91–100 of 175 posts
There's this great blog for Logo changes: https://www.underconsideration.com/brandnew/ You have to subscribe to read the articles now, but just looking at the thumbnails is fun enough
Browsing the before&after tag was especially enjoying: https://www.underconsideration.com/brandnew/archives/categor...
I found a nice counter example to the trend presented in the article: https://www.underconsideration.com/brandnew/archives/new_log...
Before: https://mir-s3-cdn-cf.behance.net/project_modules/disp/6a356...
After: https://creativereview.imgix.net/content/uploads/2022/09/MFA...
Their stated purpose was to make it more accessible. The reasoned that the neoclassical architecture and old-style font made the space intimidating to people who didn’t hold those things to be part of their culture and that it was out of tune with the increasing diversity of their collection and programs.
I think that’s the real trend here: change. Sans is so tempting because it hardly means anything and so designers will tell you it’s a blank canvas you can imbue with whatever values you want. If those values change, you don’t have to tear down your whole identity.
That’s deeply appealing for firms in the tech world considering the rapid change of pace. What’s disappointing to me is to see cultural institutions take the same defensive approach. A logo change is fine, but saying “we want to be accessible to everybody so we’ll strip out anything that ties us to a time, place, or tradition” is like trying to make a welcoming living room by replacing all the sofas, tables, and rugs with a milk crate and a metal foldout chair.
It doesn’t have to be that way. A few miles away the Boston Athenaeum did a rebrand with the same usual rhetoric on accessibility and diversity, but came through with a font that fits their tradition
Before: https://web.archive.org/web/20210126132351/https://bostonath...
After: https://bostonathenaeum.org/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You generally have to cater to the lowest common denominator, like that $150 prepaid Android phone with a non-HiDPI screen. Or someone on a 1336x720 Chromebook.
I think we all used Times New Roman for writing in 800x600 desktop CRTs with 15" curved displays and could read just fine.
The one that bums me out the most is the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston. They went from an elegant serif font to a bland sans with a few funky tails. Before: https://mir-s3-cdn-cf.behance.net/project_modules/disp/6a356... After: https://creativereview.imgix.net/content/uploads/2022/09/MFA... Their stated purpose was to make it more accessible. The reasoned that the neoclassical architecture and old-style font made the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hopefully AI will make those uncreative designers redundant, freeing them to do something more aligned with their talents.
That's way too hopeful. AI is not creative, it's a tool that gives you what it calculates to be the best solution which is taken from the space of all pre-existing solutions. So if anything it will double down on the lack of creativity and keep showing whatever worked before referring us down a cycle of dull, but very machine-predictable mediocrity. AI is not the solution for making things more creative.
Are you sure? I'd say for example here it shows creativity: https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.08433
The one that bums me out the most is the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston. They went from an elegant serif font to a bland sans with a few funky tails. Before: https://mir-s3-cdn-cf.behance.net/project_modules/disp/6a356... After: https://creativereview.imgix.net/content/uploads/2022/09/MFA... Their stated purpose was to make it more accessible. The reasoned that the neoclassical architecture and old-style font made the…
Can put this under the dictionary definition of insanity. Or someone needed justification to get paid without doing any real work.
There's this great blog for Logo changes: https://www.underconsideration.com/brandnew/ You have to subscribe to read the articles now, but just looking at the thumbnails is fun enough
Wow, thanks for that. I had no idea that e.g. Deezer got rid of their iconic logo https://www.underconsideration.com/brandnew/archives/new_log...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's very noticeably in building architecture. My bad take: Modern architecture ugliness comes from architects using CAD with insufficient proficiency to create complex designs. Result: Mossty cubes and grids, with some advanced users adding fillets.
Just wait til the next generation come in, who've grown up designing widgetes for 3D printing. Weird procedural geometry, swoopy curves and crazy patterns galore! :D
Design is a bit of a fashion industry. Lots of people imitating each other. I'm not a designer but I know a few good ones and appreciate good design. What I appreciate in good design is not only looking good but standing out from the crowd. The problem with imitating others is that you end up looking like everything else. It's not offensive. But also not remarkable or memorable. A lot of web design suffers from being…
