Batman's logo should be good?

[Paperghost]

Know what I hate? The stupid grey bat thing on the bat costume. It especially sucked in batman begins, because you couldn't even make it out properly. I was going through all my old Breyfogle comics today and for all the current trendy "bah! too childish! creature of the night doesn't have a bright yellow logo, lol" stuff, there's something undeniably awesomely poetically FANTASTIC about that yellow symbol. it also presents waaaaaay more opportunities for drawing batman in different ways, too. with the practically all black costume, the artists don't seem to be able to leave as much to the imagination...I think its more of a loss than a gain.

so, what's better and why.....yellow awesomeness or all black monotony?

[brundlefly]

so, what's better and why.....yellow awesomeness or all black monotony?

Black monotony for me. He's supposed to be stealthy and trying to using the darkness to his advantage, which could be difficult with a neon yellow oval on his chest. And while you liked it, I myself never cared for the 'yellow oval' batsymbol and was glad when they retired it, so I'm just biased against it to begin with. I do see your point regarding using an all-black batsuit with the yellow symbol, since the current outfit is a black/grey combo so that the black bat shows up against the grey front. In order to make a chest batsymbol show up on an all-black outfit, the yellow bat would probably be the option to go with. Although one could technically take out the yellow and replace it with grey or silver...... :D

[Paperghost]

He's supposed to be stealthy and trying to using the darkness to his advantage, which could be difficult with a neon yellow oval on his chest.

see, thats the thing i've never understood - the "stealth assassin" idea of batman used as a reason for not having the yellow oval. i've yet to see a batman comic where he ninjas in, nobody notices he's there, and he ghosts out like some ghostly supersleuth with nary a vase knocked over or a pictureframe slightly ajar.

lets face it, he's stealthy exactly up to the point where he gets the drop on the bad guys - he then comes

a) smashing through a window pulling scary faces while punching people in the face and smacking stuff up

b) crunching through a door while doing something similar to the above

c) doing something scene-stealing on a wire / using the batmobile / insert over the top action hero moment of choice here, complete with bad guy gunfire, lead villains doing the whole Mange-Khan dramatic speech and explosions all over the place. he may be effective, but subtle he ain't!

to me, if he's good enough to remain "stealthy" while being a well built guy standing over six foot tall and wearing a gigantic swooshy batcape and pointy ears without making a sound, the yellow oval is not likely to be spotted either. i also think (without getting too nerdalinger-ish) that the yellow oval is a powerful psychological symbol in the midst of a major group buttkicking...i could imagine having nightmares about the one constant (an ominous yellow symbol) in a whirlwind of feet and kicks and smoke bombs or whatever. some big, ill-defined black / grey smudge apparently bopping me round the head just doesn't have the same effect.

As for the film - no silver logo. please god....otherwise it'll be back to clooneys bat nipples!

[brundlefly]

see, thats the thing i've never understood - the "stealth assassin" idea of batman used as a reason for not having the yellow oval. i've yet to see a batman comic where he ninjas in, nobody notices he's there, and he ghosts out like some ghostly supersleuth with nary a vase knocked over or a pictureframe slightly ajar.

He does that a lot, actually. He's not always there to fight. Infiltrating, evidence gathering, observing, that kind of thing.


As for the film - no silver logo. please god....otherwise it'll be back to clooneys bat nipples!

Oh, yeah, I forgot about that. You've got a point; forget I said anything about adding silver to the Batsuit. :D

[captain_unimpressive]

In The Dark Knight Returns, Batman takes on some machine-gun-wielding thugs, and gets shot in the chest, blowing away that yellow Bat-symbol to reveal some bulletproof padding inside. Then Batman 'thinks' to the reader:
"Why do you think I wear a bright yellow oval on my chest? Can't armor my head."

Besides the practical implications, aesthetically it and the belt simply work to break up the grey-and-black shroud that Batman wears.
Imagine two versions of a Batman comic, one with the black bat and one with yellow. The first comic has a panel with Batman looming in a corner, obscured by the shadows. You can, however, see him just barely, nothing else to tip the reader off to his presence. He says something to a crook, then takes him out all ninja-like.
The second shows him rendered completely invisible by the shadows; but there's a glint of yellow that creates the shape of a bat. Then the speech bubble and the grin appears, and the thief disappears into the shadows.

[Stephane Garrelie]

I preffer the black and yellow logo.

