4 ms·

How Google Got Its Colorful Logo

25 points by yaj 18y ago

ErrantX 18y ago
I always thought that the founders had done it themselves (in fact I am SURE I read a book about the beginnings of Google that said so explicitly). Actually it left me a bit disappointed to find that it had been "designed" :( Google always used to make me feel (as a crap graphic artist) that Home-brew logos COULD go a long way.
- mcargian 18y ago
  > Actually it left me a bit disappointed to find that it had been "designed" I'm disappointed it was "designed" since it looks exactly like a home-brew logo.
- wheels 18y ago
  I'm pretty sure the founders did this one themselves: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Google1998.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Google1998.png The design seems to have been an iterative process of trying to modernize that, that ended up not being too far from the original concept-wise.
  - ErrantX 18y ago
    Ah gotcha! That is wha tI was thinking of thanks. @IsaacSchlueter: I know what you mean (it's one of those logos that just "describes" the brand without any support).
  - yters 18y ago
    While the new one is more substantial feeling with the darker tones, the original isn't too bad either.
- IsaacSchlueter 18y ago
  It is a really good logo. I mean, it's up there with CocaCola and Nike, imo. I had always thought it must have been done by a professional, or at least, someone very very talented. It's just a little too perfect. Seeing the iterations was really interesting. Sometimes you have to go through a few complex versions before realizing that simpler is better.
axod 18y ago
Split an article over 8 goddamn pages each with popup adverts and slow loading times = I can't be bother to read it. Way to go wired... You might get more page views and ad impressions in the short term, but you'll certainly get less readers in the longer term.
paul 18y ago
It's sad that even recent history gets badly mangled. This article is written as though she completely created the Google logo, when in fact the logo had already existed for some time and she basically just changed the font (and produced a bunch of other concepts that were ultimately abandoned). The link provided by "wheels" correctly identifies the "before" logo: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Google1998.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Google1998.png. I think it was created by Sergey using the Gimp, but I could be wrong about that (it was before my time).
- SwellJoe 18y ago
  There's a Google Logo Script-fu. It's a pity it's not written by Sergey. But, I'm sure the actual Sergey creation pre-dates the Script-fu. http://registry.gimp.org/files/google-logo.scm http://registry.gimp.org/files/google-logo.scm
- Create 18y ago
  It's sad that even recent history gets badly mangled. This is all what PR and marketing is about: not to speak of companies supposedly involved (vs. hidden in plain sight).
deleted 18y ago
[deleted]

25 points by yaj 18y ago

I always thought that the founders had done it themselves (in fact I am SURE I read a book about the beginnings of Google that said so explicitly). Actually it left me a bit disappointed to find that it had been "designed" :( Google always used to make me feel (as a crap graphic artist) that Home-brew logos COULD go a long way.

mcargian 18y ago
> Actually it left me a bit disappointed to find that it had been "designed" I'm disappointed it was "designed" since it looks exactly like a home-brew logo.
wheels 18y ago
I'm pretty sure the founders did this one themselves: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Google1998.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Google1998.png The design seems to have been an iterative process of trying to modernize that, that ended up not being too far from the original concept-wise.
- ErrantX 18y ago
  Ah gotcha! That is wha tI was thinking of thanks. @IsaacSchlueter: I know what you mean (it's one of those logos that just "describes" the brand without any support).
- yters 18y ago
  While the new one is more substantial feeling with the darker tones, the original isn't too bad either.
IsaacSchlueter 18y ago
It is a really good logo. I mean, it's up there with CocaCola and Nike, imo. I had always thought it must have been done by a professional, or at least, someone very very talented. It's just a little too perfect. Seeing the iterations was really interesting. Sometimes you have to go through a few complex versions before realizing that simpler is better.

axod 18y ago

Split an article over 8 goddamn pages each with popup adverts and slow loading times = I can't be bother to read it. Way to go wired... You might get more page views and ad impressions in the short term, but you'll certainly get less readers in the longer term.

paul 18y ago

It's sad that even recent history gets badly mangled. This article is written as though she completely created the Google logo, when in fact the logo had already existed for some time and she basically just changed the font (and produced a bunch of other concepts that were ultimately abandoned). The link provided by "wheels" correctly identifies the "before" logo: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Google1998.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Google1998.png. I think it was created by Sergey using the Gimp, but I could be wrong about that (it was before my time).

SwellJoe 18y ago
There's a Google Logo Script-fu. It's a pity it's not written by Sergey. But, I'm sure the actual Sergey creation pre-dates the Script-fu. http://registry.gimp.org/files/google-logo.scm http://registry.gimp.org/files/google-logo.scm
Create 18y ago
It's sad that even recent history gets badly mangled. This is all what PR and marketing is about: not to speak of companies supposedly involved (vs. hidden in plain sight).

deleted 18y ago

[deleted]