Oberlin

I'm not particular sure why the new logo feels any more "modern" than the old one; it many ways, it doesn't seem at all too different. However, I still welcome the change. Further, I very much like the new focus on a web-based style guide; to me, that is the most important part of this logo change.

It feels a bit wordy--too much text. Perhaps just "college & conservatory"?

This is just an attempt by Oberlin to attract more full-paying, white, straight, varsity-playing, keg-standing, beer-pong playing, arts-hating male students.

This is not the school that I applied to!

(/sarcasm)
No, it's good.

The new logo looks great! The old logo was nice, but it looked kind of art nouveau to me, which made it seem not timeless. This new logo looks classical and fresh at the same time. I like the better top-to-bottom balance in the B, E, and R. The RL ligature is also a nice touch. Strong work.

It looks terrific. I'd never thought of the old logo as clunky and heavy; but next to the new one, that's how it looks. Love the pointy N, too.

Good typography is important, but we shouldn't sacrifice originality for that trendy clear-cut look. The 1984 logo is in a completely distinctive typeface; isolate the B, E, R, or N and you can still recognize the logo. It may be funky non-standard lettering, but it holds its own.

Try the same experiment with the proposed logo. What distinguishes the B in this OBERLIN from the B anywhere else? The E, the R, and the N perhaps aren't the same as the Times New Roman we see every minute of every day--and there is obviously an elegance to these letters--but other institutions have already picked up on this. Amherst College uses the same exact typeface, and Macalester and Grinnell have similar looks to them. These colleges, of course, are also simply following today's trend toward Roman capitals. (For a truly authentic effect, though, we should probably write "CONSERVATORY OF MVSIC.")

There are many details that I appreciate about the proposed logo. Including "College of Arts & Sciences" and "Conservatory of Music" is a great step toward presenting both divisions equally, and the use of an ampersand is refreshing. Overall, it is very well spaced and perfectly balanced. However, it is the uninspired feeling to it that I keep coming back to. Why not part from the stylistic trends of other liberal arts institutions and create something a bit more unique? Investigate other typefaces that might look more distinctive, don't just use one that came included with other software. Or hire a calligrapher to letter the word "Oberlin" by hand.

I know you must have put in much time already to bring the proposed logo to where it is right now, and certainly the logo is not the only element of this institutional identity project. I do feel, however, that it needs some rethinking before it will really look original and stand out among other logos.

I suppose all change meets with some resistance. I (like Chris, above) like the distinctive feel of the lettering in the old logo; the fact that the R has a half-line in a different spot than the B and E gave us a bit of a jaunty feel. The new typeface is elegant, but generic.

Try those judgments out:
Oberlin: a bit jaunty
Oberlin: elegant, but generic

Which one is Oberlin? No question in my mind. I wouldn't be opposed to streamlining the old logo a bit -- you could take serifs off the "points" of the N, and make the letters slimmer and taller -- but still keep the differently-balanced block letters. Otherwise, we're just Oberlin... Amherst... Swarthmore... Baskin & Robbins... Starbucks... Whatever.

As for the extra words... hm. OK. But, as someone said, pretty wordy for a logo. I'm afraid I don't have a solution.

Looks good--sweet ampersand!

It looks like you're using Trajan, which is a poor choice. The font, which was drawn in 1989 and based off of first century Roman writing, has no connection with Oberlin. Trajan is generic. It's used by many institutions of higher education (e.g. University of Kansas, University of Arkansas, University of Colorado, Amherst College, Kutztown University, Lubock Christian University, SUNY Maritime College, University of Texas at Austin, University of New Hampshire, Rice University, University of San Francisco, California State Univesity Long Beach, NYU Stern, etc.).

The proposed new logo isn't terrible. But I think we can do better. One of the primary goals of the Fearless campaign was to pull Oberlin out of a pile of institutions that used similar marketing. Using Trajan throws us back into that mass.

And Trajan is the movie font: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t87QKdOJNv8

Also, what Chris said.

yeah yeah we like the old one - second what chris gollmar said. we like jaunty.

A few reactions:
The ampersand is overstylized compared to the rest of the text.
Why all caps? (especially in the subtext.)
The flared edges and rounded middle of the dividing line is offputing. Something asymetric might be better.
The RL connection is neet, but too understated to be effective.

In general, I think this is a decent effort. It will not upset alums, but likely won't leave an impression on prospective students either. I think the stuff about consistent colors and web fonts is key.

