More Oak, Less Cal

Part of a $58 million dollar renovation, the Oakland Museum of California — which “brings together collections of art, history and natural science under one roof to tell the extraordinary stories of California and its people” — will re-open in May of 2010 with a renovated and expanded building designed by Mark Cavagnero Associates. The initiative, which will create more exhibition space and update the infrastructure to support more new media work, hopes to boost museum participation by 50% and help to revitalize the Oakland cultural scene. A new identity was introduced earlier this month.

There is a clear world of difference between these visual identities. The former places the emphasis on the state abbreviation, most certainly stressing the heritage of much of the noteworthy collection — including items like gold-rush era Levi’s, Greatful Dead posters and Native American baskets. The idea of the new logo is strong but the execution feels like it was forced through a 1990s Microsoft Office product. The new identity shifts the identity away from being heavily california-handed, likely to shake off some of its cal-centirc reputation, and plays its acronym notes by drawing out “OMCA”. While the visual approach is somewhat reminiscent of Scher’s Public Theatre work, the letterpress approach to the composition is well handled and provides some added tension to the new/old aesthetic.

Thanks to Deirdre Spencer for the tip.

Dale Campbell’s comment is:

It is growing on me. I do like how to O M and CA are larger. I could see this translating into a pretty cool brand. I would be interested to see it in application on things like banners and ads/posters.

thanks for the post,
Dale

On Nov.30.2009 at 06:40 AM

Tom Petty’s comment is:

In isolation, this is something that strikes me as slightly crass, and reminds me a little of the new Animal Planet identity.

However it also strikes me as an identity that has a lot of scope to be applied in creative and exciting ways, so i’ll reserve judgement for now!

On Nov.30.2009 at 06:49 AM

Julio’s comment is:

Mmmm i don’t know. Probably they needed a good brand make over, but i don’t like this result. I gess the uppercase in all the letters bothers me, especially with the apparently disorder of them. Maybe they should use some color change in the O, M, CA.

On Nov.30.2009 at 07:05 AM

buruno’s comment is:

The “Museum” part looks a little odd to me – I see “Mumseu(m)” –, but definitely an improvement.

On Nov.30.2009 at 07:08 AM

Nick Irwin’s comment is:

other than the confusing alignment issues and the large valley between the “O” and the “A” its unique….thats my positive comment for a monday

On Nov.30.2009 at 07:55 AM

Lester’s comment is:

Deirdre Spencer is probably getting a ton of traffic from your poll, which opens his site anytime you try to make a selection. Might want to close your tags :)

I like the OMCA. I wish the other letterforms would match each other in weight, though, even though they’re different sizes.

The MU/SEU/M part, split up the way it is, makes me want to pronounce it differently. I don’t really think that’s a problem, though.

The spacing is nice.

On Nov.30.2009 at 08:04 AM

Joseph’s comment is:

I agree with several of the comments here. The varying weights in the smaller letters are a bit awkward, as is the handling of “Museum” (I, too, am reading “Mumseum”).

It has potential. I think in order to gauge how effective this new brand will/won’t be we’ll have to wait and see it in real world applications as Dale pointed out.

On Nov.30.2009 at 08:14 AM

Martin Boath’s comment is:

Eye chart. Gone horribly wrong.

On Nov.30.2009 at 08:18 AM

Harper’s comment is:

What’s interesting to me is that this logo works better the smaller you make it. At larger sizes it’s really a bit of a mess though.

On Nov.30.2009 at 08:24 AM

jonathan’s comment is:

What the hell is this?!?!

Have you learned nothing Mark Cavagnero? How could anyone not familiar with the words “Oakland” or “museum” understand this?

If you want to make OMCA stand out, why not just use OMCA. This is just completely unreadable.

On Nov.30.2009 at 08:33 AM

Erwin’s comment is:

Come on, people! This is just wrong! Incredibly poor job…

On Nov.30.2009 at 08:34 AM

Armin’s comment is:

Not to further align it with the Public Thater work but this logo would have been much more successful had they used Champion Gothic (or Titling Gothic) with its vast family of extended and condensed designs, which would have avoided the small changes in size — most noticeable in “MU” and “SEUM” — necessary to make the letters justify. The way this is done is pretty sloppy and unrefined. But I really like how they managed to highlight the acronym, even if it’s a clunky one, Ohmcah doesn’t quite roll of your tongue.

