- Last post
- 15 Responses
Well, it'll suit the CSM lot anyway - anything that hollows out existence.
I quite liked the old one - it was quirkily duff and actually kind of meant something.
as a graduate from the ual (st martins), I think it has potential (it's no way near as bad as many on creative review are saying). It's a shame they didn't spend more care and attention on the logotype/typography, it does look 'typed out'.
But I like the sentiment that the student work should shine through – they just don't show any examples of this on the blog.
I think a build could be to use the suffix 'ual' as part of the tone of voice, eg: 'visUAL' 'unusUAL' 'conceptUAL' etc.
Nothing worth getting upset over. Move along.
Seems very generic, and no color. Poor choice of font. Other than that I like it.
My [slightly hungover] brain is reading an i or a k into that closing colon (eugh), reading as 'oo-ak' or 'wali'.
I admit this isn't very likely a valid concern.
I liked the old one, it had a bit of character, it had an idea and it worked (to a degree).
Ex - Camberwell student
a logo in isolation on white background looks cack but in wider applied context (on CR page) i think it's not bad.
I can see that, with a background it looks OK. Whereas the other one looks horrible no matter what.
wow helvetica! how original! more non-design, but perhaps that's what they teach at the ual: these days. The old one had an idea behind it, even if the execution wasn't very inspiring
At least the logo is a smidget better than the London 2012 Summer Olympics.
London you be rockstars!
Doesn't suit an arts school.
^ when I saw that in the tube I honestly was like WTF?!?!?!
I feel they should have kept the colour coding.
The length works poorly in CSM.
I mean, I am all for Helvetica and kind of understand what they are trying to do, but seems to me that it could have been done a little better. Shows no effort.
'Semi' ex-student of Chelsea UAL