When reading the age of anti logo, I learned around when it comes to the world of design common today numerous things are continuously changing when it comes to standards, and other concepts. I know today many exhibition halls don’t need their symbol to be changed since they think it takes away from their legacy. Also for numerous artists and designers such as ourselves we got to go through the same thing when designing a symbol since a symbol is outlined to provide individuals an thought of someone or something with personality whereas still being moderate in various forms, extents and indeed its outside appearance.
In the 21st century’s network information era, the museum’s logo design will break through the static two-dimensional graphics and usher in a dynamic and personalized development trend. The logo has become a vivid “business card” for the museum’s external communication, and it carries the visual intermediary of the museum’s information and social communication. The museum is described by design elements such as color, graphics, text, form, and materials. Color can understand the culture of the city, the main color of the museum building, the surrounding environment and so on.
We’re living in an age where everything is constantly evolving our media, technology how we interact, etc so it makes sense for museums to want to be flexible with their identity. The contents in a museum are constantly changing and shifting so it’s appropriate that their identity should be the same. Variety in content keeps visitors engaged and wanting to come back for another visit because what they saw their first time there most likely won’t be the same on repeat visits.
Upon reading The age of the Anti logo one may find the answers to why museums are shedding their identities in regards to something a bit more modern. When it comes to the world of design and design in general , if there’s ONE thing that’s constant it’s change. Things are always changing when it comes to ideals, concepts and technology and with this age of tech places like museums have to find ways to cater and to appeal to a larger audience and by doing that you have to create an identity/logo that can be flexible, modern yet something that will be appealing to people, and something that you can build a brand off of.
Subsequently reading The Age of the Anti-Logo, I think it’s fair to say that developing a museum brand is a complicated task. Each logo needs to have an identity.
It sounds easy enough but many museum’s identities originally used serifs, focused on the building’s structure, and or the important ruler’s seal/emblem. However some museums can have more than one type of focus.
Recently museums like the Whitney changed their logo. Although the previous logo was relevant to the early 00’s (10 years old), the pixelated logotype (representation of the dot-com boom) has become outdated.
What I enjoyed about this reading was the way it made me question “the crisis of confidence”. I found this interesting because the article described how it’s good to adapt, be “flexible” and attractive to the viewer and donors but then question if in doing so your attention is drawn away from the museum’s original purpose.
Prior to this article I thought the focus was the target audience. Now I think what makes a logo successful is one that adapts and keeps originality. Like the Museum of Art and Design. The best way I can describe their logo is positive and negative space. The MAD remains but the image inside changes to the exhibition.
I understand and see how after reading the article, museums revive their logo, I believe many museums don’t want their icon to be changed because they think it takes away from their heritage, but as things arise, the icon needs to be more” connected to the public. Many museums are transforming and adapting themselves to appeal to the public in order to reach a shared ground with both modern and old.
Kelsey Campbell-Dollaghan article “The Age of the Anti-Logo: Why Museums Are Shedding Their Identities” talks about how Museum logos no longer have the traditional look that would consist of using the building facade, company name, or even an emblem. A museum is an institution that preserves various collections from around the world, exhibiting both permanent or temporary pieces to the general public. A museum is meant to educate current and future generations but in order to do so they need to constantly change their exhibitions; would designing a logo for a corporation like a museum be simple?No.When it comes to creating a logo for a museum it would never be a simple task as Campbell-Dollaghan said “developing a museum “brand” is a complicated chore”, in general People have their take on what is art and if it’s worth being in a museum that alone can be more stressful for the person who has to pick it, right!. Graphic designers have to go through the same thing when designing a logo because a logo is designed to give people an idea of a company’s identity while still being minimalist in shape, size, proportions and even its exterior. Sometimes logos need to be revamped to show adaptation in a company’s interior and exterior, a logo is supposed to conform to society’s expectations while still being adaptable in every context that may arise. Do you think it would be easier to design a museum logo using both traditional and modern styles?.
The article “The Age of Anti-Logo: Why Museums Are Shedding There Identities” discusses the process of designing a logo for a museum and how intricate the approach can be in its quest for flexibility. As museum logos become less concrete they are able to advertise in more ways they would have if not. Describing current logo design as “complicated” and a “chore” the author brings up the argument if something is lost in such an elaborate approach to design. Personally I find these flexible logos interesting but I do wonder how far one could go until it’s real purpose is lost, becoming something entirely abstract. As this style becomes popular it will be interesting to see what can be achieved next.
According to the article “The Age of the Anti-Logo: Why Museums Are Shedding Their Identities” mentioned by the designers,“One of the main subjects we tried to explore was the notion of a graphic identity that wouldn’t consists of a static, single logo, but one that would be able to change shape, reacting to ever-changing proportions and surfaces.” Which I really agree upon, especially in logos for collective brands that have a collective of products and services that have to fit each criteria of news and pieces of artworks or even it’s own business cards and envelopes. Creating a logo design for a museum in my own opinion has to be simple and not complex as other companies’ designs. I also liked the idea that the W log was made in a simple black and white frame. Which really doesn’t have any kind of tricky serifs that can go wrong with other contents or products.
According to the article, The Age of the Anti-Logo: Why Museums Are Shedding Their Identities, I agree with the statement, “developing a museum brand is a complicated chore.” I agree with this because a museum consists of a lot of artwork and the logo will have to one way or another connect to each and every one of them, in my opinion. It’s better if a logo such as the Whitney museums, can change depending in what context it is found, without changing the overall aspect of it. One way logos are successful are if they can be used in different shapes and sizes but keeping its identity such as the MIT Media Lab, which includes the same colors, but pointing in different directions. Another great point the article states is, as the institution evolves, the logo should go along with it.
After reading the article, I understand and see how the museums renew their logo, to make them “flexible” they need to keep up with times for people to look at them in a new way. lots of museums are changing and converting themself to sell to people in the public. Like from what I know, MTV has been doing that for a long time.
After reading the article I understand the need museums have to update their logo. In the old days institutions like museums would normally the building, the name was used, or some sort of emblem as it’s the logo. In today’s market logos have become the opposite of what used to be popular, what’s used now is minimalists, symbolism in the form of simplicity, some logos are flexible while using different variations. Museums are difficult to create logos for with all the content they have or the amount of history that goes to its reputation. Logos in this time have taken a more elegant approach with an interesting form of simplicity. I believe if more logos become modern for museums maybe people won’t lose interest thinking it’s outdated and see what the change is about when they decided to visit. Nobody doesn’t change their logo for no reason, it’s a sign of growth and maturity towards the brand.
Upon reading the article about the age of the anti log and how many museums are changing there logos to keep up with the times and better appear as modern and sophisticated rather than showcasing what they stand for. This new trend is changing logo design as we know it for example intel and cpu manufacturer for computers recently changed they’re logo not that it is bad but for something more modern with just a word mark in a new type face which was different from they’re processor of a combination.