As long as you keep the serifs, I'm happy.

The new OBERLIN has too much space between the O, B, E, and R.

I like that you're asking for feedback more than anything else

the r-l touch makes me feel icky. the bulge in the middle of that slender little line, however, is delightfully graceful. I like how there's room to breathe in all of it.

Although you may be asking for approval rather than actual feedback, I hope a few things will be taken into account:

There seems to be a common concern both with development of the Fearless slogan campaign and this new logo that Oberlin is losing the characteristics we came here for, and that is becoming a constant trend in the Office of Communications. Please, please, please: we understand economic strains on the college, but do we really need these revisions?

This logo comes off to me as rushed and poorly planned. It does everything a logo is supposed to do in the design-a-logo-for-a-college-rule-book, but fails to leave any emotional feeling in me. I appreciate the gestures made in the lower bump of the B, the R and the L, but otherwise this is just standard capital work, which just proves ignorance on the part of whoever's responsibility it was to direct typography on this project, making us guilty by association. Letters that could be radically improved include the N and O. The joining of R and L is awkward but not unbearable, if nothing else it is distinctive.

Aspects of our logo that everyone loves are that it is easily recognizable, individual, and characteristic of the college. Modernizing and streamlining is not bad per se, but abandoning the previous elements all together seems rash.
Now that I see the two logos together, I understand the original is a bit bulky and wayward, but we like some of that, so don't be afraid to keep certain parts!

That being said, I think one other positive distinction being made is that between college and conservatory. The bottom feels wordy, but perhaps it could be done more elegantly. Just to play devil's advocate, I think the strength of the logo should be in our unity, as Oberlin, rather than creating an image of Oberlin as two separate institutions.

The comments made by Chris and Colin are particularly well made. Any chance of a calligrapher? Open it up to students (and don't require a burned CD for submission)? The new logo is not horrible by any means, just a bit misguided at the moment. I look forward to any revisions the Office makes. You all have probably been working incredibly hard on this, especially given Fearless's reception on campus, and I'm sorry not to be more enthusiastic at the moment, but I am sure with further work it will look fabulous, so please do revise it and don't be discouraged now!

I'm not the typography expert like Chris, etc, but I'd like to see an "Oberlin" that is stylistically more in between the old and new versions. For instance, with slightly thicker letters--I think the thicker letters of the old version make it stand out more on publications than the new one would. I do like the mention of both the College and the Con, but it is a bit wordy--could we say just "College & Conservatory"? I do like the dividing line and fancy ampersand.

All in all, neither logo is particularly inspiring (although they're both fine), but the new one does seem much more generic.

Many thanks for all of your feedback, folks; we will happily take all of this back to our logo design team. Please encourage others to weigh in as well. (If someone wants to stick a link to this on OCon, etc. to draw the non-Source-readers, I'd appreciate it.)

We are definitely looking for feedback, not just approval. Obviously we can't promise to make everyone happy (already there is some disagreement within the handful of comments that have been posted!) but we will do our best to capture and respond to the macro-level themes that emerge.

RE "...becoming a constant trend in the Office of Communications..." - I'm really hoping that we've been at least marginally successful in changing that feeling over the last 6-8 months. If there are things you think we could be doing better, please don't hesitate to send me an email.

-B

As one of the students who frothed at the mouth when the 'fearless' campaign went into effect, I'm really pleased to say that I like this logo. Sure, the old logo was distinctive, but so is this one.

To the 'generic' crowd: really? It feels classy and familiar, sure. But go find me another college's logo that looks like this new one. I think you're mistaking a comfortable, clean, attractive logo for one that's generic. Particularly with the odd RL kerning (what's up with that?) and the College/Conservatory inclusion, I think the new logo is distinctive and references a different aspect of the Oberlin tradition than the old logo while still paying homage to it.

My biggest complaint is the kerning in OBERLIN. There could definitely be some improvements there. Overall, though, I like it very much.

And, oh yeah, as someone said earlier: "Sweet ampersand!"

beautiful work. well thought out and very well executed. The slight flair in the line, the stylized "&" symbol the slight separation between conservatory and college while still supporting the unification of both. I applaud showing the unity of our single institution's various arms.

great work :]

I'm also not particularly knowledgeable about typography, but I do think that the new logo should have more of a distinctive feel, like the old one. I really like the move toward standardizing style guidelines, and -- especially as a double degree student -- of unifying the college and conservatory, but I don't like how the new logo is tastefully bland. I understand if you want to move away from the squat feel of the old logo, but I like the funkiness the old B, E, R and N had. Can this be retained in the new logo, at least to some extent? Additionally, connecting the RL feels like an attempt to add something memorable, not like an element that makes the logo truly distinctive. The rounder O, though, looks nice.

