This is a very old entry — images are small, formatting is off.
Launched in 2009, yfrog — a subsidiary of ImageShack, the provider of free (or paid) image hosting — is a free platform made specifically for sharing images through Twitter. TechCrunch reports that, according to Quantcast, yfrog has 500,000 uploads every day and almost 20 million unique visits a month. That’s, like, a lot. Although not, like, enough to beat its main competition, TwitPic, which gathers about 30 million uniques a month and seems to be the most recurring spot to be directed to to see images from Twitter. In a complete rethinking of the service yfrog has transformed into a full-fledged social platform with user profiles, celebrity yfroggers, the ability to comment directly on photos, and other accoutrements of sharing and liking. Along with the new website, comes a new logo.
The old logo featured ImageShack’s own yellow frog from its logo, along with a rather bizarre wordmark that couldn’t make up its mind of whether it’s a stencil or not. The logo looked amateur and not very trustworthy. The new logo is certainly more professional but it’s as dull as watching a frog croak. Speaking of frogs: where is the frog in the logo? I don’t mean to be dense and say that a logo has to literally reflect the name of the product, company, or service it represents but when the name includes the word “frog” it seems to me like there are dozens of visual ideas that could be exploited. Instead we have a circle of speech bubbles that represent, you better believe it, online dialog and sharing! Exciting, isn’t it? But let’s assume that that’s the best concept ever, then why are the speech bubbles ever-so-slightly skewed and scaled as they progress? It’s barely noticeable when small and it’s utterly annoying when big. The best part of the logo is the typography, even if there isn’t a frog there either.