Crowdsourcing
- Started
- Last post
- 47 Responses
- raf0
I think Olympic branding is a one off commodity, but that's me.
I am not suggesting leaving it to amateurs. It would be students, freelancers or the kind of people who work for agencies anyway – the same people who end up doing in.
How often large contracts won by huge agencies are done by freelancers anyway? Many of you did those yourselves, having signed NDAs.
Another plus is, winning a design contest like that can be a big break for a young designer, which is a good community thing in the end.
"I rather have Woldd Olins design it."
You haven't looked at it in some time, have you?
Oh, while we're at it...
- you're missing the point. it's not just a logoFax_Benson
- babaganush0
Pisses me off when the newspapers report crap like £400k for a logo. Having been a part of large branding jobs for the likes of the BBC it would be impossible for 'freelancers' to manage the jobs with te stakeholders in those organisations- to co ordinate feedback, timescales. Manage inept departmental heads who may well be on £100k a year and no shut about branding.
That's aside from years if expertise having managed similar type jobs that have a proven case study of successfully telling the brand story...whoever said they earned every penny will have been correct Nd that probably doesn't cover the fact that the resultant logo was probably a committee arse fuck.
Crowd sourcing may work for small florist logos etc. But it should never be used for serious scale projects any more than architectural build may have a tender process but you wouldn't just crowd source to someone who'd built a rickety and done a Lynda course in draughtsmanship.
- randommail0
Sure, they could have crowdsourced the logo for £15,000.
But Wolff Olins still would have gladly done the rest of the branding work for £385,000. Which would in fact help Wolff Olins be more profitable. Logo design is the easy part.
- raf0
I have taken part ie. in meetings over a global corporation's web presence. They were held over two years in many European cities, marketing heads flown business class from all around the globe.
Hours of discussions over silly things, ie. 800x600px for the US audience vs. more modern 1024x768px resolution that German branch stood firm for.The result of all that was very underwhelming, to say the least.
Just the cost of a single one of those meetings, with airfare, expensive hotels, dinners, penthouse conference room rental would cover fantastic web presence by a top class small agency – one of those which normally end up subcontracting these jobs from the big guys.
It's ok, this is how money works at that level. It is there to be spent.
But should it be like this when it comes to spending public money?
Again, I am not telling "let's leave this to amateurs". Crowdsource among agencies who would provide full package. For peanuts, because this is something that would look good in their portfolio.
Seriously.Not seriously... If I were serious, I would want agencies to pay to do Olympic branding. And you know what? They would.
- babaganush0
Two wrongs don't make a right, the sententious us eight but a bit utopian. Head of BBC is on £800k I think ( a public body ) some council chiefs and even a head master in parts of London are on £250k.
I think there are far larger sums pissed up the wall on individuals that it could be argued as to why try are paid so much out if the public coffers. I have no qualms about Wolf Olins getting paid as a significant sized company what isn't really an insignificant amount when it comes to comparable piss-takes with tax payers money.
The point of hosting annolympics is that if it is done properly it should generate incomefor the country, so so-called experts get paid upfront for this contribution. Whether it works or not is a different matter
- I give up. Fucking iphonebabaganush
- Olympics don't generate income, big games always bring a loss. It's jut an opportunity to spend tax money on contractsraf
- That's wrong. It's subjective. Munich lost £178 million whereas LA made £215 Millionbabaganush
- well said sir!Melanie
- akrokdesign0
i freaking hate crowd-sourcing in all forms or sizes.
just cause you don't like that they spend the tax money on it. crowd-sourcing is not the solution or makes it's okay.
sounds like you wanted "made in china" and import it. just cause it's cheaper. what the fuck. why can't the work stay in britain or at least in eu. etc.
- It's ok, you're supposed to hate crowdsourcing as a designer. It's a healthy reaction.raf
- akrokdesign0
now, i don't know the details. but maybe they should had been more tighter about their budget.
