The logo for the 2012 Olympics cost $1 million! Designed by a professional design group. "The logo's been described as a load of rubbish, an international embarrassment, childlike graffiti and a bomb blast. " Plus their animated flim for the logo promoting the 2012 Games causes eplipetic seizures: One person's story: [quote]Pip Hatcher's husband Colin had a seizure when he saw the ad on the TV. PIP HATCHER: He was looking at it on the television and he suddenly went bright red and he was screaming at me, please turn the telly off quick. He said to me he was (inaudible) and he actually went into a fit. He went all over the floor and it was really affecting him so I had to walk up the room, quickly to the television and turn it off. And then he was in a fit. Mainly anything flashing lights like that, he can't bear. He does not like flashing lights at all, but that was worse than he's ever seen. [/quote] Article: "No medal for new London Olympic logo" http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2007/s1944652.htm They must have forgotten to run it through the test for it, on the Harding FPA machine, like what people in the tv industry use. So they took out a certain sequence in the commercial now. Not the logo yet...but 45,000 people signed an online petition to change the logo too! The logo: from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/06/04/nolympics104.xml It spells 2012 in case you didn't notice! The animation - don't watch it if you have epilepsy: "London 2012 Logo" http://youtube.com/watch?v=txXC6PwgEmc&mode=related&search= news show on it: "London unveils logo of 2012 Olympic Games" [youtube]8aysQbw_Xh8[/youtube] Interesting youtube video: "London 2012 Logo in 7.58 minutes" [youtube]oicBOVZcO4Y&mode=related&search=[/youtube] some disclaimer from youtube poster: "Another thing I would like to add is that I know that it is not how quickly a logo can be recreated that determines how good it is, this video was made mainly to disband the belief that some people who do not know anything about graphic design held, that the logo must be "more complicated than it looks" and that somehow, the hefty pricetag was justified by the complexity of production." I was just going to say the $ in a design such as a logo is not in the complexity but in the design! lol

At first glance if you just kind of skim over the logo, it kind of looks like the shapes of the competition arenas.

thats too much money for a logo,they can do better than that,no offense.

IOC likes the logo: [quote]Avert your eyes The London organizers also are skewing youthful, introducing a Cubist-like logo with four jagged pieces that form the number 2012 and comes in four colors: blue, green, orange, and pink. It's so jarring, though, that the committee took the animated version off its website after worries that it could cause epileptic seizures. It's the most controversial Olympic symbol since Atlanta presented Whatizit , its mutant insect mascot. The jigsaw, sniffs London's Design Museum founder Stephen Bayley , is "a puerile mess, an artistic flop, and a commercial scandal." The IOC loves it, though, and the organizers, who spent nearly $800,000 creating the logo, are undaunted. "It's vital that we reach out to those young people in a language that they understand and in technology that's familiar to them," says committee chief Sebastian Coe. "This brand is absolutely the world they live in." The IOC also is happy with London's progress, with coordination commission chief Denis Oswald calling it "on time and on track" and ahead of where other host cities have been five years out from the Games . . . [/quote] Article: "An idea to get young people on board" - http://www.boston.com/sports/articles/2007/06/20/an_idea_to_get_young_people_on_board/?page=1 Olympic Notes