[Brian Cronin]

In The Dark Knight Returns, Batman takes on some machine-gun-wielding thugs, and gets shot in the chest, blowing away that yellow Bat-symbol to reveal some bulletproof padding inside. Then Batman 'thinks' to the reader:
"Why do you think I wear a bright yellow oval on my chest? Can't armor my head."

Yeah, but that was Miller just trying to address the oval, which he hated, and if you'll notice, as soon as Batman was shot there, the oval didn't appear again in the series (sneaky, Miller, sneaky!).

-Brian

[Josh S]

I don't care much for the yellow oval.

[Dan Apodaca]

The yellow oval screams "Marketing!" to me.

[Reptisaurus!]

Yeah, I like the yellow oval. It's more distinguishable, and it's prettier.

I like my superheroes pretty.

[Paperghost]

Imagine two versions of a Batman comic, one with the black bat and one with yellow. The first comic has a panel with Batman looming in a corner, obscured by the shadows. You can, however, see him just barely, nothing else to tip the reader off to his presence. He says something to a crook, then takes him out all ninja-like.
The second shows him rendered completely invisible by the shadows; but there's a glint of yellow that creates the shape of a bat. Then the speech bubble and the grin appears, and the thief disappears into the shadows.

But again - I can't think of a single batman comic where a random streetpunk got away simply because of the yellow oval "giving away" his presence. he's a big dude! in a cape! with awesome pointy ear things! if he can get round *those* issues without being seen, the oval means nothing at all.

mind you, I wasn't sure you meant the theif dissapears into the shadows because he escaped (tipped off to Batmans presence) or he dissapeared into the shadows because he'd had his head kicked in. If it was the latter, ignore the previous ramble about capes and ears and stuff.

i think too much batman stuff has gone down the "he's a stealth ninja" thing in recent years. The very idea of someone being a stealth ninja while dressed up like an armour plated Dracula just doesn't work for me. Big, snarling hunk of burning vengeance is where its at. Gimme those old batman comics where he's taking down bad guys by swinging them head first into walls and punching them in the face so hard their head looks like its about to come off. five-finger-tap nerve pinches are great for doing a silent but deadly takedown but honestly, wouldnt you just rather see batman punch someone through a wall? the whole "stealth" thing should only be needed for as long as it takes him to get to the bad guys - once he does, all bets are off and its clobbering time.

its not like batman couldn't work out where to hide in amongst the rooftops of gotham while stalking a foe and NOT have something as throwaway as a quarter of the yellow oval not being seen, because most of it would be hidden by the V shape of the cape coming around the front of his chest. I'm pretty sure I could manage it myself, and I'm not exactly Bruce Lee (though I did fly to China and punch someone in the face once). So to batman, grand master of all things sneaky and weird, it shouldn't be a big deal.

The yellow oval screams "Marketing!" to me

Well, my Batman T-shirt would be completely black without it :p

I think I might buy a yellow pen and start drawing in the oval myself. Bam! Take that, DC!

[Pól Rua]

I like the 'no yellow oval' but I'm a sucker for Golden Age/Earth-2 heroes.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

The yellow oval screams "Marketing!" to me.

But it also screams "Iconic!" to me.

I can't think of a single practical reason for it, much like Supermans cape, but I like it.

[Dan Apodaca]

But it also screams "Iconic!" to me.

I can't think of a single practical reason for it, much like Supermans cape, but I like it.

Except, as far as I know, the yellow oval was added later on, unlike Superman's cape.

[brundlefly]

The yellow oval screams "Marketing!" to me.

Me, too. I tend to picture the oval on the front of hats and T-shirts as opposed to it actually being part of Batman's costume.


i think too much batman stuff has gone down the "he's a stealth ninja" thing in recent years. The very idea of someone being a stealth ninja while dressed up like an armour plated Dracula just doesn't work for me. Big, snarling hunk of burning vengeance is where its at. Gimme those old batman comics where he's taking down bad guys by swinging them head first into walls and punching them in the face so hard their head looks like its about to come off. five-finger-tap nerve pinches are great for doing a silent but deadly takedown but honestly, wouldnt you just rather see batman punch someone through a wall? the whole "stealth" thing should only be needed for as long as it takes him to get to the bad guys - once he does, all bets are off and its clobbering time.