On Nov.30.2009 at 08:38 AM

Joe’s comment is:

This is giving me a really bad headache!

On Nov.30.2009 at 08:53 AM

Chris Rugen’s comment is:

I’d love to see more of it in its natural environment. Here on BN, it’s not quite working for me, but I see great potential for it to be the keystone of a larger identity with a lot of flexibility and play. I think the mark is probably successful for OMCA’s purposes, but isn’t ringing my bells. The letters aren’t locking like I want them to, but they have clearly had visual balancing (as seen on the A and O).

In a way, the initial confusion and required exploration/thinking is in line with a museum’s goals, though this one feels a bit more like a contemporary art museum’s ID than a historical one. Again, it’ll be all about where the designers and the institution take it.

On Nov.30.2009 at 09:26 AM

Dennis’s comment is:

Looks like an eye chart museum. An improvement if only due to the lackluster previous identity. I wonder what trends will be popular when this changes in ten years.

On Nov.30.2009 at 09:58 AM

Jared’s comment is:

The “OMCA” seems very disjointed and leaves me uneasy. My eyes are working too hard to try to read it right. I do like the general concept, though.

On Nov.30.2009 at 10:23 AM

Jacob’s comment is:

I don’t particularly dislike it, but I wonder when this trend of oddly arranged letters is going to pass.

On Nov.30.2009 at 10:37 AM

Dan’s comment is:

Oof. Like Tom Petty above said, it reminded me of the Animal Planet logo.

On Nov.30.2009 at 10:41 AM

Matt2’s comment is:

Strangely enough, I was in Oakland over Thanksgiving visiting a friend. (I know what the stereotype of Oakland is, but in fact much of the city is quite pleasant.)

Agree on the Animal Planet comment. That’s the first thing I thought.

The old logo strongly implied the museum was about California. The new logo loses that, makes it seem more like a contemporary art museum full of Piet Mondrian paintings. I think they still need to emphasize the California history part somehow, because otherwise I don’t know what the Oakland Museum is.

On Nov.30.2009 at 10:43 AM

mykl’s comment is:

It’s am improvement over the old but a missed opportunity to do something memorable. The letter spacing feels overly loose at this size and lacks cohesiveness.

On Nov.30.2009 at 10:50 AM

Warren’s comment is:

What the hell is Oak Mum?

Seriously, nice idea for a museum but a little more care and artistry would’ve made this much better…

On Nov.30.2009 at 11:02 AM

ADAM303’s comment is:

generic typography + generic font = generic museum i’m not interested in visiting

it looks like a first year art student created it.

On Nov.30.2009 at 11:27 AM

jason Parry’s comment is:

needs refinement

On Nov.30.2009 at 11:46 AM

James’s comment is:

Seems a bit trite which while may be conceptually applicable to a museum I don’t think that the mark really is going to stic in people’s minds as this type of typography has been done over and over (and better) before… it also seems a bit “rock and roll” for a museum logo. I get that museums don’t need to be stuffy and old fashioned but some kind of legitimacy needs to be represented and I do not think this logo does that.

On Nov.30.2009 at 11:51 AM

Ann’s comment is:

Hi

where did you find this new logo?

On Nov.30.2009 at 01:48 PM

tetra’s comment is:

Ann: Thanks to Deirdre Spencer for the tip.

On Nov.30.2009 at 02:24 PM

Steve Rose’s comment is:

On Nov.30.2009 at 02:41 PM

Harrisburg personal injury attorney’s comment is:

Not excited about this one at all. Really think that they took a decent logo and went the wrong way. Straight forward isn’t always awful.

On Nov.30.2009 at 03:23 PM

Glenn Sakamoto’s comment is:

I dig it.

On Nov.30.2009 at 03:53 PM

j.merrill’s comment is:

I knew this looked familiar: www.orkposters.com

On Nov.30.2009 at 04:07 PM

cj’s comment is:

ugh, ork posters. both them and this logo are good in theory but horribly weak in execution. still, I like this logo a LOT more than I like the posters.

