Name: 巴黎 2024 年奧林匹克象形圖--發生了什麼？ (paris 2024 olympic pictograms - what happened?)
Uploaded: 2024-08-07T04:59:07.000Z
Duration: 5 min 28 s

程度副詞

Have you seen these? These are the pictograms for the Paris 2024 Olympics, but the brand directive for the Paris Games is called pictograms a relic of the past, calling these instead a coat of arms for the events. So should this win a gold medal for innovation, or be disqualified for throwing out the rulebook? Let's dive in. I previously did a full breakdown of the history of Olympic pictograms on this channel, but let's do a quick pictograms 101. The first pictograms for the Olympics were introduced at Tokyo 1964 to solve communication and wayfinding problems for international visitors who couldn't read Japanese. Good pictograms should strive for four key qualities. First, clarity of meaning. They should be instantly understandable, regardless of your language or cultural background. Second, readability. The design should be simple enough to be recognized at a glance, even when viewed from afar, or shrunk down to a tiny size. Third, consistency. The entire set should feel unified, not like a collection of random illustrations. And finally, four, distinctiveness. Each pictogram should be unique enough to avoid confusion with others in the set. Tokyo 64 established a convention for sporting events with a simplified figure in an emblematic pose, with a clear uniform or equipment for that sport. With the exception of Mexico 68, which we'll come back to, designers since then until 2022 have largely worked within this framework. The designs reached their most graphically pure interpretation at the 1974 Munich games under Otto Eicke, and in the 1990s they began to incorporate more playful approaches with visual motifs from the host country's culture, or overall branding for that year's game. Now let's examine these blasons designed for the

您見過這些圖案嗎？這些是 2024 年巴黎奧運會的象形圖，但巴黎奧運會的品牌指令稱象形圖是過去的遺物，將其稱為賽事的紋章。那麼，這究竟是應該獲得創新金獎，還是因違反規則而被取消資格呢？讓我們深入探討。我曾在本頻道詳細介紹過奧運象形圖的歷史，現在讓我們來做一個簡單的象形圖 101。最早的奧運象形圖是在 1964 年的東京奧運會上推出的，目的是為不懂日語的國際遊客解決交流和尋路問題。好的象形圖應具備四個關鍵品質。第一，含義清晰。無論你的語言或文化背景如何，它們都應讓人一看就懂。第二，可讀性。設計應足夠簡單，即

情態副詞

Paris games. According to the press, each incorporates three key elements. First, an axis of symmetry, often mirrored across a diagonal, like a face card in a deck of playing cards. Two, a depiction of the ground, usually the court, field, or track for the event. And three, a representation of the sport, typically shown through a piece of equipment or gear. Notably absent is any representation of the athletes themselves, which they claim makes them more inclusive, because there is no figure that can be read as either male or female. But does it really achieve this goal? This is especially complicated for the Paralympic events. Is it truly more inclusive to remove the athlete, the human being, and leave the mobility aid in the center of the pictogram? Just as importantly, do these graphics actually meet the criteria of a good pictogram? They do certainly feel like a consistent set, but let's compare them to the

巴黎奧運會。據媒體報道，每種遊戲都包含三個關鍵要素。第一，對稱軸，通常是對角線上的鏡像，就像撲克牌中的面牌。第二，對地面的描繪，通常是球場、賽場或賽道。三是運動的表現形式，通常是通過一件裝備或器材來表現。值得注意的是，這些卡片上沒有任何運動員本人的形象，他們聲稱這樣可以使卡片更具包容性，因為卡片上沒有任何可以被解讀為男性或女性的形象。但這真的能實現這一目標嗎？殘奧會項目的情況尤其複雜。去掉運動員，去掉人，把助行器留在圖形的中心，這樣真的更具包容性嗎？同樣重要的是，這些圖形真的符合好的象形圖的標準嗎？這些圖

Tokyo 2020 designs. Between these two options, which has better clarity of meaning? Between these two, which is more readable? Can you tell which is which between these? How about these?

