<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
<title>blogTO Recent Comments: AGO's New Logo: Yay or Nay?</title>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/feed/recentcomments/?9631</link>
<description>Comments recently made in this post on blogTO</description>
<copyright>Copyright 2009</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 06:16:06 PST</lastBuildDate>
<item>
<title>Akira</title>
<description><![CDATA[
The world continues to be fleeced by BMD. Step back and ask yourself this: for all the rationalisation and pontifications put forward by BMD each time they release a new corporate logo, why do the logos all feel "kinda" the same?

Slightly different typefaces used, some visual trick added (today, the multi-coloured AGO overlaps); ultimately he consistently fails to create something unique, considering how different the design briefs from the client must be.

It's the repetition that makes me want to label BMD's process and pricing a fraud.

But if clients can't see that, then these clients deserve what they get.]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c327778</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c327778</guid>
<category>Toronto, Arts</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2008 20:03:22 PST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>newman</title>
<description><![CDATA[
Its too early to tell. Would like to see how the logo will be used.. 
My suggestion is to have a animated logo on the building using projections  or tv moniters]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c296764</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c296764</guid>
<category>Toronto, Arts</category>
<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 14:47:36 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>hgh</title>
<description><![CDATA[
yay]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c283862</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c283862</guid>
<category>Toronto, Arts</category>
<pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2008 09:53:22 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Carlos</title>
<description><![CDATA[
Found this link that features the AGO logo transformation
You can see a lot of other logo transformations too, some logo mash ups and funny stuff

http://www.underconsideration.com/brandnew/]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c283399</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c283399</guid>
<category>Toronto, Arts</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 14:46:44 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Jacq</title>
<description><![CDATA[
I like it :) it's groovy.]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c283143</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c283143</guid>
<category>Toronto, Arts</category>
<pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 14:28:12 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Aaron</title>
<description><![CDATA[
somebody said glitter?
<a href="http://img258.imageshack.us/img258/5278/animatexn0.gif">http://img258.imageshack.us/img258/5278/animatexn0.gif</a>]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c283032</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c283032</guid>
<category>Toronto, Arts</category>
<pubDate>Sun, 18 May 2008 23:39:23 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Michael</title>
<description><![CDATA[
Well, the colours do match the OCAD building next door...]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282869</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282869</guid>
<category>Toronto, Arts</category>
<pubDate>Sat, 17 May 2008 21:31:36 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Eric S. Smith</title>
<description><![CDATA[
The <a href="http://www.collectionx.museum/en/exhibition/5787/6.html">1971 one</a> <em>is</em> nice and clean.  The curly little butterfly in its <a href="http://www.collectionx.museum/en/exhibition/5787/7.html">1969 predecessor</a> is downright cute, and arguably the most abstractly logo-like of them all.  Fans of the subway typeface should enjoy the <a href="http://www.collectionx.museum/en/exhibition/5787/11.html">1947 wordmark</a> (not really a logo).  And for those who say "I liked the old one best," well, it <em>is</em> hard to argue with what they used at least once in <a href="http://www.collectionx.museum/en/exhibition/5787/16.html">1914</a>.]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282843</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282843</guid>
<category>Toronto, Arts</category>
<pubDate>Sat, 17 May 2008 18:22:44 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Harsh</title>
<description><![CDATA[
lacks curiosity - primarily due to absence of any typographic uniqueness. it's not something that will grow on me. it's going to stay as it is. non-provocative, banal, vanilla of sorts.

does the job though.]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282811</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282811</guid>
<category>Toronto, Arts</category>
<pubDate>Sat, 17 May 2008 13:34:41 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>euges429</title>
<description><![CDATA[
I dunno. The new logo is visually stunning (and visually boggling) indeed, so it's nice and modern in that respect. I think all the negativity from this forum (and other AGO patrons) comes from the fact that it's such a drastic departure from the more simple and "classic" logo it had before. Think of the ROM's old Times New Roman font, and think of the "Renaissance ROM" script. Looks nice, but just not what we're used to. That kind of change is sure to get some eyes wide open... That being said, the new logo is "hip" and "modern," shall we say?]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282715</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282715</guid>
<category>Toronto, Arts</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 23:26:40 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>moeed</title>
<description><![CDATA[
what in the world was wrong with the old one? it was perfect. 

this new one is hideous, absolutely hideous. i am REALLY interested in hearing what in the world they are trying to convey here. old was truly gold.]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282711</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282711</guid>
<category>Toronto, Arts</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 23:08:44 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>mk</title>
<description><![CDATA[
I love it... way better than some... think ROM and Province of Ontario Trillium logos!?!?]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282639</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282639</guid>
<category>Toronto, Arts</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 13:57:41 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>krystyn</title>
<description><![CDATA[
I like the idea, but the font is awful. It does look awfully 1997, and at first glance so does the colour scheme...but I think the colours are actually quite nice and work well.]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282632</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282632</guid>
<category>Toronto, Arts</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 13:25:09 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>ariana</title>
<description><![CDATA[
i like it! but agree with someone above that the b&w version might not be quite as cool...]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282627</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282627</guid>
<category>Toronto, Arts</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 12:36:45 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>adam</title>
<description><![CDATA[
wait, that doesn't make any sense... that'll learn me to try to be clever in a public forum before I finish my second coffee.  Well it probably won't but it should. 

I wonder how this looks with 3-D glasses...]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282604</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282604</guid>
<category>Toronto, Arts</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 11:26:00 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Gloria</title>
<description><![CDATA[
While I agree logos are a big part of a brand, here's the important question: 

Can anyone picture in their mind the current logo of ANY major gallery in the world? 

I'm not as passionate as some when it comes to art, but I do love it and I do a lot of art studies, and I can't. MoMA? The Met? Guggenheim? Louvre? Hermitage? British Museum? Uffizi? Our own National Gallery in Ottawa? Does anyone know off the top of their head what their logos look like? I'm not even sure anyone cares. It's the repute of their collections that's what sticks in people's minds. 

So while this logo might not last fifty years, I'm not terribly bothered. I think it looks just fine, and interesting enough to capture my interest for a decade or so. 

I think it serves its purpose -- it adds a new facet to the continually evolving identity of the gallery, and will be only one of many, many logos in a long line. It doesn't NEED to be the one-all, be-all. ]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282600</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282600</guid>
<category>Toronto, Arts</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 11:24:40 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>adam</title>
<description><![CDATA[
... actually after looking at the retrospectius, I have to admit at least this is better than the 1990s.  I never thought I'd say that either.]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282591</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282591</guid>
<category>Toronto, Arts</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 11:02:02 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>adam</title>
<description><![CDATA[
It's not quite awful but it's not very good either.  Neither is the AGO's collection, so in that context it's an effective logo.]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282590</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282590</guid>
<category>Toronto, Arts</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 10:53:50 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>redleaf</title>
<description><![CDATA[
I'm on the yay side. Like Rick - it looks all "painterly" to me.]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282568</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282568</guid>
<category>Toronto, Arts</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 09:18:20 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>uSkyscraper</title>
<description><![CDATA[
Oops, I meant London 2012 as a bad logo, not 2008.  Lisa Simpson on her knees has a habit of distracting one's mind.]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282562</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/arts/2008/05/agos_new_logo_yay_or_nay/#c282562</guid>
<category>Toronto, Arts</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 08:43:11 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>