Looks like they are missing the plot. Logos are supposed to be simple...
this post was submitted on 22 Apr 2025
328 points (98.0% liked)
Fuck AI
2482 readers
1930 users here 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.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
MagicShot.ai - Al Logo Geneator
Geat work
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
I legit thought Lemmy just got ads when I saw this post
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.
I don't like either, but the left one at least scales better for various applications across platforms and media.
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.
And will look like shit even if you manage to do it. Imagine that on a cushion cover after an year of use.
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.
Someone doesn't know what a logo is for, I see.
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.
Yet that is still simple for its monochrome ..... While the ai logo looks like tacky clip art.
Back in the day I legit wanted someone to make a custom black MacBook case that had the Newton logo instead of the Apple. Imagine how cool it would look glowing!
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?
Yeah they ditched it in favor of the rainbow apple I think before they even started mass production of the Apple ][.
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
If this was reality, I might get me an apple computer lol
load more comments
(1 replies)
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...
load more comments
(1 replies)
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?”
load more comments
(13 replies)
"I created" and "with AI" is the newest oxymoron.
Art imitates life
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'mma be honest: I compared the two logos before reading anything, and absolutely loved the one on the left. It made me instantly want to learn more about the company. The one on the right just looks like a low effort depiction of the inside of a house, and I lost interest in what it was offering before I even got to the company name. I clicked in the post to put in my 2 pence, then read the whole image. Yeah... AI sucks.
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
- What are the fundamental rules and standards of designing a logo?
- Based on these rules, generate a logo for the brand "HomeCraft" involving the shape of a house.
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.
load more comments
(2 replies)
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.
The bottom one looks like there’s an old car in the house hahaha
What truly makes a house a home is parking a car in your living room.
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.
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.
view more: next ›