“Colorado, a western U.S. state, has a diverse landscape of arid desert, river canyons and snow-covered Rocky Mountains, which are partly protected by Rocky Mountain National Park. Elsewhere, Mesa Verde National Park features Ancestral Puebloan cliff dwellings. Perched a mile above sea level, Denver, Colorado’s capital and largest city, features a vibrant downtown area.” This logo is for the state of Colorado and its government.
The tree evokes Colorado’s natural resources and spirit, red symbolizes Colorado’s red soil/rocks, yellow shows our sunshine and wheat of the plains, dual peaks represent the mountains in our state, blue base represents water-our most important resource
Images (opinion after)
Nice to see our Colorado readership in action yesterday — lots of tips received! The old logo had financial controversy around it with a reported cost of $2.4 million which obviously is not what anyone paid for the logo itself but was part of a major statewide economic-development plan by Colorado’s former governor, John Hickenlooper. I mention this because part of the rhetoric about the new logo is that it is costing the state zero dollars. I liked the old logo, I think it was an effective symbol contained in a small, serviceable shape with the snow-peaked mountain conveying enough about what makes Colorado Colorado to be a proper representative. But, clearly, a single mountain wasn’t enough and the new logo has a tree, two mountains, a sun, water, and, probably out of decency, does not include a marijuana leaf. The problem isn’t so much the inclusion of all these things — although, well, yeah, it’s a problem — but the relationship between them, particularly the tree… which overshadows and steals the thunder of both the “C” and the mountains, which I think express Colorado better than a giant Christmas tree. They left the wordmark alone so I guess that’s fine. Another thing the old logo got right was that it was a single color and could easily be applied anywhere whereas this new logo has 8 colors and I can’t imagine the single-color version of this being remotely good. It may have not cost the state any money now but it will cost them loss of equity and increase in confusion as the two logos live side by side for 3 to 5 years until someone realizes what a pain it is to use this logo and have to redesign it and start all over again.
Thanks to Mark P for the tip.