago, everybody modified the FIRST logo for whatever they wanted. Then FIRST asked people to ask for permission before modifying the logo, and pretty much allowed almost all modifications. Then in the last year or two, they became much more strict about giving permission, and yet most people modified the logo without asking permission.

As Kevin said, we want FIRST to be able to promote effectively, but the old logo was so commonly modified, they had no real way to defend the tradmark.

So, they had to start over, and now they have a no modification policy. Now they will be able to defend their trademark.

Whether or not you like it, I wouldn't be suprised at all if this is the real reason.

[Alexander McGee]

Originally Posted by Joe Ross

I think it's fairly clear what's happened.

Think about the evolution of the FIRST logo. First they added a TM symbol to it, then SM. They new logo is a Registered Trademark.

Years ago, everybody modified the FIRST logo for whatever they wanted. Then FIRST asked people to ask for permission before modifying the logo, and pretty much allowed almost all modifications. Then in the last year or two, they became much more strict about giving permission, and yet most people modified the logo without asking permission.

As Kevin said, we want FIRST to be able to promote effectively, but the old logo was so commonly modified, they had no real way to defend the tradmark.

So, they had to start over, and now they have a no modification policy. Now they will be able to defend their trademark.

Whether or not you like it, I wouldn't be suprised at all if this is the real reason.

People are still going to modify the new logo. It's not going to be any different. The old logo was a registered trademark as well (see my signature). No one cares weather or not an image is trademarked, people will still be re-creating it and editing it to suit their needs, with or without permission. I mean, seriously, what is FIRST going to do? If some team with a modified FIRST logo on their t-shirt is at a competition, what would FIRST do? It's not like they will stop you from competing, or file a law-suit against you.

If "defending their trademark" is so important, then why change it? Why not crack down on the offenders and make them "get permission" to modify the logo? Like I said before, FIRST isn't about hurting teams. If anything, the "transition" period where 2 logos will co-exist will be most hurtful for their logo.

A universal logo is (A) never going to exist and (B) wont do them any more good than it already has. Look at the animation entries for the last few years. People try to re-create the FIRST logo in their animations, in 3D. These things get publicized WAY more than just images of people's t-shirts, banners, and robots.

I don't think that their intentions were to be able to "defend their trademark". I just think someone thought it was time for a change.

[Karthik]

Originally Posted by JosephM

In the spirit of the oxymoron 'constructive critisim', I have posted a revised version of the logo that just looks right.

I appreciate that you're trying to help but, you should really read the FIRST logo standards .

Specifically pages 14-16 of the .pdf document, the section entitled "Do not alter the logos".

We may not like the logo, but that doesn't mean we should go around and blatantly disrespect FIRST by ignoring their wishes.