What I hope you'll keep in mind is that "modernizing" the look of the logo doesn't have to mean jumping on the bandwagon of what looks trendy in 2009 -- I don't think that's what Oberlin is about. In fact, in the context of the spiffy new website, the "old" logo doesn't look particularly outdated to me. Instead, it suggests to me that Oberlin is a unique place, and I hope whatever you choose for the new logo suggests that too.

And thanks, Ben, for asking for feedback on things like this. It makes a big difference.

I can't pinpoint where this emotion is coming from, but it just doesn't excite me very much. It's not really an identity.

Also, I always thought the previous logo added gravitas to my image of Oberlin as a crazy, fringe place in Ohio full of hippies. It reminded me that we were a totally intense, scholarly institution. The new one doesn't really lose that (i.e., good!), but it is sort of generic. The um... the what's it called? That bar-thing reminded me of John McCain's campaign logo (which in turn, reminded me of a grandparent driving a Chrysler).

While I do enjoy the elegance of the proposed logo (although it is a bit generic, using Trajan), am particularly glad about the "College of Arts & Sciences" and "Conservatory of Music" elaboration, and love the "platypus" ampersand (that's what I call ampersands designed like that, because they look like a platypus lying on its back)...

I am going to miss the old logotype. Indeed, it was distinctive. Also, I tend to associate the old logotype with the one thing I see it on every day, my "Think One Person Can Change the World? So Do We." poster. I miss those days, and the attitude that I perceived Oberlin as having in those days: "Jaunty" and idealistic.

The old logo looks like it could be a font in a roleplaying sourcebook. (Note: This is awesome.) The new one looks like a sign for a freaking insurance company, or this --> (https://www.amherst.edu/sites/all/themes/default/amherst_college.gif). Yeah, I don't like it. It's not an especially big problem, but it's just bland and disappointing and it doesn't reflect the Oberlin I know very well.

Agree with pretty much everything everyone's said, except for the expressions of total satisfaction. I do agree that the logotype is due for a change. I've thought that, and ditto for the website, since before I came here. +1 on Chris Gollmar's suggestion of a calligrapher. Otherwise, I'd suggest a custom face that retains the current one's general proportions. That would retain what's most distinctive about the current logo, while allowing our talented designer exorcists to expel the Devil from the details.

Wow, Tevi's right. I missed that echo of the McCain poster. Bad.

I'll join in praise of the ampersand. Does anyone else find that it looks a little like something you might see on sheet music? Whether that's intentional or not, I'd encourage thinking that way - creative ways to make the letters themselves echo aspects of Oberlin.

I also agree that there's too much text. But it's not really a huge problem, as long as you allow "Oberlin" to be used on its own in appropriate contexts. But if you do that, all the text might backfire, as people continue to use "Oberlin" by itself in *most* contexts. If you enforce using the whole thing everywhere, it would be a disaster for versatility, and bring about countless misdemeanors against aesthetics. I like the suggestion of using just "College & Conservatory," especially if you can fit them attractively on one line.

Finally, I'm just going to put it in here. Since I first heard about "Fearless," I've tried to think about an alternative I'd prefer, and I keep coming back to "Think One Person Can Change The World?" I appreciate Oberlin's evident movement away from Fearless. But I don't think we could do much better than the old one. Sure it's unwieldy. But aside from "Think different," I can't think of another slogan that has actually inspired people, that they've taken to heart and applied to their daily lives. I've met a lot of amazing people who came here because of that slogan. I'm not saying we don't attract amazing people still. But let's put it this way: I don't think anyone will not come here as a result, if we bring the old motto back.

Chris nailed it so good I don't really have much else to say. I've always detested the old logo. The new one is elegant, but lacks character. (The old, by contrast, is ugly yet distinctive.)

The new logo won't absorb meaning over time either, because it's such a widely used face in set in such a typical fashion. No matter how long we stare at that logo, if you change the words in the logo, it won't look like Oberlin's logo any more. That's what generic means.

There must be some happy medium between having character and being pretty!

