Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Oxford University Press’s new logo is unfathomably bad

joukovsky.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 340 posts

Re: Oxford University Press’s new logo is unfathomably bad

#111

Post by mturmon »

themodelplumber wrote: post #2

It's interesting to see the discussion unfold. I used to do a lot of logo design, some for the replacement of time-honored logos even. Spicy jobs those were, both on pro and con sides! One thing I learned was that new, individual, and fresh leadership psychology often brings new logos into being. Differentials in psychology can't help but expose new perspectives on organizational concepts. And that's what a logo is,…

Let’s follow your hint. The CEO of OUP is trying [https://www.thebookseller.com/news/oup-rebrands-it-becomes-d...] to effect a transformation to digital distribution and digital “tools and resources” which I assume means going beyond digital versions of books and journals.

So yeah, the coat-of-arms/bookplate format of the old logo is not where he’s headed.

Absent from the OP is consideration of the new logo on its own terms. I get an O for Oxford, the turning pages, and hint of a Möbius strip. It works for me.

On the other hand, the translation of the Latin on the old motto is “the Lord is my light,” paired with the crowns invoking royal fiat. Traditional, yes, but…

Another signal in the new logo may be a declaration of independence from the University of Oxford itself, because the old logo was just the University’s coat of arms.

Re: Oxford University Press’s new logo is unfathomably bad

#112

Post by some_random »

dghlsakjg wrote: post #36

I assume this logo is going on the spines of books. This means that you are taking a recognizable easy to spot image that says: 'this book is vetted and serious, trust it like you trust us', and replacing it with a logo that is less recognizable (and by my prediction won't be around in 100 years). For anyone who browses shelves this will, in fact, reduce utility. It's a small thing, but it is worth considering.

For what it's worth, my only Oxford University Press published book just has "Oxford" written on the spine, no logo.

Re: Oxford University Press’s new logo is unfathomably bad

#114

Post by systemicdanna »

An unpopular opinion: there are too many other logos that look like the original logo. Some amalgamation of Latin words and a coat of arms. It's also pretty unattractive visually (weird thickness exterior curves, all caps words with hyphens).

First impression of the new logo: boring. Second impression: nice play on an open book and capital O, very clean lines, will look good in print (perhaps with some light gradient/shading). The new typeface reads very well.

Re: Oxford University Press’s new logo is unfathomably bad

#115

Post by Maursault »

blululu wrote: post #72

This is a bit hyperbolic. It's really not that bad of a rebrand. Brands are important. People care about them. They need to be updated with the times. Perhaps the author would care to show some alternative modernizations to illustrate a better way to do it.

The author says nothing about why the new logo is bad and the old one good. Frankly, objectively speaking, the new logo is much better from a design perspective whether the author likes it or not. A logo needs to be original, readily identifiable, and easily reproducible on any substrate. The old logo does not meet any of these standards, while the new logo does. The same can be said for the old Met logo. The newer Met logo is unmistakable and more easily reproduced anywhere. Author is obviously not a graphic designer or at least not one that was educated in design principles.

Re: Oxford University Press’s new logo is unfathomably bad

#116

Post by irrational »

frakt0x90 wrote: post #4

Who cares? It says Oxford University Press which is the important part. The little image above it is just fluff and literally doesn't matter. I certainly wouldn't call it 'unfathomably bad' considering it's not a child's drawing or a some obscene gesture.

I care. I own a number of Oxford press books. The old logo says to me “serious, distinguished, trustworthy, academic, has been around long enough to be taken seriously, etc.”

The new logo is not one I could take seriously.

Re: Oxford University Press’s new logo is unfathomably bad

#117

Post by kuschkufan »

blowski wrote: post #61
kabdib wrote: post #49

I remember when SGI (Silicon Graphics) paid a bunch of money to rebrand to . . . drumroll . . . SGI! The consultants must have been high-fiving each other after that one landed, it's like trading in your car only to find that the saleswoman has sold you your own car back, at a profit. (SGI later collapsed due to "Corporate Campus Syndrome", and other companies, including Google, now occupy the wacky buildings they sp…

A university in the UK (Portsmouth?) hired an expensive creative agency to come up with a new name. They whittled it down to three options: * University of Portsmouth * The University of Portsmouth * Portsmouth University

Yeah, so a couple years back the "Technische Universität Berlin" rebranded to "Berlin Universität der Technologie" or Berlin University of Technology. Because they thought that would be more similar to e.g. MIT and the like. Of course the abbreviation then would be BUT... Thankfully it did not stick and they are back to Technical University of Berlin.

Re: Oxford University Press’s new logo is unfathomably bad

#118

Post by heurisko »

frakt0x90 wrote: post #4

Who cares? It says Oxford University Press which is the important part. The little image above it is just fluff and literally doesn't matter. I certainly wouldn't call it 'unfathomably bad' considering it's not a child's drawing or a some obscene gesture.

It's lost history. The Latin text on the old logo connects the present with the past. There would have been thousands of instances where people would have thought "what does that mean" and have a browse through history.

Airbrushed and homogenised in favour of a tire.

Re: Oxford University Press’s new logo is unfathomably bad

#119

Post by mikkergp »

systemicdanna wrote: post #114

An unpopular opinion: there are too many other logos that look like the original logo. Some amalgamation of Latin words and a coat of arms. It's also pretty unattractive visually (weird thickness exterior curves, all caps words with hyphens). First impression of the new logo: boring. Second impression: nice play on an open book and capital O, very clean lines, will look good in print (perhaps with some light gradient…

I imagine the new logo looks more appropriate on a book about computer science or theoretical physics.
Post reply on HN