Eh, not really. I don't picture Batman as a giant roided-up, Bane-like figure in bulky battle armor and a black cape who just plows his way through enemies with brute force while snarling and screaming action movie one-liners. He uses a combo of his intelligence, stealth, and fighting skills to get the job done. He's not Ben Grimm or the Hulk, only dropping in to bust heads with wild haymakers and cause extensive collateral damage in the process.

[Shellhead]

Part of the problem is that Batman's costume serves more than one purpose, so compromises must be made. Yes, sometimes Batman is sneaking around, so the overall black and gray color scheme is useful. But sometimes Batman needs to intimidate punks to get information or other cooperation, so he needs to present a distinctive appearance and not just look like an ordinary ninja. Beyond that, Batman has a reputation to uphold, to ensure cooperation from the authorities, so his costume must be distinctive and readily identified. From that standpoint, the yellow oval almost serves as a badge.

[Paperghost]

Part of the problem is that Batman's costume serves more than one purpose, so compromises must be made. Yes, sometimes Batman is sneaking around, so the overall black and gray color scheme is useful. But sometimes Batman needs to intimidate punks to get information or other cooperation, so he needs to present a distinctive appearance and not just look like an ordinary ninja. Beyond that, Batman has a reputation to uphold, to ensure cooperation from the authorities, so his costume must be distinctive and readily identified. From that standpoint, the yellow oval almost serves as a badge.

Exactly. If a particular moment of "stealth" is needed real badly, is batman seriously going to compromise his one chance at stealthy action by turning up in his pointy headed batman suit complete with flappy cape, or actually employ those "worlds greatest detective" skills for once and work out that an all black ninja costume might be better suited?

Eh, not really. I don't picture Batman as a giant roided-up, Bane-like figure in bulky battle armor and a black cape who just plows his way through enemies with brute force while snarling and screaming action movie one-liners. He uses a combo of his intelligence, stealth, and fighting skills to get the job done. He's not Ben Grimm or the Hulk, only dropping in to bust heads with wild haymakers and cause extensive collateral damage in the process.

i dont picture him as ben grimm either - but lets face it, his primary function is to beat up bad guys and scare the bejeebus out of them.

as an example, "worlds greatest detective" is all we ever hear these days - its on the cover of issues, in the words spoken by the characters, heck, they probably spraypaint it on the walls of the batcave.

while there might have been a few serious attempts at this in the past, i find its used more as a marketing tag line gimmick, even MORE forced than the supposed "commercial nature" of the yellow oval, when in reality he was always just zapping all his info down from oracle or some other deus ex machina. he still had to then go plowing in and smack people up. (and yes, I'm aware that this idea of him relying on oracle too much is given brief lip service in a few issues...not enough though).

either dc need to drop the worlds greatest detective thing and get real - for all the supposed depth and character work and everything else we pretend makes comics somehow more "impressive" than they used to be, any superhero comic is going to come back to its primary function at some point...punching people in the face...or remove all the fisticuffs and have him do some serious snooping - something which is *never* going to happen.

i cant think of any particularly staggering detective style revelations beyond convenient plot devices as proof of his supposedly mighty detective skills, either. he's clearly good at it, but thats about it. but we happily accept any character outline DC hands us about him without stopping to actually challenge it. dc writer says batman is worlds greatest detective? uh, *why* exactly? compared to who? oh, just the whole planet? okay then, fine. whoo look, we used up fifteen pages of cod-detective work to get to the payoff of the issue....joker getting punched in the face!

i remember a handful of issues where the payoff of the book was the revelation of some detective work and not just a smackdown - might have been some late eighties or early nineties stuff, not sure. they definitely dont roll like that anymore though.

ultimately, for all the interesting trappings DC will try and pin on him (unreasonably, i think) he is what he is - an intelligent guy in a batsuit running round beating people up. as the JLI writers often noted, all of the DC universe characters problems are solved by hitting things real hard ;)

and i still question the notion that a six foot guy in a batman suit can get away with any sort of "stealth" beyond limited creeping round up to the point of reaching the goons. using cop out writing gimmicks like his batsuit is made of up some completely silent material or something so thats okay, or he mastered the zen arts of floating six inches above the ground to move without noise (as you can see, I'm making these examples up but you see what I mean) just doesnt cut it for me. i dont think using the art of stealth as a reason why we cant have a yellow bat symbol works at any rate. make the guy use his brain and stick him in a ninja suit for those missions already.