I agree with many that the new logo is much more elegant than the old logo. Harris pointed out that it lacks character, but unfortunately I don't know where that happy medium would really be.

I do think that the logo is a bit too wordy, and because of that, too large (read: tall), however. I also can't think of a solution - "College & Conservatory" seems too informal.

As is though, I still think it is an improvement over the old logo.

Additionally, I noticed that it says you are looking to vet this "with faculty, trustees and students". Is there any reason that alumni are not included? It seems that we should also be a part of the discussion here, and we're being left in the dark - I was only able to find out about this thanks to Jonas.

I like the classy old font, I don't like the trendy new one. I'm for recognizing both the College and Conservatory, but I'm against the current divider line. It has an unfortunate recent parallel:

http://msa4.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/mccain-palin1.jpg

http://www.stickershoppe.com/mm5/graphics/00000001/mccain-palin.jpg

@Ben Jones:

I completely understand, and I really do think you will all continue working on it, so please don't misunderstand me. My primary reason for questioning is why are all of these changes being made now, and so dramatically? Fearless wasn't really your fault, that was outside marketing influences, but this logo change is, at least I presume, an initiative by the college. I don't know what more is to be done, but time probably will deal with it. Naturally, there will always be disagreements and dissent about the direction of the college, and perhaps it is just the time frame that makes these adjustments seem more radical than we are used to; when was the last time any of the advertising / marketing imagery was adjusted, anyways?

The old logo has plenty of faults on its own (although I delight in its awkward squatness at times), but one thing I also distinctly remember is that it is the only one I actually clearly remember out of the other colleges I applied to. I just don't feel that with this new logo. Of course, any logo would take some adjusting, and I would rather provide helpful feedback than continue to focus on past deeds, so please feel free to e-mail me if preferred. Major props to the entire Office for asking for input, seriously. We appreciate it.

@Sam - RE your question of why the changes are being made now - mostly just for the reasons outlined in my original entry: to provide some much needed consistency to our logo use (+ create an official style guide) and to celebrate the unique synergy between the College and the Con in a unified identity. The reason it will take 2 years to implement is that we'll only switch to the new logo when current supplies of any given item run out (i.e. we won't throw away existing supplies). So the change to a new logo won't incur any additional expenses (something we're very sensitive to in this economy).

@Jaremy - I am hoping that there is enough of a common thread that current students can represent the feelings of alums fairly well... and from what I've seen here, they are indeed raising the same concerns that I feel alums would also raise. I'm not sure how much value would be added by inviting 30,000+ additional voices to the fray. I think most alums are satisfied to let the campus community make decisions of this nature, as long as the collective student voice is heard.

Many thanks for the continued feedback, everyone. I definitely hear you all about wanting us to be more unique with the typography. Seeing some of the other college logos that use Trajan was all the convincing I needed. :-)

P.S. Captcha is occasionally giving us trouble - please copy your comment before clicking submit, just in case you have to refresh. Sorry about that.

Hi Ben,

As an alum ('99), former staff member of the Office of Communications (back when it was called College Relations), and a designer, I'm sad to say: I really disagree with the choices made in this logo.

Aside from the odd kerning between the R and the L (which I understand may still be in the process of being tweaked, and which might actually look kind of cool if the leg of the R descended below the baseline and curled under the L), my biggest issue with the logo is the use of the Trajan typeface. Trajan is not bad in and of itself -- it's clean, relatively elegant, and classical. But those qualities are certainly not representative of the Oberlin I knew (and I mean that in the best possible sense). The Oberlin I knew -- and the one the "Fearless" campaign was marketing -- was bold, unafraid to get its hands dirty, and interested in questioning received wisdom. Trajan is... well, the exact opposite of that. Also, aside from Copperplate Gothic, Trajan is probably the most overused modern serif face out there, showing up (as someone already mentioned) in hundreds of movie posters in the last few years. I guarantee that in five years Trajan will seem as dated as Cooper Black (the ultimate 80's font).

On a practical level as well, I think there will be problems with using Trajan -- the "college of arts and sciences" and "conservatory of music" will be really difficult to read at smaller sizes in all caps, and since Trajan has no lower-case you'd be stuck with it.

Anyway, that's my two cents. I appreciate the chance to weigh in -- keep up the good work!