On Nov.30.2009 at 05:01 PM

Michael’s comment is:

I voted this bad because “crap” wasn’t an option.

On Nov.30.2009 at 05:03 PM

Bobby’s comment is:

Granted, as a writer I’m more “words oriented,” but I really don’t like the breaks in the new one. Bad and confusing. It just doesn’t make sense.

On Nov.30.2009 at 05:59 PM

grubedoo’s comment is:

I immediately liked it although I agree that the that the finer points of the execution leave a bit to be desired.

On Nov.30.2009 at 06:45 PM

grubedoo’s comment is:

that the that the that the … stutter

On Nov.30.2009 at 06:46 PM

Mark’s comment is:

I like it.

It’s a very unique approach to a museum identity. it’s clean, it’s fresh, it’s new. I like it.

On Nov.30.2009 at 09:03 PM

Dogg’s comment is:

CA? Caca? Peepee?

What, was the designer charging per letter? Or maybe that Postmaster General is getting overzealous on the abbreviation standards.

On Nov.30.2009 at 11:06 PM

Psycho’s comment is:

OMG. That’s it.

On Dec.01.2009 at 06:40 AM

Randy Hill’s comment is:

I just really don’t like it. It’s too faddish for my taste.

On Dec.01.2009 at 12:59 PM

Tak’s comment is:

It seems to miss the bare minimum I’ve come to expect from a brand: Readability, Scalability and Individuality. Long names usually present unique design challenges, but that’s why we as designers have jobs.

I’m a little disappointed in this re-branding, not just because I’m a Bay Area native, but a project like this (a museum!) has so much creative “meat” to utilize and extrapolate from, this just seems…like a missed opportunity.

On Dec.01.2009 at 01:01 PM

adam’s comment is:

i think it looks alot like this:

http://www.mcny.org/images/header/home.jpg

On Dec.01.2009 at 08:56 PM

zack9’s comment is:

i live right around the corner from this place. To bad they didnt just go with OMCA. a la LACMA in Los Angeles.

On Dec.02.2009 at 02:25 AM

Tommy’s comment is:

There is something vaguely awkward about it and it also feels slightly dated. But it has charm and integrity too…

On Dec.02.2009 at 03:08 AM

Adam Bestwick’s comment is:

“How could anyone not familiar with the words “Oakland” or “museum” understand this?”
“This is just completely unreadable.”

Sorry Jonathan, I disagree.

I’m English - I’ve never been to California or been in the Oakland Museum, but I got it straight away. I know I work in this business, but I think you under-estimate the visual literacy of the general public.

I do agree with some of the comments regarding the word ‘mum’ leaping out from the arrangement, but although Steve’s version above addresses this, I prefer the juxtaposition of the initials and smaller caps.

Reminds me of something Brody would have done, and maybe that should make it dated, but I feel it is a pleasant update.

As it retains a familiar shape, it should make for an easy transitional update - especially considering signage and hardware applications.

On Dec.02.2009 at 03:24 AM

Waco Personal Injury Lawyer’s comment is:

I can’t get behind this one, looks like a jumbled eye chart. Although easily understandable it’s not readily recognizable. That’s a large problem to have when you’re a logo.

On Dec.02.2009 at 10:45 AM

Phanyxx’s comment is:

It’s definitely a change of personality, which, I believe, is what they were trying to achieve. I hope they stick with the yellow version, because the black really does look too much like a student project…

On Dec.03.2009 at 02:14 AM

Brian Scott’s comment is:

Why is an architecture firm rebranding a museum? http://www.cavagnero.com/

On Dec.04.2009 at 06:06 PM

Amanda’s comment is:

Any idea who designed this?

Ick.

On Dec.04.2009 at 07:34 PM

dsi r4’s comment is:

The orange design is too awesome. I like the way the ‘O’ ‘M’ ‘CA’ are placed its a real art of creativity.

On Dec.05.2009 at 06:00 AM

Karl’s comment is:

It’s nice, fun,
playful use of Typography,
it’s good and well needed update.

