In Monday’s SFGate, the University of California’s new logo: “Utterly forgettable.”
Everybody hates it. Me, too.
From the SFGate article, New, simpler UC logo draws derision:
Mark Fox, a graphic design professor at California College of the Arts who designed that school’s logo [at right] and has done work for UC in the past, panned the new effort.
“The visual language is generic, commercial and utterly forgettable,” he said. “It is a complete mismatch for the university’s history and reputation. (It) has no visual or conceptual gravitas.”
A good logo should be distinct and memorable, create positive associations, reflect well on the company and work easily and inexpensively in all media, he said.
“The new UC logo,” Fox said, “fails in most of the above criteria.”
A logo can be simple. But it should be tested before launched. The Gap learned this a few years back. Does no one pay attention? To quote myself:
“This is the icon that reassures people that you are who you are. There is integrity implied. There is relationship behind it. Changing your logo is not a move to make lightly or without strategy.”
I stand behind that, still.
And to respond to the concerns of the UC that the crest (not even a logo, necessarily — the outgoing image had transcended “logo” — it was a crest) is not discernable at small sizes, I respond with the image at right. I also agree with the majority dissent that the new logo, whether big or small, looks like a “still loading” animation that is stuck. Gap went back; UC seems to be sticking to its guns.