[yo go re]

I'm for the yellow, all the way - it does no more to ruin his stealth capabilities than a bright yellow belt does. That's the handy thing about wearing a big flappy cape: you can flappy it over yourself when you want to hide bright things, and flappy it back when you want them to be seen...

[Mike Smash!]

I don't mind the yellow oval, but I prefer the black bat on grey. I just prefer the shape of the current bat logo to the old one.

[howyadoin]

Except, as far as I know, the yellow oval was added later on, unlike Superman's cape.It was added because the bat-symbol on his chest couldn't be registered as a trademark, because - if I remember this correctly - you can't register a plain old bat. But a bat inside a yellow oval could be trademarked, because that's a logo, not just a bat.

[Brian Cronin]

It was added because the bat-symbol on his chest couldn't be registered as a trademark, because - if I remember this correctly - you can't register a plain old bat. But a bat inside a yellow oval could be trademarked, because that's a logo, not just a bat.

That's one urban legend I haven't been able to crack yet. :)

Anyone know anything more about it, let me know!

-Brian

[dancj]

In The Dark Knight Returns, Batman takes on some machine-gun-wielding thugs, and gets shot in the chest, blowing away that yellow Bat-symbol to reveal some bulletproof padding inside. Then Batman 'thinks' to the reader:
"Why do you think I wear a bright yellow oval on my chest? Can't armor my head."

I never bought that explanation. It requires the criminals to be very good shots against a foe who's usually darting around all over the place.

Personally I'd go with the black + grey custome with no blue or yellow anywhere, but the blue, yellow and grey costume is fine too.

Dan

[Paperghost]

I never bought that explanation. It requires the criminals to be very good shots against a foe who's usually darting around all over the place.

Personally I'd go with the black + grey custome with no blue or yellow anywhere, but the blue, yellow and grey costume is fine too.

Dan

plus, why not just shoot him in the mouth? no armour there!

having said that, i rather like the way batman starts out in the traditional costume and ends up in the grey / black thing, before eventually ending up in the armour suit. i know miller says he did that because he wanted to ditch the traditional costume when no one was looking, but i dont buy that. if you look how batman is drawn over the course of DKR, he starts off looking "normal" and as the story progresses his physical form becomes more blocky, monstrous and non human - reminds me of marv from sin city a little. i always like to think this is some insightful commentary on the internal state of bruce waynes mind, than some stupid hatred of the yellow logo. plus it sounds WAY cooler!

and yay, my thread is popular! woo!

[Buried Alien]

I like the yellow logo. For the first twenty-three years of my life, the yellow logo was the default look for Batman (in the comics, the Adam West TV series, the various animated appearances, and the Tim Burton movies). I recognized that the oval-less costume was Batman's historic original look, but the yellow oval was more the norm in my youth.

In terms of storytelling, the return to the oval-less costume in recent years has taken away what I feel to have been a very cool visual element: in the past, oval-less Batman signified a young, inexperienced Batman at the dawn of his career (pre-Robin and pre-JLA). Batman with the oval signified a more current, more experienced Batman.

During the Silver/Bronze Age, the presence or absence of the oval was also easy shorthand for whether we were dealing with the Earth-One or Earth-Two Batman.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[Dan Apodaca]

It was added because the bat-symbol on his chest couldn't be registered as a trademark, because - if I remember this correctly - you can't register a plain old bat. But a bat inside a yellow oval could be trademarked, because that's a logo, not just a bat.

I've heard that, too.

Which is why it just reeks of "marketing" to me.

[howyadoin]

That's one urban legend I haven't been able to crack yet.I never knew it was in question. It definitely fits with what I've read about copyright law - that you don't actually submit an image, but a written description of the image, for example.

[Paperghost]

I've heard that, too.

Which is why it just reeks of "marketing" to me.

why, because they had to find some way of protecting their intellectual property? DC didn't come up with the trademark rules, they simply had to follow them like everyone else. So they came up with a yellow oval - is that a big deal, simply because it happens to look better than a plain black bat? in other words, would you rather dc

1) changed the rather basic logo to something that actually qualifies as a trademark or

2 do nothing because of some aversion to "marketing" and lose the bat symbol completely because someone else registered it, at which point they have to resort to writing the word "batman" on his chest?

