The flag of Iran actually has text writen with zero curves along the edge of the white band (they say "Allāhu ʾAkbar" or "God is most great" 22 times). The emblem in the middle however is curved, being a stylised writing of the name Allah.
They had to! They’re forbidden to make images of Muhammad or Allah, so they mastered calligraphy and geometry to create aesthetically pleasing mosques.
Of course they know how to make text on a flag look good.
The rule about texts on flag is really just a hold over from when the primary purpose of a flag was to provide easy identification at sea, or on a battlefield. In that context anything that could make the flag harder to identify was a bad idea.
These days flags are national symbols, and don’t really have a practical function other than serving as a symbol for the nation, which usually doesn’t require them to be identifiable on a smoke strewn battlefield or miles away at sea. so the rules are less important.
That said, medieval European standards frequently had mottos and text written on them along with a bunch of other elements that would normally be considered “bad design”.
Chinese and Japanese alphabets: are we a joke to you?
And in general it isn't really harder with other alphabets, even the Latin one (you can do it with cursive), it's just that different cultures didn't focus on it as much as the Arabic one did for artistic purposes (which comes from the fact that in islamic art representing human figures, especially on buildings and especially mosques, isn't a thing, so they focused on different subjects, including and especially calligraphy)
/uj, Chinese is a logography, Japanese is a logosyllabary made of a logography and 2 syllabaries, Arabic is an abjad, Latin is the only alphabet you mentioned that is an alphabet.
/rj Arabic is like “you merely adopted the calligraphy, I was born in it molded by it. I didn’t even see the angular stroke method until i was a man but then it was but a sword in my side.”
Calligraphy just means “pretty writing”, almost every written script has calligraphy which perfectly suits it. Have you never seen medieval manuscripts? That’s calligraphy! Arabic calligraphy is just a lot more over the top
I don’t speak Arabic but can read it bc I am a Muslim, it’s certainly more readable than a metal logo. If I was a genuine Arabic speaker I think it would be readable though since I struggle more with some fonts than with this. 90% of the thin swoops and lines are fluff you can ignore
Iran's flag is a great "exception that demonstrates the rule". It DOES use text prominently, and it does so for similar cultural reasons as the other examples here.
It also looks radically better than the other examples. The design shows us WHY text looks bad on flags by solving those problems while including text.
which of these work? are they easily identifiable at a distance? While waving? in weather conditions? Can they be drawn even by a gradeschool child? they're all really complicated and overly detailed, it reminds me of the horrible trend US states have of plopping the state seal on a background and calling it job done. Im partial to some of the aesthetics, the bottom left one in particular looks quite good to me, but more as an artwork than a flag.
Compare these to the best flag in the world - Japan. Iconic, easily identifiable, easily reproducible. Even the US flag is a bit busy but you wouldnt want one much more complicated than that surely.
I know many of these are established “rules”, but I’ll still push back on them.
which of these work? are they easily identifiable at a distance? While waving? in weather conditions?
At least half of them, yes (the ones with more distinguishable colors more specifically; Iran, Hezbollah, Taliban). You don’t have to discern every single detail in a flag to identify it, very few people would mistake the US / UK flag for one another despite their “complexity”. It’s the contrast that makes them stand out.
Can they be drawn even by a gradeschool child?
Most people mean this in a very general sense. If you can scribble something in vaguely the right area with the right colors and it can still be identified, it counts imo. After all, this gradeschool child wouldn’t need to break out a ruler and make sure the flag is in the exact right ratio after all.
To this extent, I’d say Iran counts as much as Canada, The UK, US, Spain, Portugal, Brazil, India, Nepal, or Albania would all count, since even their scribbled versions are fairly identifiable.
Look up Duolingo flags as a reference.
Also, Several Nations who relied on flags for communication in naval forces could afford much more complex flags just fine.
Compare these to the best flag in the world - Japan. Iconic, easily identifiable, easily reproducible.
