a flag should have these qualities: simple, bold, meaningful, and recognizable. thus, it should not be overly complex, use washed-out colors, display random colors/designs without symbolism, and should not look too similar to another flag. also, it helps if you can tell what it is when its hanging limp.
I would say flag of Kazakhstan meets all these criteria.
Good color contrast, not too full of detail yet not another tricolor, simple composure with traditional symbols of the nation. Easily one of most aesthetic state flags out there, surprised it wasn't mentioned before in this thread.
The state seal of Massachusetts is getting redesigned. It's now considered "offensive" by native Americans who don't understand heraldry. On one hand, this is bullshit because the seal is not offensive. On the other, this means Massachusetts might get a cool flag because the current one is just a seal-on-a-bedsheet
Good color contrast, not too full of detail yet not another tricolor, simple composure with traditional symbols of the nation. Easily one of most aesthetic state flags out there, surprised it wasn't mentioned before in this thread.
Good color contrast, not too full of detail yet not another tricolor, simple composure with traditional symbols of the nation. Easily one of most aesthetic state flags out there, surprised it wasn't mentioned before in this thread.
The state seal of Massachusetts is getting redesigned. It's now considered "offensive" by native Americans who don't understand heraldry. On one hand, this is bullshit because the seal is not offensive. On the other, this means Massachusetts might get a cool flag because the current one is just a seal-on-a-bedsheet
That reminds me of how some Mainers (I don't know the demonym) are pushing for the current Seal-on-Bedsheet flag to be replaced by the previous state flag, which I am all for. Seal on bedsheets need to die asap.
Even though (apparently) good flags aren't supposed to be detailed/have writing one of my favourites would be the Donetsk People's Republic with the eagle and text on it.
It'd be cool on the back of a jacket or something, and just the eagle emblem with the "Донецкая Республика" text on the top and bottom would be cool as a large tattoo across the back I think.
Good color contrast, not too full of detail yet not another tricolor, simple composure with traditional symbols of the nation. Easily one of most aesthetic state flags out there, surprised it wasn't mentioned before in this thread.
Simple: no, due to the overly complicated semi border
Bold: meh, only because the base colour is an unusual blue.
meaningful: I don't know enough to argue this, although I do feel that the meaning should hopefully be recognized by even those with a vague knowledge of the country. All I get is the eagle (which is used for hunting)
Recognizable: sure, I guess. But I honestly thought it was a native American tribe flag at first glance.
I'm sorry but I feel this will be my only chance to do this.
Who thought this was a good idea for a flag? The transgender flag is so damn bland, I don't think they could make it blander if they tried. The design is bland, the colours are bland.
I'm sorry but I feel this will be my only chance to do this.
Who thought this was a good idea for a flag? The transgender flag is so damn bland, I don't think they could make it blander if they tried. The design is bland, the colours are bland.
Going by the North American Vexillological Association (NAVA) standards for flag design, the transgender flag is one of the better ones. It's simple; it's symbolism is meaningful (blue for boy, pink girl, white for undefined/transitioning); it uses three basic colors; there are no letterings or seals; and it's distinctive. If you showed anyone the transgender flag, they'd be able to immediately tell at this point that it's the transgender flag. Compare this to the numerous copycat flags riding on its coattails which either use too many colors, too similar colors, or are just plain fucking ugly.
The bland-feeling design is likely because of its use and co-opting by other groups and new flags in the same vein as the transgender one, not to mention its similarity to tricolors (which make up nearly a third of all world flags). The colors contrast against one another to pop, though the flag's simplicity means the colors could be traded in for more contrastive ones without altering its meaning. The softer colors are one of its worse weaknesses in that regard as they don't stand out as much as harder colors would.
Does it leave a sour taste in the mouth because of troons? Sure and I wouldn't argue otherwise. But is it a blandly-colored, bland flag by any means? I would argue no. In comparison with other flags from the Letter-Soup group, it's actually one of the better ones and has actual meaning behind its color choices and layout.
Going by the North American Vexillological Association (NAVA) standards for flag design, the transgender flag is one of the better ones. It's simple; it's symbolism is meaningful (blue for boy, pink girl, white for undefined/transitioning); it uses three basic colors; there are no letterings or seals; and it's distinctive. If you showed anyone the transgender flag, they'd be able to immediately tell at this point that it's the transgender flag. Compare this to the numerous copycat flags riding on its coattails which either use too many colors, too similar colors, or are just plain fucking ugly.
The bland-feeling design is likely because of its use and co-opting by other groups and new flags in the same vein as the transgender one, not to mention its similarity to tricolors (which make up nearly a third of all world flags). The colors contrast against one another to pop, though the flag's simplicity means the colors could be traded in for more contrastive ones without altering its meaning. The softer colors are one of its worse weaknesses in that regard as they don't stand out as much as harder colors would.
Does it leave a sour taste in the mouth because of troons? Sure and I wouldn't argue otherwise. But is it a blandly-colored, bland flag by any means? I would argue no. In comparison with other flags from the Letter-Soup group, it's actually one of the better ones and has actual meaning behind its color choices and layout.
Going by the North American Vexillological Association (NAVA) standards for flag design, the transgender flag is one of the better ones. It's simple; it's symbolism is meaningful (blue for boy, pink girl, white for undefined/transitioning); it uses three basic colors; there are no letterings or seals; and it's distinctive. If you showed anyone the transgender flag, they'd be able to immediately tell at this point that it's the transgender flag. Compare this to the numerous copycat flags riding on its coattails which either use too many colors, too similar colors, or are just plain fucking ugly.
The bland-feeling design is likely because of its use and co-opting by other groups and new flags in the same vein as the transgender one, not to mention its similarity to tricolors (which make up nearly a third of all world flags). The colors contrast against one another to pop, though the flag's simplicity means the colors could be traded in for more contrastive ones without altering its meaning. The softer colors are one of its worse weaknesses in that regard as they don't stand out as much as harder colors would.
Does it leave a sour taste in the mouth because of troons? Sure and I wouldn't argue otherwise. But is it a blandly-colored, bland flag by any means? I would argue no. In comparison with other flags from the Letter-Soup group, it's actually one of the better ones and has actual meaning behind its color choices and layout.
