Slashdot Mirror
The Man Behind Google Artwork
malyn writes "CNN has an article on the artist who designs the custom Google logos for holidays, special events, etc. From the article: '[Dennis Hwang] has been manipulating the six letters in the Google name into shamrocks, fireworks, hearts and goblins since shortly after he got an internship there in 2000. Company founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin found out that he was an art major in college. They said "Hey Dennis, why don't you give this a shot,"' and he has been doing it ever since."
It's funny how getting in on the ground floor of something like Google can let one individual stand out like this... Imagine if Google decided now to start putting up cystom art with each holiday. Due to their size, I'm sure it would be a huge heck of a mess... getting an artist, deciding on designs, figuring out what goes with the corporate principles. He's a lucky guy, getting to do that on his own... I can barely get approval for a logo for our intranet, that will only be seen by 20 people, due to the issues I raised above.
You mean like they did on December 26, 1996? Yes, how unoriginal of them, trying to pull a fast one on us knowing full well that Google would do the same almost a half decade later.
audioLibre - freedom of music
The ACLU has never interfered in the private religious activities conducted by a business. It's only when government gets involved that the ACLU cries foul. For example if it's a government project, or that business gets special subsidies from the government, or that government is providing the business with free police, fire protection, and road service.
Apology to Ubuntu forum.
"Dennis Hwang may be the most famous unknown artist in the world -- his work doesn't hang in galleries or museums, but it's been viewed hundreds of millions of times."
So, how is this different from someone who designs the logo of a national (or international) fast-food chain, or the package art for a widely distributed consumer product?
Even if it's not 100% of his job duties, he's being paid to produce artwork to build & reinforce a brand. Sounds like the job a *lot* of graphic artists hold, and I'm not entirely convinced that it's seen by more people (more views != more viewers) than a number of national or international ad campaigns.
Did I say overlords? I meant protectors.
Why would the ACLU be involved? If anything, they'd protect Google's rights to display what they want.
Religious holidays are off-limits. Some people will inevitably get all up in arms because they feel left out or under-represented. This was disussed in his NightLine interview a few weeks ago.
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
Look... if Bill O'Reilly says they're evil, then they're evil! Don't expect me to think beyond that!
With regards to the article itself I think AxXium sums up my view best:
Well, the redesign contest had the stated requiremenat that things had to remain more or less the same. A polish, rather then redesign contest, as it were. As for the logo: logos are not the kind of thing you should change. They may have been desigined to a paticular fashion, or not, but if they are good (or well known, which for a logo may be the definition of good), then they just are. Polish, tweeks, sure. But they should remain more or less the same.