[Young Avenger]

I hate the yellow oval. I always thought it was stupid for a character like Batman to have bright colors on his costume.

[Dan Apodaca]

why, because they had to find some way of protecting their intellectual property? DC didn't come up with the trademark rules, they simply had to follow them like everyone else. So they came up with a yellow oval - is that a big deal, simply because it happens to look better than a plain black bat? in other words, would you rather dc

1) changed the rather basic logo to something that actually qualifies as a trademark or

2 do nothing because of some aversion to "marketing" and lose the bat symbol completely because someone else registered it, at which point they have to resort to writing the word "batman" on his chest?

Relax, man. I'm not starting a petition to get DC to change the logo or anything.

I just don't like the yellow oval. That's my preference. Which I'm entitled to, by the way.

[Paperghost]

Relax, man. I'm not starting a petition to get DC to change the logo or anything.

I just don't like the yellow oval. That's my preference. Which I'm entitled to, by the way.

I am "relaxed" - and I'm not disputing your entitlement to like or dislike the yellow logo. I'm simply asking you a question based on your response to the trademark issue, and how you said it reeks of marketing. Most everything is marketing these days, whether comics or not - I just don't think its fair to hit DC with the marketing reek brush because they jiggied up the logo. Faced with that situation, anybody else would have done the same thing too. Though Infinite Disas - er, Crisis is another story :D

[Alan2099]

I've never understood how people can complain about the logo not being stealthu enough when he's got half his face exposed.

People are just as likely to see that as they are a spot of yellow.

[Tommy]

If people can see a little yellow ovel don't you think they can see his yellow belt?

[Paperghost]

If people can see a little yellow ovel don't you think they can see his yellow belt?

and his bright blue undies!!

....oh wait :(

Batusi, anyone?

[The Joker]

Personally, I liked the yellow oval. :)

I found it to be a nice visual if anything else.

[Dan Apodaca]

I am "relaxed" - and I'm not disputing your entitlement to like or dislike the yellow logo. I'm simply asking you a question based on your response to the trademark issue, and how you said it reeks of marketing. Most everything is marketing these days, whether comics or not

The yellow oval wasn't added "these days".

- I just don't think its fair to hit DC with the marketing reek brush because they jiggied up the logo. Faced with that situation, anybody else would have done the same thing too. Though Infinite Disas - er, Crisis is another story :D

So what if anyone else would have done it? DC did, so I'm talking about them. Wait, isn't this thread specifically about the yellow oval? So, why am I getting flack for responding directly about the yellow oval? You're acting like I'm making some sweeping statement about DC comics or something.

[Paperghost]

So what if anyone else would have done it? DC did, so I'm talking about them. Wait, isn't this thread specifically about the yellow oval? So, why am I getting flack for responding directly about the yellow oval? You're acting like I'm making some sweeping statement about DC comics or something.

I don't understand where the "flack" is - everybody is simply replying to everyone else's thoughts and opinions on the yellow oval, and interjecting with questions at the same time. Two choices based on a question isn't "flak". aren't we simply debating interesting points raised? and your point about it reeking of marketing IS interesting...its also caused other people to comment directly on it so I wouldn't see that as a bad thing :)

The yellow oval wasn't added "these days".

everyone in the thread is aware that the yellow oval has been around for a long time, i'm not referring to the oval itself with that comment specifically - its just a generic outro observation to end the post with. though theres absolutely nothing wrong with the yellow logo reeking of marketing in any case, because are you saying that even before the yellow oval DC wouldn't have had a mighty marketing machine pimping Batman or whoever? every product needs to be marketed to its fullest extent, or it'll die through lack of press exposure anyway. everything about batman (from every era) is potentially "marketable", so why not? batman is there to make money via great stories, as is any comicbook character.

so going back to the yellow oval reeking of marketing, i'm not even sure thats a problem. heck, if it sold more comics *and* made batman more memorable or whatever in the public eye, wasn't that a good thing? plus, you gotta admit - it looks hella cool :)

[Dan Apodaca]

so going back to the yellow oval reeking of marketing, i'm not even sure thats a problem. heck, if it sold more comics *and* made batman more memorable or whatever in the public eye, wasn't that a good thing? plus, you gotta admit - it looks hella cool :)

It wasn't a good thing to me. I'd prefer for the character to be influenced by artistic choices, not business ones.

And no, I still don't think it looks cool.