- Aaron

I'm with Colin Koffel. Oberlin's logo should be unique, reflecting Oberlin's nature; a font that is used anywhere else (never mind as other college's logos) completely misses the mark. The midline quirkiness in the old font might be an excellent starting point, as it's a relatively unusual feature of a font.

I very much like the attempt to tie together the Con and CA&S. However I imagine that because of the horizontal line, just the top part would be used by itself pretty often, thus defeating the purpose. Why not lose the line altogether and have "Oberlin" sit directly atop the other two lines?

I do like the ampersand.

Congrats on classier, more apt choice of typeface for this wordmark. Still needs some attention to kerning, as you've noted---esp. between O and B. I agree with other comments looking for more distinctiveness and originality, which would also provide incentive for change. Some institutions with similar wordmark styles have incorporated simple, distinct symbols, crests or initials to the left of the wordmark.

Other things to consider: (a) A stacked format is challenging to use in applications where you can't accommodate its depth; (b) When reduced as a unit, bottom two lines may become illegible, and you may have to adjust relative size of OBERLIN with the two lines underneath (c) When this is used in reverse, especially in a reduced version, thicks and thins of the ascenders in College and Conservatory may break up because of ink (or pixel)"creep."

Good luck with this project. Will look forward to updates.

Oooh, the kerning is not so good.... type matters! Be professional and polished.

Am I the only person who thinks that the new logo bears an uncomfortable resemblance to a McCain Palin yard sign?

I thought this new logo looked fine until I was pointed to the other colleges with similar logos...I too felt that Oberlin's logo "stuck out" when I was applying to schools and would hate for that to disappear with this logo change. But I like the idea and I don't think it's too conservative.

You are trading off a distinctive and creative look with rugged individualism for a stylish and elegant but non-inspiring typeface that is status quo at best.

That said, if you keep this logo the letters on the right have too much width - need to broaden the B and E in order to create the correct balance.

Firstly, it seems obvious that there will have to be two versions of this logo—one that is just "Oberlin" and one that I believe should say "Oberlin/College & Conservatory".

I will also agree that the new logo proposed here currently leaves much to be desired. The bold squatness of the old logo gives me a feeling of the strength that I associate with Oberlin, and the thin, pointed serifs of the new logo simply do not. In addition, the lack of serifs on the upper left hand and bottom right corners of the N lends an awkward feeling. Perhaps making the x-height of the B, E, and R in the old logo consistent would formalize it a bit.

I agree that the trajan typeface simply will not do. Perhaps we could try something even bolder and more unique? (Fixed width? Geometric sans serif?)

I'm a fan of the line underneath the text in the new logo, as well as the distinction between the College and Conservatory.
However, I like the thicker text (old logo) better. The thinner typeface and the kerning of the new log makes the word "Berlin" stand out, instead of creating a cohesive, full word. We're Oberlin, not O-BERLIN.

I like it.......clean and simple...with good information

Might I suggest a Latin motto, a bit tongue in cheek, in the Oberlin style, such as:

Nil admirari (To be surprised at nothing)

Ad astra per alia porci ("to the stars on the wings of a pig" - A favorite saying of John Steinbeck. A professor told him that he would be an author when pigs flew. Every book he wrote is printed with this insignia.)

Nec temere nec timide (Neither reckless nor timid)

You get the idea....

I applaud your intention to marry college and con consistently with the word "Oberlin," but please don't do it with an amateurish-looking logo. This looks like a sterile first draft and simply doesn't reflect the aesthetic maturity and visual sophistication of most Oberlinians. Oberlin will be noted as late to the party with its adoption of 90s-trendy Trajan as others are ready to move on, a midwestern college still lagging behind.

You need a thoroughly knowledgeable, up-to-date, first-class logo-designer-specialist, and this doesn't look like it's had that kind of attention. Such a person would have saved you the comments above that your setting of Trajan is hackneyed out there in the higher ed market. Also, that designer would have solved the spacing issues and given you sample applications before allowing you to put this out to the Oberlin community for comment.

This is far too important a project, far too costly to implement, not to put your resources up front into a logo design that reflects the excellence of the conservatory and college. This is pedantic and ordinary, not at all the creative effort most would expect of Oberlin. You're on the right track to introduce change, but please find the best LOGO designer (not firm) you can, wherever he or she may be.

+1 to the suggestion on calligraphy.

A compromise I can think of is to handwrite the current Trajan logo. That might convey the image of being both distinctive and up to date.

