What the actual fuck? Man I need to catch up on the Sophie Labelle thread. Also I really regret making that post because I’m up to my eyes in islamic contents.
Worst Redesigns. -
- Thread starter deermeat
- Start date
I was shitposting, but I genuinely did not know that they were supposed to be different people. I always heard that you're supposed to rub his belly for good luck, but that may just be bullshit they say because it sounds funny.
It was just a few years ago that they were teaching about the controversy behind the Redskins brand and just about every single student besides maybe 2 people thought that the whole thing was bullshit. Seeing that is just sad.
2000-2015
2015-current
Boomerang's lineup changed the past decade. What used to be a time capsule of older cartoons from the 20th century to early 90s turned to a rerun channel of canned Cartoon Network shows. Boomerang had its own identity of entertainment for all ages. Now it's a dumping ground for leftover CN shows. Shame.
Before:
After:
From pretty bitchin'....
....to AIEEEEE!!!!
After:
From pretty bitchin'....
....to AIEEEEE!!!!
need shoeonhead nudes
kiwifarms.net
Tbh I like that new American Airlines design, it's got some effort put into it whereas most modern design remakes are just trying to be as minimal as possible idk why... so they can be vectorized easier?
I think it looks too "corporate-ey".
That new shirt looks like a Hatsune Miku OC.
Or the uniform of a cyberpunk trashman.
The Philippine Piso used to be made with different materials and sizes that vary depending on the value.
Then they did this, they made them in the same material, produced them so they're almost similar in size, and the only thing that tells if it's higher or lower is the coin's thickness.
Then they did this, they made them in the same material, produced them so they're almost similar in size, and the only thing that tells if it's higher or lower is the coin's thickness.
BRB moving to Phillipines so all my coins can be evenly stacked.
Yes. It's to make vectoring easier. The new American Airlines logo is odd, since the little bird (airplane wing?) thing could be difficult to vectorize properly. Why is it shaded like that?
I think overall it conforms to contemporary design standards, though. The OG design had a lot of little jagged feathers in the bird's wings, which are problematic. They've also upped the kerning on the font, which helps with scaling. The new design is pretty smooth, and aside from the shading (maybe they'll have two versions to use in different contexts; one with shading, one without?) and the fact that they'll now need a minimum of four ink colors per logo instead of just two, I don't see anything "wrong" with it.
Which reminds me: why do video game movies feel the need to deliberately fuck things up? Really the only movie that sort of got it "right" (that I've personally watched) was Mortal Kombat. From 1995.
Old:
Sleek imperial warships that look like what a military empire with a taste for elegance would use versus Soviet-Steel Green surplus warships of the alliance that look like they were manufactured by the lowest bidder.
Old 90s anime designs that look like real people and have proper facial features
New: (2018
both sides: Overdesigned 3D abominations and complete character redesigns that would be at place in any other anime but this one.
I keep screaming but god wont answer.
Sleek imperial warships that look like what a military empire with a taste for elegance would use versus Soviet-Steel Green surplus warships of the alliance that look like they were manufactured by the lowest bidder.
Old 90s anime designs that look like real people and have proper facial features
New: (2018
both sides: Overdesigned 3D abominations and complete character redesigns that would be at place in any other anime but this one.
I keep screaming but god wont answer.
Glad they changed it back.
There's a major difference between a cartoonish caricature and an actual racist stereotype. Native Americans have red skin. It's pretty red, not that red, but it helps this character stand out against the background.
Is this
a 'racist' caricature? It makes Obama, a black man's, nose, mouth, and ears bigger. But before you say anything
This caricature of some white guy does the same thing.
So does this one of an asian woman.
And all of these are similarly exaggerated.
Is there any obvious racist intent in the features of the cartoonish indian redskin, other than his skin being brighter than naturality? The woke ignore all context of entire artforms when making these arguments.
Here's an example of similarly stereotyping inspired from that Cleveland Indians logo.
It's up to you of how you would interpret it.
Personally, I find that particular design cheap and unappealing.
Especially compared to before.
I'm referring to 1928 to 1945.
Attachments
That chart is just disingenuous. What is the sterotype in the cartoon other than the red skin? Nothing else is exaggerated beyond that, other than features that are already commonly done to extremes as is part of the style. What's even racist about most of those anyway, other than the obviousness of the blackface one, and the Chinese? Oh noooo, the jew has a big nose and the mexican guy has a hat on that is commonly associated with the culture because it's a thing that people actually wear to get the sun off their face when farming. The "negroes" and "orientals" are stupid because they're not even close to the mildness that the indians one is. The left actually thinks these are all similar? No wonder their racism arguments make as little sense as they do. The white guy isn't even a gatcha. He looks like a typical businessman new yorker from the 40s when the logo would have been made. He honestly looks like a better jewish stereotype than their jewish stereotype.
I agree that 28 to 45 are more appealing, but they just went with a style that was becoming popular at the time and was chosen for a lot of mascots at the time. It makes it easily recognizable and not lost among the crowd. The new one is just a C and not even stylized. 1921-27 was better than that. They actually just reverted back to their first ever logo like someone regressing to a childlike mentality. What a joke.
I was thinking the exact same thing. The obvious racial stereotyping is the Black one and the Oriental one. Look at the features they exaggerate compared to the pallet swap with the others.
Again, I find that particular logo unappealing and cheap. Not necessarily because of stereotyping, but the design of it. I had wanted to make a comparison with the Washington Redskins to another similar logo to say that the Redskins isn't really offensive.
To answer your question, I'm personally not a fan of THAT kind of caricature.
On that topic in mind, many food brands are removing figures from their branding for "alleged racism."
Aunt Jemina, Mrs. Butterworth, even Land O Lakes to name a few.
Easily distinguishable.
What the hell is THIS?
Seems a lot more like minority erasure to me. They also removed a regular, barely stereotyped, indian woman from that brand of butter. They're just actually getting rid of minority groups in brand media. Kind of hilarious in a way.
No minorities on our food. Just generic placeholders.
Especially when said designs HAD been retouched for a modern age.
That's what bugs me about some simplistic designs. They all blur together now. No originality, no cleverness, just simple text or stock imagery that leaves little room for imagination.
Lola Bunny from Looney Tunes.
Not that I didn't like her Space Jam design, but what the hell? Complete 180 in character design too.
Similar threads
Alt title: 'That's DUKE Lolcow to you, peasant!'
[CONFEDENTIAL] Human PSA with many strange autistic obsessions, failed extortionist