東京 2020 設計。在這兩個方案中，哪一個含義更清晰？這兩個方案中，哪個更易讀？你能分辨出它們之間哪個是哪個嗎？這些怎麼樣？

Interestingly, the Mexico City Games of 1968 also broke with convention, avoiding human figures in favor of sporting equipment. Yet they still met all the important criteria for good pictogram design. Which brings us to a crucial question. Does it even matter that these new designs don't function as pictograms? Are the problems that pictograms were designed to solve in the 20th century still relevant today? For a printed tourist map of different venues, you need functional pictograms. But now you could just use Google Maps. Tuning in mid broadcast on television, a pictogram can work as a quick reference point to which event you're watching.

有趣的是，1968 年的墨西哥城運動會也打破了傳統，避免使用人物形象，而採用了運動器材。然而，它們仍然符合優秀象形圖設計的所有重要標準。這就引出了一個關鍵問題。這些新設計不具備象形文字的功能，這重要嗎？20 世紀設計象形圖所要解決的問題在今天是否仍然適用？如果要印刷不同地點的旅遊地圖，你需要功能性象形圖。但現在你可以直接使用谷歌地圖。在收看電視轉播時，象形圖可以作為快速參考點，讓你知道正在收看哪個節目。

But streaming online, the interface will give you more specific information before you click play.

但在線播放時，界面會在您點擊播放之前為您提供更具體的資訊。

So you could argue that pictograms are less relevant in the digital age, but losing them entirely seems counterintuitive to the goal of inclusivity. Physical visitors to venues will still need to navigate around them without using apps. And even on the official Olympic website, these complex graphics scale down so badly that they actually hinder readability.

是以，你可以說象形圖在數字時代的意義不大，但完全失去象形圖似乎與包容性的目標背道而馳。在不使用應用程序的情況下，場館的實際參觀者仍然需要在這些圖形周圍進行導航。即使是在奧運官方網站上，這些複雜的圖形也會嚴重縮減，以至於妨礙了可讀性。

Look at this event schedule. This table would be much cleaner and easier to read without these little smashed cockroach graphics at the side. Where they're perhaps being used more successfully is as decorative elements in commemorative merchandising and as graphic patterns in event spaces. This ornamental approach does feel characteristically French. You can't help but think about iconic brands like Louis Vuitton or Ladurée, and they're known for pattern and ornament. This is the country that invented the term baroque. It's hardly shocking that the scales have tipped towards form over function. The question is why they needed to hijack the poor pictograms to achieve this effect. They could have left them in their functional form and had this decorative pattern as a separate part of the visual brand expression for the games. Instead, we have this element that doesn't quite align with the more geometric modern deco style of the visual identity and has little connection to the logo or emblem for the games. If I can speculate for a moment, this axis of symmetry concept feels like it belongs to a completely different creative direction that was explored earlier and then abandoned, leaving this as an orphaned element. We know the original logo when Paris won the bid was based on the Eiffel Tower, which would have provided some connection to this symmetry and reflection motif. But now we're left with this ornamental element that doesn't quite succeed in the role of pictograms and doesn't really reinforce the visual identity for the games either. What do you think of the coats of arms concept? Do you think it will stand the test of time or have they missed the mark completely?

看看這張活動日程表。如果沒有邊上這些被打碎的小蟑螂圖案，這張表會更整潔、更易讀。在紀念商品中作為裝飾元素，在活動空間中作為圖形圖案，或許是它們使用得更成功的地方。這種裝飾性的方法確實給人一種法國特色的感覺。你會情不自禁地想起路易威登（Louis Vuitton）或拉杜雷（Ladurée）等標誌性品牌，它們都以圖案和裝飾物著稱。這個國家發明了巴洛克一詞。形式重於功能的趨勢並不令人震驚。問題是，他們為什麼要劫持可憐的象形文字來達到這種效果。他們本可以保留象形文字的功能形式，將這種裝飾圖案作為遊戲視覺品牌表達的