I’d argue it’s only somewhat identifiable; the only thing to distinguish it from a white flag (or many white background flags) is a red circle in a constantly moving flag. Many overly simple flags suffer from this issue, some like Italy / Ireland look practically identical at a distance, under the right lighting, or if one is washed out.
They're not rules, they're aesthetic and functional principles most people agree with.
Your argument is just structured poorly by the way. I express these principles that these flags as a whole sort of self evidently fail and you're trying to rules lawyer it, insert doubt into the principles, vaguely assert that some of the set of flags we've identified don't violate the newly stretched out principle, move forward. Its very vague, but at the same time very rules lawyer-y.
Again these are not 'rules' they're just general design and functional principles that this set of flags provided by OP clearly fails to adhere to. if you dont find those principles persuasive thats fine, but they're there, and these flags clearly fail.
And you do this weird whataboutism a few times too, for example
Many overly simple flags suffer from this issue, some like Italy / Ireland look practically identical at a distance, under the right lighting, or if one is washed out.
that doesnt have anything to do with what we're talking about.
I’d argue it’s only somewhat identifiable;
not persuasively.
Most people mean this in a very general sense.
yea and these flags are not easily reproducible even in a general sense. The only one that MAYBE fits this principle is the top right, somewhat.
At least half of them, yes (the ones with more distinguishable colors more specifically; Iran, Hezbollah, Taliban).
While I disagree, you pinpointed what makes them distinguishable - the colors. Their large-scale elements, which is what a flag is meant to be priamrily composed of to aid in identification, to be memorable and symbolic.
You're just not making great arguments and your overall presentation is poorly structured.
But these are not just "writing" - these are calligraphy. Calligraphy is all about making writing more artistic. Thus they can be part of a design like a flag in a way that straight up writing fails.
Can recommend giving this video by the postmodernist a look. He gives a great critique as to why the "best practices" for flag making isn't necessarily founded on much other than some tastes and gut feeling
Many of those flags do not have the same cultural concept of a flag as we do. In fact the one’s with the Arabic word for god on them are meant to be treated like holy objects or something which makes them impossible to use as a regular flag.
They would be flying different banners than these is my point, or maybe something other than banners.
Several flags around the world have small slogans written in the center of the flag, which are often forgotten, such as those of Haiti, Brazil, Egypt, and the Middle East. (Note: The last sentence appears to be incomplete and possibly a fragment from another text. It translates to: "only increased the font.")
Of these examples, the only one I find aesthetic is the flag of Iran. The compositions of the others are lacking, and the text doesn't look especially good. It would be impossible to read on a moving flag, and three of them don't need to be read anyway since they all say the same exact things.
Flags are meant to be symbolic, text is descriptive, not symbolic. Content of text can be symbolic, but text itself is not. Sure, there are some exceptions: "i" (lowercase) means information, the "@" symbol, the "!", etc etc which are direct symbols.
One can, and people do, put all sorts of stuff on flags. Historical flags have historical meaning and context, and are worth preserving for specifically that reason. Something having historical or contextual value doesn't make it a good model for other, new things, or inherently make it a beautiful example of something.
So yeah, text on flags looks ugly to me. I think it's a defensible claim. It's a contradiction between the medium and the content. Hell, maybe it's good for worldbuilding, because there are so many ugly flags out there. That would be a better claim to defend.
To me its because they fail at what a flag is supposed to do, that is symbolically represent their nation, be memorable, distinct, reproducible - ideally by a gradeschool child drawing it, and easily identifiable. Identifiable when waving on a flag pole, from a distance, in weather conditions.
These are just all too detailed. They're not iconic, all this detail will blur into nothing.
I said it in another comment but compare these to the best flag in the world - Japan and you'll see how it has all the elements i mentioned and functions FAR better as a flag than any of these.
I dont think any of them are particularly ugy aside from the top middle, I just dont think they're good flags.
This is a great argument for text on flags not 'working' to me.