Signifiers of brand identity should be both distinctive, and in Oberlin’s case, distinguished.

The proposed new logo fails on both criteria.

I urge the Communications staff to read, or re-read, an excellent book on document design and type, Robert Bringhurst’s The Elements of Typographical Style, 2nd edition .

Also consider the instructive case history of the New York Times nameplate as described in the EVB post at: http://www.typophile.com/node/19590.

Hello everyone - please note that this was a first draft only, an initial step to inspire thoughts and reactions (apparently it worked). If this version had been set in stone, we wouldn't have created this forum through which to solicit feedback. :-)

I've adjusted the language in the original entry to make this more clear; my apologies for any confusion.

Overall, I think this is immediately appealing. My instant reaction was that was fresh but provided continuity.

1) I especially like the ampersand. That's my favorite part.

2) I agree that the text could be compressed to "College & Conservatory".

3) The dividing line is elegant. I didn't think of the McCain/Palin signs until it was pointed out, but then I saw it instantly. However, I think that image will fade from popular consciousness pretty quickly; it's not a reason to avoid this design element for a long-term logo.

4) I strongly second the anonymous idea to have this logo hand-drawn. I think it would capture a lot of the benefits of this design - clean, light, modern - while being more distinctive. It also implies a lot of the benefits of an Oberlin education - the personal attention and the craft.

As a parent of an incoming freshman, I've seen so many college logos in the past year during the college search process. I must say the new proposed logo is generic looking. The font seems common. If the goal is to update the original logo, shouldn't the unique characteristics of the logo be maintained rather than throw out?

I completely agree with Chris, and while Ben claims to be asking for feedback it sure sounds to me like the decision has been made and in my opinion that is too bad. As an alum when you see the old Logo you just feel like you are back on campus. If the problem is that people aren't using the same logo then enforce the policy, don't change it because without enforcement we'll be back at this conversation fairly soon.

You know, the more I compare the logos, the more I like the "old" one. It's distinctively Oberlin. Any "new" logo would be well advised to retain as much character of the "old" logo as possible. IMO.

I'm not sure I'm "supposed" to leave a comment (I'm an incoming freshman: Class of 2013), but I thought "oh well, why not?" Lol. IMO, the old logo is way better than the new one. While the new one is, as previously stated by many, elegant and simple, it is perhaps too simple and normal-looking. I don't think it fits in with the whole "Fearless" idea (it actually fits in more with the old "change the world" slogan/motto). The old logo, however, does. Yes, it is a bit heavy…but doesn't that relate to being fearless? IMO at least, being fearless is all about going out there and doing your thing regardless of what others may think, regardless of societal norms and taboos, etc. Maybe the old logo does look a little antique-y, but so what? That just reflects Oberlin's rich, unique history—a history that should always be remembered and celebrated—something that the old logo does.

Also, I don't find it really necessary to add the "College of Arts and Sciences/Conservatory of Music" part; Oberlin College is, by itself, synonymous of those two entities. Nonetheless, if you must add text, then I agree with previous posters: have the text say "College and Conservatory" only. A hand-drawn logo would be nice, but to be honest, I love the old logo and would hate to see it change.

I agree with Flora: "If the problem is that people aren't using the same logo then enforce the policy, don't change it…"

As for the Latin motto idea, I like it, but aren't there one too many colleges who have Latin mottos? http://ablemedia.com/ctcweb/consortium/collegeanduniversitylatinmottoes.html
"Ad astra per alia porci (to the stars on the wings of a pig)"—I totally love this, though!

Alright, well, that's pretty much it!

Hey all— Ben Jones is a good guy and a '96 alum. He gets Oberlin. When he says that this is a first draft and he wants feedback, he actually means it.

Redesigning an institution's logotype is hard, with different design directions being pushed on the team from all directions. By creating this forum for feedback, he's allowing us to be a significant part of that conversation.

@Ben Jones: I find it amusing that you said "if this version had been set in stone […]" as Trajan was originally set in stone.

I agree with Colin Koffel. When I showed my brother, he actually said "Why did they go with the movie font?" I REALLY love the ampersand though. Whoever drew that was quite capable of badassery. I like that anything sort of squiggley can mean "and" as long as it's used in the right context. Oberlin should just adopt that ampersand as the logo. We would be revolutionaries!