- __TM0
Singapore Youth Olympics 2010 did a logo competition. After wasting everyone's and their own time managing this, they dropped the whole crowdsource/competition concept and quickly called an agency.
Just saying.
- There's more money to be sucked out of the budget via agency. Not saying that was the reason.raf
- Autokern0
"Crowdsource among agencies who would provide full package."
This is called pitching and it already normal practice. Maybe wolf Ollins was appointed after a pitch.That scale of branding project involves strict collaboration and participation with the client because it's not just a one-off thing but
it is a consultancy process.
Then it is interesting that you refer to London 2012 just as the logo without caring to explore the scope of the work involved.
And finally, London 2012 is one of the most successful branding examples. After the Olympics we will be able to tell whether those 400K were a sound investment or not.
- raf0
"And finally, London 2012 is one of the most successful branding examples."
Wait, so it is not the biggest flop in recent history anymore, only surpassed by the GAP rebrand? (which still could turn out to be a publicity stunt after all)
- raf0
OK, call it "pitching", not "crowdsourcing". Call it "pro bono", not "for free".
You'll still have agencies fighting for the privilege of doing the Olympics.
- Miesfan0
I don't understand your point. Do you defend that no one is paid? In the crowdsourcing you're taking advantage of a lot of people. Is that better?
"What would be more cost/result effective:
Define effective.
And check out this interview to understand whether the effectiveness of product you see is what you want. Or it could occur.
http://www.creativereview.co.uk/…- My point is that every taxpayer coin counts and in many cases public work can be done pro-bono.raf
- atomholc0
crowding sourcing is Socialized Designing ... kind of like Socialized Medicine.
- didn't mean that as a statement .. more like a point of discussionatomholc
- hahahahaukit
- Couldn't disagree more. It's pure free market. If u can pull it off, ie. get agencies to fight for yr budget, more power to you.raf
- it's the other way. someone is making a ton of $$$$ on cheap labors.akrokdesign
- polytechnic0
No agency could afford to take on a project on the scale of the olympics branding "for peanuts". It would bankrupt them.
- monospaced0
< frustrated that this discussion is even happening here
- ukit0
While I dont have the numbers in front of me, I'll hazard a guess that this is not in fact going to make a significant difference one way or the other for any country's budget. Politicians like to make examples of these kinds of things ($500k for a logo!), but when it comes to cutting debt/ deficit $500k is a drop in the bucket. The only things that really matter are long term factors like taxes and benefits.
- raf0
Just for the record, 400K sounds very low if production work was included, it's unthinkable applying Olympic brand would cost this little.
I assumed it was for identity and research associated with it only, I might be wrong. 400K is a likely sum and not a small one for brand design alone.My assumption was there would be a hundred agencies in London alone who would line up to take part in an Olympic branding contest even with just a small portion of that 400K budget to be won.
I based this on my experience in how advertising budgets are often overblown at corporate level and especially when nobody's (public) money is involved.
Talking about quality, I used the Olympic logo as an example because as much as it stands out among some lame games identities of the last decade, it will go down in history as an example of bad design. Funny we usually refer to 60-80's games when talking about classic games identities.
I still think spec work is good for clients and obviously something our industry, being on the other side of the table, should oppose very vigorously – this thread being an example.
Spec work works in architecture, doesn't it? Actually, it's how architectural contracts work, correct me if I am wrong on this.
- I don't know for sure, but I HIGHLY doubt this is how the architecture industry works.monospaced
- I really have no problem with it. It may be unorthodox but whatever it grows on you.Countryman
- JSK0
crowd sourcing is more about marketing effort.
Engaging consumers with the brand directly with an illusion that they are helping to create the brand or design.
It is same as any design competition sans exclusivity of design community.
- lukus_W0
The only reason it could be cost effective, is the fact that the vast majority of people working towards the project effectively work for nothing.
It's exploitation. In the same way that a lottery exploits people who play. Only in this case, people are betting time and effort, rather than a small amount of money for the price of a ticket.