/uj “Don’t put text on flags unless you extremely know what you’re doing and if you think you do you probably don’t” paraphrased CGP grey and also just good advice overall.
“Don’t overcomplicate unless you really know what you’re doing and if you think you do, you probably don’t.”
It's literally all about fonts.
NASA's modern logo is literally just NASA in a funky font, yet it still goes kinda hard.
Like all Text, it should be written in Georgia
I don't want to have to get on a plane to the deep south every time I want to write a fucking post-it note
Then go to the Caucasus.
Alternatively, Ill allow Rockwell
I made a mockup of a Georgian flag which I can't attach to this comment for some reason
Technically that’s the old logo, the modern logo is the old old logo again.
Holy shit, the 1975 logo really showed how far ahead NASA was. They predicted shit looking simplified logos that miss the charm of the old ones.
For a moment I thought it was something some idiot did in the 2010-2020
There was a whole wave of cool logo redesigns, largely initiated by the Nixon administration. Many of them were rolled back by Reagan or Reagan appointees. https://www.designweek.co.uk/issues/1-7-november-2021/federal-design-improvement-program-logoarchive/
Oh yeah lol.
It's literally all about children being able to draw it from memory! You know, the primary function of flags
I get that simplicity is a plus, but like who decided that children being able to draw any flag is essential
Someone that wanted their kids to be easily indoctrinated and nationalized
Indoctrination
Nah, let them kids learn how to draw dragons and shit.
It's almost like the "Rules" for flags are bullshit.
it's more like how rules work in most artforms: you learn them to develop the skills to then know how to break them in ways that work.
That's why you should put cursive text
The flag of Iran actually has text writen with zero curves along the edge of the white band (they say "Allāhu ʾAkbar" or "God is most great" 22 times). The emblem in the middle however is curved, being a stylised writing of the name Allah.
I DO NOT want to glaze iran but damn that's a goated flag
The red symbol in the middle is also text. It reads "la ilaha illa allah"
The difference is that th Arabic script has some of the most aesthetically pleasing calligraphy I've seen
They had to! They’re forbidden to make images of Muhammad or Allah, so they mastered calligraphy and geometry to create aesthetically pleasing mosques.
Of course they know how to make text on a flag look good.
restrictions can make you make better art I suppose.
Uh... really? Better than Georgian (quenya irl)? Better than kanji?
To me it looks... messy.
Yes
Oh yeah, definitely better
The rule about texts on flag is really just a hold over from when the primary purpose of a flag was to provide easy identification at sea, or on a battlefield. In that context anything that could make the flag harder to identify was a bad idea.
These days flags are national symbols, and don’t really have a practical function other than serving as a symbol for the nation, which usually doesn’t require them to be identifiable on a smoke strewn battlefield or miles away at sea. so the rules are less important.
That said, medieval European standards frequently had mottos and text written on them along with a bunch of other elements that would normally be considered “bad design”.
The flags designed for identification on the battlefield were covered in writing (regiment names, battle honors etc)
"Hey look, fool. My banners got more lions than yours, there for I'm better."
Calligraphy is an art style that’s hard to replicate in other alphabets
Chinese and Japanese alphabets: are we a joke to you?
And in general it isn't really harder with other alphabets, even the Latin one (you can do it with cursive), it's just that different cultures didn't focus on it as much as the Arabic one did for artistic purposes (which comes from the fact that in islamic art representing human figures, especially on buildings and especially mosques, isn't a thing, so they focused on different subjects, including and especially calligraphy)
/uj, Chinese is a logography, Japanese is a logosyllabary made of a logography and 2 syllabaries, Arabic is an abjad, Latin is the only alphabet you mentioned that is an alphabet.
/rj Arabic is like “you merely adopted the calligraphy, I was born in it molded by it. I didn’t even see the angular stroke method until i was a man but then it was but a sword in my side.”
Skill issue.