The new logo is way too busy and the text for "Oberlin" way too plain for my tastes. The old logo was distinctive and straight to the point. I prefer just "OBERLIN", and not list the college and conservatory. I think a new font would be nice, but definitely make it stand out. I just feel the new font is too plain, and Oberlin is definitely not a "plain" school.

I'm not a big fan of the new logo. I liked the older, bolder logo that was much more straightforward and distinctive; short sweet and to the point.

And while we're at it - make sure the "O" can be used by itself. (Kind of like a famous "H" and "Y" are used successfully alone.)

If we are to survey the general opinion about how(or whether) the draft should be revised, I think Ben Jones should set up a poll.

I must say I was vastly underwhelmed at the new logo. Let's create something as unique and forward-thinking as Oberlin itself claims to be instead of just following in the generic footstep of other institutions of higher-learning.

Seriously, why can't we create a logo that doesn't look like everyone elses? I know there are some creative students on campus that could do better than this. Have some students design a logo and then have students and alumni vote on which one they want to use.

Overall the logo seems reasonably safe, traditional and conservative. I have no major objections, though I do not like the “R” and “L” connection. I also feel like the “O” is too separate from the “B.” My first instinct is to read it as “O - Berlin.” It was be nice to have a more distinct logo, though.

Great work, Ben and communications team! As a 1979 graduate, I have _always_ felt the Oberlin logo is a typographic anachronism. Glad to see there is finally consensus that change is needed. (If only the same resolve could now find itself applied to both the design and business model of the antiquated alumni magazine!)

Like the commenter who said she wasn't necessarily happy with the logo but is overjoyed that comments are being actively solicited, I too am very happy to see this discussion. However, change without process isn't very useful, so my questions go more to concerns about brand identity than branding, per se. What brand characteristics are you attempting to imply through the refresh? Do you have a strategic overview of what a refresh of the brand should accomplish? Have you conducted an audit of the stakeholders (students/staff/faculty/alumni) to assess their views of the school's brand identity? (I know I haven't been queried.) A brand audit should come _prior_ to a graphic refresh. I don't know what Oberlin process looks like, but seems to me it should be deliberative, democratic, and dreamy:)

As to the specifics of this design, I'll add my voice to those who feel Trajan is too generic, although I appreciate the effort to work from the old logo. In any event, this seems more like a study than a finished product. What I'm left wondering is why (apart from cost) the college--which may or may not have the appropriate talent and resources to do this--isn't seeking the services of brand design shops for whom this is bread and butter (several of which are Obie-led). Considering how long it's taken to refresh the previous design, I'd prefer pros take a crack at it first, but ymmv. No matter what, this is a welcome improvement. Keep going.

(And btw, crosspost this discussion on Facebook and the LinkedIn Obie groups so more people can see it.)

I do not approve of the use or Trajan. It's not modern - it's the typeface used on neo-classical bank facades and by film studio marketing departments on big-budget movies to signify "meaning" or "historical gravity". It's too classical, pretentious and overwrought. I agree with the previous comment that "CONSERVATORY OF MVSIC" would be the appropriate typeset in this context. Since when is Oberlin a "etched-in-marble" kind of school? What happened to the progressive ethos of "Learning and Labor"? If we want to get back to basics, we should think about how we could revisit that motto - especially in the current economic/sociopolitical climate.

The secondary lines create a lot more typographic chaos without adding much (if any?) valuable information.

I personally love the old '84 logo - it still looks modern and unique and it does pretty much everything it needs to do. It could use a refresh similar to the recent Saks Fifth Avenue rebranding, but I feel the core elements are intact.

For the sake of both creativity AND efficiency, I think we should delete all vowels from the logo. It should look like this:

BRLN
Cllg f rts nd Scncs, Cnsrvtry f msc

Much cleaner and to the point. Plus, think of all the money we save from printing fewer letters.

While I really like the underline and text below the name, I miss the heaviness and impact of the original font. It was bold, unrepentant, proud, "OBERLIN" - it said a lot with just a few letters. You knew it meant business. I don't want the new logo to woo me. People are called to Oberlin, not woo-ed. Also, connecting the two letters in the middle seems too catchy. I know things have to be updated to stay fresh... What can I say...I really liked the old one!

That George Bent '85, he's such a goof. The thing is, he was only half-joking about BRLN...seriously, folks, I think it is useful, as Craig Bromberg says, to consider a brand audit. Besides the fact that "Oberlin" almost universally elicits a "What instrument did you play?" response, what else does that seven-letter word mean to the larger public in 2009?