[Shellhead]

It wasn't a good thing to me. I'd prefer for the character to be influenced by artistic choices, not business ones.

And no, I still don't think it looks cool.

From an artistic standpoint, I believe that the yellow oval functions like a full moon in the night sky of Batman's overall costume.

[Alan2099]

I alays thought it was a nice reflection of the Bat-symbol that they shine in the sky to summon him.

[The Batman]

I've always been partial to the basic black Batsymbol but I think that the yellow oval looks good too, especially with the all black Batsuits from the films.

One thing I am curious about is why they redesigned the Batsymbol for Burton's first Batman film?

http://www.batmanmovieonline.com/behindthescenes/photos/shawn02.jpg

http://www.batmanmovieonline.com/behindthescenes/photos/keatonkane1.jpg

as opposed to the traditional one that we're all used to?

http://www.cinescape.com/multimedia/Master_Site/Comics/Master_SiteArticle290161.jpg

[Dan Apodaca]

From an artistic standpoint, I believe that the yellow oval functions like a full moon in the night sky of Batman's overall costume.

I can get why that would influence a person's opinion of it.

But that fact is that it was created and added for purely corporate purposes.

[Paperghost]

I can get why that would influence a person's opinion of it.

But that fact is that it was created and added for purely corporate purposes.

....so Batman could effectively remain Batman, and not have one major piece of the pointy ears, cape and logo getup effectively destroyed because they would no longer be able to use it.

is that not an example of a corporate decision being used in a positive way to ensure the continuation of the stylistic devices associated with the character?

you said

I'd prefer for the character to be influenced by artistic choices, not business ones.

to me, that's a *perfect* example of a business choice allowing both the artists the choice to continue using a symbol of some sort on batmans chest, and the fans who appreciate that powerful element of what "makes" the batman costume to continue seeing it (whether yellow oval, black on grey or any other colour combo).

I don't know about you, but if they hadn't done that and they'd lost the right to put *any* sort of bat-related symbol on his chest, a major piece of what makes the overall look and feel of the character would have been lost. especially when the bat symbol could've been changed to a large "B" or something equally horrendous.

or even worse...what if theoretically they'd not bothered updating the logo, lost the right to place a bat on his chest (of any variety) so every clown on the block started creating characters with bats on their chest...and after much deliberation, they couldn't come up with any good idea and so had to leave his chest completely blank?

(shudders)

if that's what dc had to do to allow batman to keep his batsymbol, then more power to them. updating the symbol into the yellow oval for trademark purposes would be as much about them being able to protect their character, as it was about marketing it.

actually, this has got me thinking about the superman symbol - when (and why) did it go from the "original" logo (in its many crude guises) to the all singing and dancing letter "S" with all the fancy stylings? presumably that was for trademarking purposes too, but anyone know the details? it'd be interesting to see some sort of chronological running list of which companies updated their logos, when, why etc.

[dancj]

One thing I am curious about is why they redesigned the Batsymbol for Burton's first Batman film?
It's not much of a redesign. IIRC, Batman's symbol jumps back and forth between both versions within The Killing Joke alone.

[Cei-U!]

At the risk of sounding churlish, the symbol on Batman's chest (like Superman's S and Captain Marvel's lightning bolt) is an emblem, not a logo. The Batman logo is the graphic representation of the character's name, a design which has changed several times over his 67-year history. The emblem, both alone or as incorporated into the costume, and the logo can all be registered as trademarks.

Cei-U!
I summon the quibble!

[Paperghost]

At the risk of sounding churlish, the symbol on Batman's chest (like Superman's S and Captain Marvel's lightning bolt) is an emblem, not a logo. The Batman logo is the graphic representation of the character's name, a design which has changed several times over his 67-year history. The emblem, both alone or as incorporated into the costume, and the logo can all be registered as trademarks.

Cei-U!
I summon the quibble!

true - however, in recent years the word "logo" come to represent everything from "emblems" and coats of arms to flags and services. In that sense, the term "logo" could refer to both the oval *or* the textual representation of the word "Batman". In this case, I'm referring to the yellow oval as a logo which is perfectly acceptable, because it can incorporate the term "emblem". And if they'd lost the rights to the bat symbol on the costume because they hadn't gone with the yellow oval, they'd still have been stuck with regards what to replace it with.