Calligraphy just means “pretty writing”, almost every written script has calligraphy which perfectly suits it. Have you never seen medieval manuscripts? That’s calligraphy! Arabic calligraphy is just a lot more over the top
/uj Writing systems* FIFY
(Not every writing system is an alphabet. Also Arabic is an abjad not an alphabet, the difference is in how it handles vowels.)
/rj what? You mean the cursive is a gift from allah?!
I have always wondered how legible these are if you read arabic. Are they like black metal logos?
Yeah, those are superstylized calligraphic monograms, they are not meant to be read each time the flag is seen, just be recognizable.
I don’t speak Arabic but can read it bc I am a Muslim, it’s certainly more readable than a metal logo. If I was a genuine Arabic speaker I think it would be readable though since I struggle more with some fonts than with this. 90% of the thin swoops and lines are fluff you can ignore
I was today years old when I realized that Iran's flag has text on it.
Even the crest in the middle is stylised Arabic
Iran's flag is a great "exception that demonstrates the rule". It DOES use text prominently, and it does so for similar cultural reasons as the other examples here.
It also looks radically better than the other examples. The design shows us WHY text looks bad on flags by solving those problems while including text.
As long as you can't read it it can look cool
Middle East only?
Brazil's "Ordem e Pau Grosso" has joined the chat
Thick dick
I'm sure people won't get distracted with politics.
You can always trust that people will stay on point, text on flags might work.
I mean, like half of these flags are from actual terrorist organisations, so wouldn't be surprised if this spiraled into politics
Considering you already blocked me, I doubt I can convince you otherwise.
This is bait. Lmao
which of these work? are they easily identifiable at a distance? While waving? in weather conditions? Can they be drawn even by a gradeschool child? they're all really complicated and overly detailed, it reminds me of the horrible trend US states have of plopping the state seal on a background and calling it job done. Im partial to some of the aesthetics, the bottom left one in particular looks quite good to me, but more as an artwork than a flag.
Compare these to the best flag in the world - Japan. Iconic, easily identifiable, easily reproducible. Even the US flag is a bit busy but you wouldnt want one much more complicated than that surely.
I know many of these are established “rules”, but I’ll still push back on them.
At least half of them, yes (the ones with more distinguishable colors more specifically; Iran, Hezbollah, Taliban). You don’t have to discern every single detail in a flag to identify it, very few people would mistake the US / UK flag for one another despite their “complexity”. It’s the contrast that makes them stand out.
Most people mean this in a very general sense. If you can scribble something in vaguely the right area with the right colors and it can still be identified, it counts imo. After all, this gradeschool child wouldn’t need to break out a ruler and make sure the flag is in the exact right ratio after all.
To this extent, I’d say Iran counts as much as Canada, The UK, US, Spain, Portugal, Brazil, India, Nepal, or Albania would all count, since even their scribbled versions are fairly identifiable.
Look up Duolingo flags as a reference.
Also, Several Nations who relied on flags for communication in naval forces could afford much more complex flags just fine.
I’d argue it’s only somewhat identifiable; the only thing to distinguish it from a white flag (or many white background flags) is a red circle in a constantly moving flag. Many overly simple flags suffer from this issue, some like Italy / Ireland look practically identical at a distance, under the right lighting, or if one is washed out.
They're not rules, they're aesthetic and functional principles most people agree with.
Your argument is just structured poorly by the way. I express these principles that these flags as a whole sort of self evidently fail and you're trying to rules lawyer it, insert doubt into the principles, vaguely assert that some of the set of flags we've identified don't violate the newly stretched out principle, move forward. Its very vague, but at the same time very rules lawyer-y.
Again these are not 'rules' they're just general design and functional principles that this set of flags provided by OP clearly fails to adhere to. if you dont find those principles persuasive thats fine, but they're there, and these flags clearly fail.
And you do this weird whataboutism a few times too, for example
that doesnt have anything to do with what we're talking about.
not persuasively.
yea and these flags are not easily reproducible even in a general sense. The only one that MAYBE fits this principle is the top right, somewhat.