Just to be blunt and to the point -

The kerning looks off. The non-existent space between the R and L is distracting. The N looks much wider than the rest of the type face. The break ornament seems a bit thicker than the rest of the lettering.

Which is it? College of Arts & Sciences? Conservatory of Music? Its a bit confusing to have both in the same logo. Also, is the tracking in this lettering spaced out so far for a reason?

Also, the leading or space between the lines seems very loose.

If you're going to make a logo that is essentially just a type treatment like this, you have 2 main tasks: pick a font that's interesting and works well for the specific letters and words in the logo, and kern it really well. This logo fails on both fronts (where the prior logo succeeded).

First, this font, Trajan, doesn't work particularly well for the word 'Oberlin': with the long leg on the R and the narrow B and E, I don't think there's any great way to kern it. Also, it's a pretty generic font choice. The prior logo's font is very distinctive (and very well kerned); Trajan is one of the most-used fonts in the world. Google "Trajan college|university logo" for an idea of how many other colleges use Trajan for their logos, or "Trajan movie" for how many movie posters use it. Our logo should be distinctive.

Second, on the kerning. As I mentioned, the R makes kerning 'OBERLIN' pretty tough. However, the kerning is very uneven throughout the logo -- it doesn't look like it's been kerned at all. Just look at the space on either side of the 'O' in 'COLLEGE' or 'CONSERVATORY': in each case, it's much closer to the 'C' on the left than the 'L' or 'N' on the right. Or the 'RVA' in 'CONSERVATORY', which is much tighter than the rest of the logo. Or that the word 'ARTS' is tighter than 'OF'. Again, it doesn't look like any work has been put into the kerning.

Also, related to the kerning, the tracking is too wide as mentioned above by others. Overall, the logo falls apart into the separate letters rather than looking like a single object (again, something the prior logo succeeds with).

In general, I'm pretty disappointed with this redesign, and I hope much more work is put into it.

David Warner '97

Change for the sake of change?

The preference here seems highly subjective. Personally, the "old" logo looks more modern to me, not that there is much difference at all.

If you are going to make a change, make a bold change. Otherwise you are painting a green room a slightly more pastel shade of green and calling it change.

And of course, the old adage: if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

p.s.

I'd like to echo Alix's suggestion:

"College & Conservatory"

Otherwise, too much text.

And someone also described the new font as "generic," which I also agree with.

I'm not a typographer, but I agree w/many of the comments made. The original logo had a more distinctive looking font. The new one, less so. I also found it less easy to read. The "O" kind of hangs out there so I didn't instantly see the word "Oberlin." I do w/the old logo (though of course, I've been seeing that one for years). The kerning of the new logo does seem off as pointed out by others. It's a nice logo, but doesn't wow me. That's not to say Oberlin should stick to the old logo. Something new to reinforce new strategic brand direction is good.

I personally like the old one.

I much prefer the old one, and agree with the comments about the old logo being distinctive.

I don't care for the "College of Arts & Sciences / Conservatory of Music" bit. The old logo I think was more effective for branding: I would purchase items with the old logo and shy away from those with the new one.

To those who have recently posted here, please note that there is now a second part of this thread:

http://feedback.oberlin.edu/logo2.shtml

I can't believe that the image my alma mater has proposed to represent itself to the world is artistically distinguishable only by its type face. It's an insult to anyone who attended classes in the art department, and it fails to do what a logo is supposed to do: provide a recognizable symbol that represents the outstanding qualities of its institution. In my mind, that includes art, science and music in a cloistered setting. I attended Oberlin on the 3-2 program so that I could broaden my Engineering degree with some classes from the art department before going to Case Western Reserve. Case recently tried to adopt a logo almost as unimaginative as this Oberlin one, and met such a hailstorm of objection that they scrapped it and came up with something more inspiring and reminiscent of its older one. See the new one at http://www.case.edu/alumni/aacase . I'm appalled to read so many comments drawn inside the box of what has been presented. The Oberlin I attended was full of students who knew all about the box, and achieved greatness beyond its borders. You owe it to your alumni, your present student body, and future high school seniors like I was to propose a logo that stirs our spirit, and beckons to those engrossed and inspired by the love of knowledge and expression.

Evan,

Just want to make sure you've seen the update:
http://feedback.oberlin.edu/logo2.shtml

This thread is almost a year old.

Best,
Ben