[deleted]
Oxford University Press’s new logo is unfathomably bad
151–160 of 340 posts
Re: Oxford University Press’s new logo is unfathomably bad
#152Ooh, ooh. I have one to share! The infamous "Case" Fat Man With a Surfboard logo: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case_Western_Reserve_Universit... Is it as bad as the Met's new logo? Probably not. Is it pretty objectionable, and universally maligned? Yeah, definitely. Anybody else got one to share for our shared schadenfreude?
> Fat Man With a Surfboard logo:
Yeah, this new OUP logo looks great for a surf school too. Definitely a wave in the circle.
Re: Oxford University Press’s new logo is unfathomably bad
#153A logo change, like mergers, divestments, and reorgs, are one of the few things where the C-suite can feel important. It gives them something to do, issue a press release about, and give interviews to the BBC.
Unlike those other things, it's hard to prove it was a mistake. Maybe over time, sales fall off and prestigious authors migrate to other publishers, but if you approved the new logo, you can find a hundred other things to blame for that.
Re: Oxford University Press’s new logo is unfathomably bad
#154This 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 M…
>Frankly, objectively speaking, the new logo is much better from a design perspective whether the author likes it or not.
Disagree fam, I think you drank too much of the kool-aid. A logo ought to above all communicate about the brand and now I'm gonna mix up OUP with Apeture Science.
My point is not that you're wrong, but rather that design is firmly in the land of opinion and your staunch 'objectivity' is bankrupt. I hope you didn't pay anyone to acquire that opinion.
Re: Oxford University Press’s new logo is unfathomably bad
#155I always love reading the angry rants from people who get angry about any change in an organisation's branding. Every single time. Absolutely every time there's a logo change, you can see the hoard of pointless blog posts coming over the hill. And they always fail to understand what actually happens in design, what it's actually for .
Well, why don't you explain what actually happens in design, and what it's actually for?
Re: Oxford University Press’s new logo is unfathomably bad
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
Relevant to what ? Things aren't relevant in isolation. We're talking about the logo of an historic institution, part of an institution with an even deeper history, the sort of place where you might expect a person chosen at random to be able to understand that motto.
Relevant to the common alive person. I'll be that person chosen at random; I don't understand the motto. How is it relevant to a school? Good riddance.
Maybe you aren't relevant to Oxford University Press — very seriously, no insult meant. You're not the audience, and whether you understand it is not their concern.
Re: Oxford University Press’s new logo is unfathomably bad
#157I am trying to to think of a single rebrand / new logo / new icon that I actually liked at the time—that didn't seem to signal a degradation in the integrity, quality or trustworthiness of the entity represented. (There are some cases where the new brand has grown on me, to the point that I have come to prefer it to the old one. The most recent examples I can think of are the 1999 rebrand of Northern Electric as Nort…
Ooh, I'll give it a shot!
Burger King: https://jkrglobal.com/case-studies/burger-king/ Simple, but fun. Retro, instead of over modern. Better than the logo is all the supporting fonts and imagery. Super aesthetic.
InstaCart: https://www.wolffolins.com/case-study/instacart Pretty recent, tech company, not a beloved brand at the time of rebrand, but wow it's a great rebrand. Way more character, way more fun.
Leibniz: https://auge-design.com/work/leibniz-design-relaunch/ Subtle changes, embraces the character, modernizes the packaging, makes a consistent design system. Maybe not what you're looking for, but still a cool example of new design done well and embraced.
New York State Parks: https://id29.com/our-work/new-york-state-parks Clean and happy.
CNET: https://www.wearecollins.com/work/cnet/ Big name, awesome rebrand. Tons of character, no one misses the old logo or vibe.
Midi: https://www.pentagram.com/work/midi/story Really interesting supporting logos and graphics. Maybe a little too heavily minimalist, but man that's a cool idea to have a dynamic icon for your logo!
Mojang: https://www.boldscandinavia.com/work/mojang-studios/ Tons of fun, reflective of blocks and pixels.
DK: https://www.pentagram.com/work/dk Good example of modernization without losing character.
These are some bigger names, but honestly the really interesting stuff is inside smaller companies who don't have to worry so much about legacy. There's some beautiful, character filled work out there.
Re: Oxford University Press’s new logo is unfathomably bad
#158It looks like something for a telco.
Someone peeled the skin off a 3D model of the AT&T death star, and origamied it into a coffin wreath.
Re: Oxford University Press’s new logo is unfathomably bad
#159I profoundly dislike the new logo as it erodes an ever diminishing bygone-era of graphic design. Traditional cyphers, monograms and other iconography are time-bound to the pre-20th century (n Not everything needs to be redesigned, not everything needs a modern sans-serif font. Oxford University is the worlds foremost academic institute; founded in 1096; the Press founded in 1586! The previous logo represented this an…
Well, you can thank Jony Ive for taking over the UI as well as the hardware, and rebranding the entire iOS experience in his minimalistic image.
Looks like a bunch of people went to do the same thing in OUP. They probably launched a campaign labeling the thing on the left “skeumorphism” or its equivalent.
I remember when Apple’s interfaces were iconic and user friendly. Then in iOS 7 I couldn’t figure out where the chrome ended and the webpage/document began anymore. The search bar in Google Chrome on iOS was literally a blank white space. I had to tap there to discover search.
Apple… known the world over as a UX leader for its UX guidelines since 1980s … became a follower … of Microsoft’s new mobile interface. Which was later totally discontinued by Microsoft. Well, at least Wozniak liked it.
Re: Oxford University Press’s new logo is unfathomably bad
#160I don't like it as it seems to remind me of the James Bond intro. But it seems most (or at least a large fraction) of people don't really like rebrands. So it probably doesn't really matter (unless unreasonable amount of money was spent on rebranding).
Even then it still doesn't matter. Anyone who spends an unreasonable amount of money on rebranding probably has a far more unreasonable amount of money remaining afterwards.
My interpreter is that they lack any good ideas for real change.