On Dec.07.2009 at 10:48 AM

Gareth Coxon - Dot Design’s comment is:

Like it, bit of old and new working together. I can see it working well on the merchandise too, good work!

On Dec.07.2009 at 11:59 AM

ayana’s comment is:

Although, one could argue that the museum name in the old logo/mark is overshadowed by the CA, the new mark design completely obliterates the focus on the museum name. There is an elegance to the old mark also.

The legibility is difficult. It is hard to discern Oakland from Museum from CA. The visual hierarchy fails. The letter kerning is off.

I would have liked to have seen more time expended on development. Perhaps it was, and this is what the “client” wanted. I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when the presentation of the logo iterations were made.

On Dec.11.2009 at 01:11 PM

Euro’s comment is:

It’s a great logo. Readable and a fresh update, suited for a museum and bold enough to take the bait. From this side of the Atlantic we may wonder why such negative views on many a decent logotype here on this great site..

On Dec.15.2009 at 07:49 AM

hlwimmer’s comment is:

Funny — this is the first time I’ve seen the new mark.

One of my students recently tackled the Oakland Museum as a semester-long rebranding project before the above ID was unveiled. Ironically, he’s now working at the Museum as a designer.

He approached the project with the idea that the museum was (could be) part of a larger network of California Museums, each dedicated to the region it was located within (i.e.: LA, Central Valley, Sierras, etc.)… and each with it’s own variation on the mark he developed, the look of which extended into signage and environments. It was a delightful execution and yielded a dense 3-book set of materials — all of which, I dare say, was a bit more enticing than this execution.

Had the same student come to class with this solution, I’d have encouraged them to explore different, even historical/physical/hand-drawn type samples within the same mark — some thin, some condensed, a slab-serif here/there, etc… in the way an original wood-type solution might look. Presently, the mark is a mash-up of two worlds — digital- and wood-type, with a reverence for neither… like a designer aping Paula Scher aping Hatch aping Carny-posters (an oversimplified analogy, for sure, but you get the point).

Formally, there are a few awkward spaces within the mark itself — where “A” meets rounded characters, for instance — that a more careful use of type might alleviate.

However, having lived in Oakland, I can only imagine the complex web of input/approval for a public project like this in the commercial world. Because of this, I’m voting “fine”… giving the designer the benefit of the doubt and that — in Oakland — we’ve seen a lot worse.

Going one step further, (rather than old vs. new) I’d like to see the designer’s favorite logo contrasted with the client-selected/refined version. Those are always the most fun comparisons.

On Dec.16.2009 at 10:28 AM

dgottwald’s comment is:

hi there, i’m the former student mentioned above. that last poster clued me in to this thread. indeed, i did said project and indeed i’m now a designer at the oakland museum (although in the history department, we have nothing to do with the branding).

if anyone is curious, the mark in question was designed by SOM.

http://www.som.com/content.cfm/www_home

and you can view the mark and system i designed here:

http://79nm.typepad.com/79nm/2009/08/-academy-of-art-university-alum-lands-dream-job-with-the-oakland-museum-of-california.html

cheers,

On Dec.21.2009 at 12:46 PM

mertz’s comment is:

i looked briefly at this (enough for me to make have a feeling about this design) and not considering the typeface or the colour selected, i like it because it doesn’t allow my eye to get lazy. i have to think a little bit about it when i’m looking because it doesn’t conform, and yet if you think about it it’s a simple design with rectangular unaligned sections. when i was looking at in and thinking fun, i was like why, and thought that it’s exactly what they did with all the words…not just specifically museum, oakland, ca, w/e but all the words/letters together.

On Dec.24.2009 at 10:59 PM

Elroy Torain’s comment is:

Just read your post. I kind of support your views though there are two to three points which I don’t think I would agree with what you have said. The best part of it is the way you have written the stuffs. The language was easy to follow and your style was appealing. English is my second language and you have done a good job avoiding jargons and difficult phrases. Keep on writing more posts. PS: I have already subscribed to your blog’s RSS feed.

On May.02.2010 at 06:49 AM