I'd also argue that DC managed to create a symbol that was *too* successful, because if their intention was for the "real ultimate king of batman logos" to be represented by the text-based mark (which I don't go along with, because if you were them, would you spend all your time shoving a text based logo down peoples throats or a funky looking yellow badge?) they pretty much messed up by diluting the notion of what a "batman logo" would mean in the mind of the general public anyway. After all, say "batman logo" to the guy on the street - does he immediately think "the trademarked word Batman in a stylised form of writing (possibly with some graphic of the batman behind it, Adam West TV show style) or does he think "yellow oval with a black bat in the middle")? I know what one I think of.

As an example, search for "batman logo" on google images - almost everything returned is the bat symbol. Potentially the wrong interpretation of what "batman logo" actually means? Possibly - but there's not a lot DC could actually do about it.

[JKCarrier]

I'm not overly concerned about the "practicality" of a cartoon character's costume. Batman's outfit has always been wildly impractial. The cowl would seriously hinder his field of vision, and that huge cape would be a serious liability in hand-to-hand combat. Luckily, the only real function a superhero's costume has to perform is to look cool, and Batman's does that quite nicely.

I don't know if the story about the oval being added for trademark purposes is true or not, but I know the oval looks a lot better to me. If you look at the Batman comics just before the "New Look" was introduced, the bat symbol had become this little inconsequential squiggle, barely even visible. The addition of the yellow oval brought it back into focus as the identifying centerpiece of the costume. What's the point of even having a symbol, if it's not going to stand out?

[Paperghost]

I'm not overly concerned about the "practicality" of a cartoon character's costume. Batman's outfit has always been wildly impractial. The cowl would seriously hinder his field of vision, and that huge cape would be a serious liability in hand-to-hand combat. Luckily, the only real function a superhero's costume has to perform is to look cool, and Batman's does that quite nicely.

I don't know if the story about the oval being added for trademark purposes is true or not, but I know the oval looks a lot better to me. If you look at the Batman comics just before the "New Look" was introduced, the bat symbol had become this little inconsequential squiggle, barely even visible. The addition of the yellow oval brought it back into focus as the identifying centerpiece of the costume. What's the point of even having a symbol, if it's not going to stand out?

i like it when they use the cape as part of the battle - like when he fought some blind dude in the 90's (don't ask) and he sliced his face open with the tip of his cape.

i vaguely remember an old batman comic where the bad guy is in an alleyway, thinking he got away from the police. he enters an old building and the panels are pretty dark looking. next one in, theres a vague outline of his face aaaand....complete look of (almost obscured) terror, and absolutely nothing facing him in the black panel bar the yellow oval blazing away.

i mean, thats just awesome. and a great stylistic use of the oval to push the story along visually - to me, it just gives the artists more options to do something interesting with the images. i'm not sure an artist could convey something like that now with the yellow oval gone - its like they've had to become too literal in their depictions as a result of it being removed. I wish they'd realise we don't need to physically see the whole of batman in every panel he appears in. strange how something so small can potentially affect the way people draw someone.

[Dan Apodaca]

A business decision is a business decision.

As far as I know, yellow is not the only color that can be used for trademarks. They used yellow because it would be the most visible contrast, of the colors they could easily print back then.

A gray or blue oval could've been done and would have looked much better, but they went with yellow because it was the best for business.

This isn't about making business decisions to maintain the art, it's about making business decisions to maintain the profit.

[The Batman]

By that rationale though most every single Batman story is really little more than a business decision. Really the only reasons that they produce stories is so that they can sell books and make money afterall.

I'm prefer the ovaless symbol as well, but that's just because it looks so damn cool.
http://www.zonanegativa.com/imagen/0880.jpg

[Dan Apodaca]

By that rationale though most every single Batman story is really little more than a business decision. Really the only reasons that they produce stories is so that they can sell books and make money afterall.

The only reason that DC comics makes Batman comics is to sell them.

But that's not the only reason that numerous people write and draw them.

[Kaos]

I prefer it ovaless, just looks cooler

[Bry Kotyk]

I prefer the simple black-on-gray symbol. It's a bit hard to call him "the Dark Knight" when he's running around with a bright yellow oval on his chest, no?

I'd also like to see him to lose the manties and switch to a black belt. That'd be cool.

And honestly, they need to cut this habit of colouring the cape and cowl baby blue, already. Absurdly goofy, that.