18 November 2009
Some Thoughts On The New AGA Logo
See, this is their new logo…
… but, from the sheer number of people who say they see “asia” instead of “aga”, maybe they should have went with this…
Of course, that would have been better suited if the architect used Edmonton’s trademark pyramid shape in his design.
… but, from the sheer number of people who say they see “asia” instead of “aga”, maybe they should have went with this…Of course, that would have been better suited if the architect used Edmonton’s trademark pyramid shape in his design.Others have pointed out the similarity of the AGA’s logo to another company’s well-known corporate identity…
edmonton bontemporary art yallery
… of course, had the AGA’s team gone as carefree as Ebay’s designers, and jostled their letters up a bit, they might have dropped their inverted-a ‘G’ below the baseline to give it a descender (like actual lower-case letter Gs have), lending to readability. Details…
I suppose, in the end, to really judge the new logo, one could always use the old artists’ trick of looking at it in a mirror to see how it holds up…
Hey! Whadya know? I have no trouble reading that!
This new logo might just signify our new grotesque art gallery quite well, after all.
Hey! Whadya know? I have no trouble reading that!This new logo might just signify our new grotesque art gallery quite well, after all.
Posted by MC in In Other News.
Looks like Studiosavant isn't the only blog raising an eyebrow at the AGA's logo blunder.
Brand New, a designer blog on brand identity, is tearing it apart…
November 18th, 2009 at 5:31 pmI just had to look up Vision Creative Inc., the firm hired to design the logo… wow, did the GAG, er, I mean AGA, cheap out, or what? I mean, I'm sure they spend a small fortune on their failed logo, but, really, what did they expect from these jokers? I looks like the whole firm is a fly-by-night gang of recent undergrads… it looks like a bachelor's degree is the highest educational level of anybody there.
Seriously, is there anything the Art Gallery of Alberta management DOESN'T fuck up?
November 20th, 2009 at 10:15 am… other than the hiring of their preparatory staff, of course…
November 20th, 2009 at 10:16 amI'm not a huge fan of the new logo either, but your comments seem pretty unfounded. Anyone with any idea about design and branding in Edmonton knows who Vision is, and for the most part their work is great. How many working designers have graduate degrees? What does this have to do with the quality of their work? Given the poor typography of the identity on this sight, it is quite clear you're not in much of a position to comment, design-wise.
November 23rd, 2009 at 4:22 pmI apologize if I touched a nerve, Landon. You're right, I was going out on a limb with my comments, purposely egging on some opposition, which I'm glad you've provided. Honestly, I occasionally try to push towards outlandishness, just to see if anyone out there reading will enter into the dialogue, so, thanks again for participating, not just reading.
As I implied, I didn't know shit about Vision Creative Inc., so you may infer, I'm don't qualify as a design/branding nerd myself (which is why I point to the design/branding nerd blog), but merely someone with a visual background who sees the obvious flaws in the design.
I don't know how many working designers have graduate degrees. I was merely pointing out that the highest degree of anyone at the entire firm was a bachelor's degree. I don't know if this is common, but it seems to me that the gallery's corporate 'identity' hinges on, firstly, the new building (which cost a fortune, but is arguably down-market quality), and secondly, their new logo (which cost, what, for its arguably down-market quality?).
I can't really say that more education would make the designers' work any better, you're right, Landon. I guess I just thought that the AGA might have gone with a more experienced/better credentialed, international design team/firm for their branding, to go with the supposedly well-credentialed designer of the new building.
Again, my apologies for my previous lack of clarity. Obviously, a designer doesn't need a graduate degree to make good work, and I didn't mean to imply otherwise.
Thanks for your comments, Landon. What are your suggestions to improve the typography here, if you don't mind me asking?
November 23rd, 2009 at 7:10 pmFrom what I've experienced, young designers who are without the piece of paper do better work than those who, eight years ago, finished their masters in some now (presumably)outdated design class.
I doubt that any of them *need* to go to school to be successful designers; many have probably been building blogs and playing around with fonts their whole lives.
That said, the logo should have been a contest in which a panel of people/the public voted on. Anyone should have been able to enter, and people of all ages and backgrounds should have judged.
Instead we get "Asia/ASA" slathered in two non-complimentary colours and topped off with PUKE green. Bleh. Blah. Bleh.
December 22nd, 2009 at 9:21 pmExcellently put, somethingcaustic. Hell, when I studied visual communication design back in school, we used things like plaka and the waxing-machine. Now, I'm sure there are a bunch of top-notch, unschooled 12-year-old designers out there, who could have made a better logo on their Iphone at recess than the design firm the AGA hired.
December 23rd, 2009 at 9:04 am