University of California introduces a modern logo

Post by tapp » Sat, Dec 08, 2012, 6:35 AM UTC

supersaiyan wrote: post #28

This seems like deja vu, University of Waterloo was also trying to modernize its logo, didn't go to well: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lF1YfYOumM of course a Hitler interpretation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHLKp3lwdK0 Instead of replacing everything, the new logo is used only for advertising materials, while the old logo remains on the diplomas. p.s the new logo looked horrible once it was introduced, but a…

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Dec 08, 2012, 6:38 AM UTC

knowtheory wrote: post #39

christiangenco wrote: post #25

This looks like something made by a ten year old who just learned photoshop. If this actually catches on, I'll eat my hat, but from where I'm standing it's one of the worst logos I've ever seen. It's unclear in meaning and borders, uses gradients poorly, and isn't balanced.

The gradient is what kills it for me. Is it supposed to represent a buffer, spinning away as you shovel tuition in until you can load "the real world"? :P

Post by ronyeh » Sat, Dec 08, 2012, 8:52 AM UTC

Post by Turing_Machine » Sat, Dec 08, 2012, 3:39 PM UTC

seanlinehan wrote: post #42

aresant wrote: post #36

Simplistic logos are so easy to pan mercilessly & dismiss, and as a UC grad that was my first instinct too. But a quote on one of the subsequent sites in the comments (from UC's creative director) makes their case: "Previously, the UC system only used its seal as its primary visual identifier, where it was abused with impunity. . . this is less of a rebranding exercise, but instead the creation of a coherent, consist…

The strategic thinking behind the move is brilliant. Even if the logo cost $100,000 there is an argument to be made that more people will be able to connect with the brand and hopefully will donate. I'm quite certain that this type of move could be majorly profitable. But as hackers we know that a solid idea is not enough... the execution is what truly matters. The UC system's idea is awesome; the execution is pretty…

Post by glomph » Sat, Dec 08, 2012, 4:07 PM UTC

mhartl wrote: post #18

hyperbovine wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not me. It's hideous.

You're in agreement with the parent comment. "Who's in?" means, "Who's in on the bet that they will revert the logo [because it's hideous]?" (We're all in agreement, of course. This new logo is the seventeenth sign of the Apocalypse.)