While I disagree, you pinpointed what makes them distinguishable - the colors. Their large-scale elements, which is what a flag is meant to be priamrily composed of to aid in identification, to be memorable and symbolic.
You're just not making great arguments and your overall presentation is poorly structured.
Now try to back up the “text can look aesthetically pleasing on a flag” argument using US state flags.
C
Whats the original pic without those flags? It looks familiar.
Seven Deadly Sins
Thank you!
Don't forget the banners samurai would wear
[deleted]
Top left is written in Kufic script, which is a form of Arabic.
no, the text is in Arabic.
Hot take maybe: some of these are kinda ugly.
But these are not just "writing" - these are calligraphy. Calligraphy is all about making writing more artistic. Thus they can be part of a design like a flag in a way that straight up writing fails.
Lain calligraphy can also work on flags.
I don’t really like the Afghanistan one because it looks like a subtitle, but all the others are cool
https://youtu.be/c-IgG7iou94?si=Fgi89pEZd--59y4b
Can recommend giving this video by the postmodernist a look. He gives a great critique as to why the "best practices" for flag making isn't necessarily founded on much other than some tastes and gut feeling
I'm reminded of one of the masters
Laughs in State of Washington
Many of those flags do not have the same cultural concept of a flag as we do. In fact the one’s with the Arabic word for god on them are meant to be treated like holy objects or something which makes them impossible to use as a regular flag.
They would be flying different banners than these is my point, or maybe something other than banners.
/taleban not middle eastern/
Wait until you see the Houthi flag
Hot take: The Thuluth word-final hā' looks terrible as hell
I don’t like how it’s synonymous with the word Allah
The bottom three are still meh to me, the top three work well because of their other elements
HELL YEAH! FUCK VEXILOLOGISTS! FUCK THEIR STUPID "A cHilD sHoUlD bE aBlE tO dRaW iT" RULE!
Several flags around the world have small slogans written in the center of the flag, which are often forgotten, such as those of Haiti, Brazil, Egypt, and the Middle East. (Note: The last sentence appears to be incomplete and possibly a fragment from another text. It translates to: "only increased the font.")
Of these examples, the only one I find aesthetic is the flag of Iran. The compositions of the others are lacking, and the text doesn't look especially good. It would be impossible to read on a moving flag, and three of them don't need to be read anyway since they all say the same exact things.
Flags are meant to be symbolic, text is descriptive, not symbolic. Content of text can be symbolic, but text itself is not. Sure, there are some exceptions: "i" (lowercase) means information, the "@" symbol, the "!", etc etc which are direct symbols.
One can, and people do, put all sorts of stuff on flags. Historical flags have historical meaning and context, and are worth preserving for specifically that reason. Something having historical or contextual value doesn't make it a good model for other, new things, or inherently make it a beautiful example of something.
So yeah, text on flags looks ugly to me. I think it's a defensible claim. It's a contradiction between the medium and the content. Hell, maybe it's good for worldbuilding, because there are so many ugly flags out there. That would be a better claim to defend.
Those flags are all wet stinky ass though lol.
Because they are green. So ugly.
To me its because they fail at what a flag is supposed to do, that is symbolically represent their nation, be memorable, distinct, reproducible - ideally by a gradeschool child drawing it, and easily identifiable. Identifiable when waving on a flag pole, from a distance, in weather conditions.
These are just all too detailed. They're not iconic, all this detail will blur into nothing.
I said it in another comment but compare these to the best flag in the world - Japan and you'll see how it has all the elements i mentioned and functions FAR better as a flag than any of these.
I dont think any of them are particularly ugy aside from the top middle, I just dont think they're good flags.
This is a great argument for text on flags not 'working' to me.
/uj “Don’t put text on flags unless you extremely know what you’re doing and if you think you do you probably don’t” paraphrased CGP grey and also just good advice overall.
“Don’t overcomplicate unless you really know what you’re doing and if you think you do, you probably don’t.”
I like the other ones but the Hamas and Taliban flags are straight ugly dawg