Comments on: 2009-05-15 | City Rail

By: boxerdude

boxerdude — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 00:28:10 +0000

I can’t decide if I love it or hate it. I suppose that simply in being provocative, it has achieved a level of success. Although I agree that in the days of new media, rules aren’t as hardfast as they used to be. However, in this case, I’m not sure I dig it. Part of me likes it, and part of me wants to stop looking at it.

By: Guy

Guy — Tue, 09 Nov 2010 12:45:45 +0000

I’ve always loved this logo. The original logo was exactly the same WITHOUT the blur. I was riding the train one day and noticed that they’d changed the logo to include the blur. I saw it on a moving train and thought the blur was caused by my eyes not capturing the logo because the train was moving! On closer inspection, I noticed that they’d added blur to the logo.

I don’t care that the logo can’t be reproduced in certain contexts without losing what’s special about it — the logo itself exists without the blur. I LOVE that they’ve done this, and put everywhere, on trains moving and great speed. Awesome. Kudos to the designer.

By: Daniel Evans

Daniel Evans — Thu, 23 Sep 2010 12:06:59 +0000

It’s not great for the eyes so I don’t know if that’s a deal breaker right there given a logo should be nice to look at, but I think there’s an element of greatness in this.

Seems like a lot of people are stuck in a mindset that design should dictate technology that’s been used for the past 30 years. Gradient / blurred logo’s will look bad in a fax in the same way they would look bad on a CGA monitor. People need to get with the times!

By: Hooch

Hooch — Thu, 23 Sep 2010 07:10:43 +0000

The logo has been around for years. It’s just the motion blur that is new.

If you type ‘Rail Logo’ into Google images you will get yet another similar one (if you think you recognise that one, maybe you do from Lego).
I’m sure I have also seen the *exact* same one that it used to be (sans blur) in photos from Europe somewhere, maybe the UK. I’m still on the hunt to find it though.

Also, It’s orange. It used to be yellow though.

By: mikeW

mikeW — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:23:41 +0000

lol i guess this is cool if you don’t want real world applications such as the actual train…

By: Rafaelkoreia

Rafaelkoreia — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 18:39:45 +0000

Sydney cityrail logo.

By: Anonymus

Anonymus — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 04:29:36 +0000

Correct me if I’m wrong but is this the work of Ken Cato (Cato Partners). These guys have been around for longer then I can remember and have produced almost every iconic Australian logo. As for this one though I don’t think it is that visually appealing but the logic behind it is excellent as Matt suggests. I think you have to understand more about the history or stories behind Cato’s logo’s to fully appreciate them.

By: Matt

Matt — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 19:58:48 +0000

I think this a great logo (pity about the company involved)
it works for the following 3 reasons:
1 – It suggests the word “S” for Sydney (the location of this organization)
2 – It suggests a railway track diagram
3 – And it is also blurred to suggest the movement of the logo on a train going past you on the station…damn missed it again!!

By: Luke

Luke — Wed, 20 May 2009 13:58:06 +0000

Despite my distaste for CityRail, I believe the logo is well done.

Having seen it on trains in real life many a time, I can honestly say that it works well in portraying speed, efficiency and loyalty. (Pity the service it represents does not live up to this.)

The fact that it does have a motion blur, unlike any other logos around, helps create visual equity unique to CityRail.

By: KrazyCeltic

KrazyCeltic — Fri, 15 May 2009 21:37:32 +0000

I saw a blurred Sitepoint.com (http://www.sitepoint.com/) logo, which might be unfair on my part since there are differences and these are very generic shapes.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 14 May 2009 21:59:16 +0000

“I am also stuck with the impression I have seen this logo before.”

Me too!
The closest resemblance I can remember is:
http://www.sitepoint.com/

By: spaceface

spaceface — Thu, 14 May 2009 19:33:10 +0000

http://www.on-lineamsterdam.com/travel/images/ns_logo.jpg at least they turned it upside down lolz

By: Siebe Kruize

Siebe Kruize — Thu, 14 May 2009 13:47:34 +0000

Looks like dutch logo for Traincompany http://www.ns.nl

By: Dirk Leys

Dirk Leys — Thu, 14 May 2009 13:05:35 +0000

It’s not totally the same, but it reminded me of the Dutch Railways logo: http://ns.nl/

By: DChuck

DChuck — Thu, 14 May 2009 12:55:56 +0000

I am also stuck with the impression I have seen this logo before.

it just didn’t have the blur and didn’t sport the same name.

I’ll do some researches and keep you all informed

By: Chris Siegle

Chris Siegle — Thu, 14 May 2009 12:53:21 +0000

somehow, just because this logo breaks the rules of a good logo, it makes me like it. i like the speed that it projects, it makes me picture the train flying past me with a crisp logo on the door, being blurred by the speed that its moving at. i love the typeface as well, it goes well with the speed element

By: Dominic

Dominic — Thu, 14 May 2009 11:59:47 +0000

Well, like I said, only use it if it makes sense and if it provides something that totally matches your idea behind the logo. not just because you can. I haven’t used blur in a logo yet, but its not something I would exclude in general when creating a logo.

By: ArturDZGN

ArturDZGN — Thu, 14 May 2009 11:54:12 +0000

Ok, i agree with you when you say that today we have the tools to provide all these effects to the logo creation.
But because i have those resources i could never use blur on a logo, gradients & transparency sometimes make a little difference on the logo depending if its for print or screen only.

Do you use blur on your logos?

In my opinion this logo isn’t a good example.
It could never be logo of the month.

Besides (on the tag) that isn’t yellow.. its orange, or perhaps, my monitor is not well calibrated.

By: Paul Randall

Paul Randall — Thu, 14 May 2009 11:51:09 +0000

I’m not a huge fan of the motion effect, or type, but it does a good job of looking like a rail company logo other than that.

By: Dominic

Dominic — Thu, 14 May 2009 11:31:37 +0000

Today you totally have the ability to reproduce logos that use gradients, shadows, blur and what so ever… So why not use these things? Of course only if it makes sense, not just because you can. You can still keep the rules of a good logo, but some aspects of 20 years ago just dont fit anymore. In this case, the blur effect fits perfect. Of course you could just use basic shapes to show motion, but the blur effect makes it much clearer.

By: ArturDZGN

ArturDZGN — Thu, 14 May 2009 10:44:03 +0000

“Fianally someone who is stuck in time with a “YOU CAN’T FAX IT! – comment” …”

what do you mean with that Dominic?

By: Dominic

Dominic — Thu, 14 May 2009 10:40:57 +0000

Fianally someone who is stuck in time with a “YOU CAN’T FAX IT! – comment” …

By: ArturDZGN

ArturDZGN — Thu, 14 May 2009 10:30:50 +0000

blur on a logo??? bad idea…
You dont need to motion-blur a logo to give the idea of motion.. just throws to the trash the challenge of designing a logo.

By: Nix

Nix — Thu, 14 May 2009 09:38:59 +0000

Ignoring the stupid blur, I’m pretty sure that I’ve seen this exact logo used somewhere else. Any guesses?

By: A

Thu, 14 May 2009 07:03:34 +0000

Very efficient: gives an immediate understanding of the fuzzy timetable!

By: Callum Chapman

Callum Chapman — Thu, 14 May 2009 06:54:32 +0000

I like the idea and how it suggests that trains are a quick way of getting around but it does my eyes in a bit!

By: Greg

Greg — Thu, 14 May 2009 05:19:12 +0000

is this some sort of sick joke??