Do you guys think more complex, stylish logos (designs that were

>>287950
1960-72 is go tier.

Unfortunately, until phones triple in size, or phones start displaying directly in your retina, we will be stuck with ultra minimal flat over tones. So I guess give it 5 years.

>>287951
This

I keep trying to explain to my friends that 60s-70s gd is the literal golden age for design.
They just don't get it.

Fuck though, what a time that was. Fucking crazy art, architecture, film, music. Like they go from badly designing shit in the 50s (though some of it can look pretty good) to masterpieces of design. I'm honestly jealous of the people who got to live through that period. Shit must have been amazing. With the exception of 'Nam, I guess. Though the Cold War probably brought on a lot of what influenced the style. All that emerging technology, space exploration, all kinds of stuff.

Fuck I love it.
The era's design inspires me more than the shit nowadays. Some of the new stuff is cool, but it's hard for me to think we'll have anybody that'll become an instant classic, in any field. Like some of the great directors of the time. I mean fuck, movies probably will never be great again. It's just shit to get normies' money. "Hey guys, remember Tonka Trucks? Yer gonna love a movie imagining of it!". No real vision anymore. Fuckin memberberries.

>>287956
I would agree, but
>architecture
Fuck that. 60s-70s architecture was the worst.

File: c_fit,fl_progressive,q_80,w_636.jpg (13KB, 636x208px)

13KB, 636x208px

>>287950
No. The future is Breathtaking.

>>287950
That really showcases how modernism went from being a fresh and innovative design movement to an excuse for lazy and incompetent designers.

File: 298047064e8b3770326f4d2846b812dc.jpg (82KB, 736x552px)

82KB, 736x552px

>>287950
i've seen stuff like pic related getting a lot of views and possitive feedback recently and a lot of people are designing logos with a more organic approach with an almost 1900's hand made feel to it.

>>287950
The logo just kept getting worse after '73. I'm ok with the current logo, but prefer all those before '73

>>287951
>>287956
agreed on '60-'72 as beeing the best.

>>287975
What a time to be alive.

File: Neo Future.jpg (40KB, 620x385px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 620x385px

>>287968
What? You don't like all the crazy and wacky ass Neo Futurist architecture?

I always think buildings like those are so cool, it's art to me.

File: poop.jpg (82KB, 2000x1000px)

82KB, 2000x1000px

>>287984

Stuff like this might generate more interest in the professional community, but that's not the issue.

The problem is, if you want to do commercial design, form has to follow function, right now function DEMANDS branding and brand marks work in a canvas size exponentially smaller than anything in previous history. Until this caveat is address everything will be ultra minimal flat.

>>287984
Good luck on scaling that down

>>287950
Goddamn it, that new Pepsi one triggers me so fucking hard. I was just sperging about this to my parents the other day as they just kind of supportively nodded along.
The design along with the curve of the E is just too much, do one or the other, fuck.

>>288035
>Too hard to calculate
>Too hard to build
>Too much wasted space for nothing
>too hard to match to surroundings
Fuck this shit.

>>288390
The same could be said about a lot of art though.

>>288092
You are obviously unfamiliar with the Pepsi Globe Dynamics.

File: 29CHINAAIR-web1-master675.jpg (22KB, 675x451px)

22KB, 675x451px

>>288035
I can imagine this conversation taking place

>Designer A: Hey want do you think the future is going to be like
>Designer B: No cuboids