NCMA gets a New Logo Designed by Pentagram

There are a lot of changes going on over at the North Carolina Museum of Art. The new expansion, designed by Thomas Phifer and Partners, will open on April 24, 2010. The extension includes a set of gardens and new sculptures, including Roxy Paine’s ‘Askew’ Dendroid. Now, the museum has unveiled a brand new logo designed by Micahel Beirut and Yve Ludwig of Pentagram, one of the most famous design firms in the world. We first posted about them hiring Pentagram back in December of 07.

NCMA is on the edge of design in NC and this move is another that underscores that fact.  Below is a description of the new typeface and images of an interview with Beruit and designers in Preview Magazine. The interview can be downloaded as a PDF here and an mp3 here.

Stream the interview:

The Museum’s expansion presented a natural opportunity to redefine the North Carolina Museum of Art. With the Museum and its programming, the 164-acre Museum Park, and the Performing Arts series, the NCMA offers a range of experiences that allow the basic definition of the Museum to grow and evolve to meet the needs of its visitors.

The goal was to develop a distinctive logo to express this unique integration in a manner that was contemporary, yet timeless.

Inspired by the shape (a basic ellipse unit) of the 362 signature coffers encasing the skylights in the new building, the custom typeface provides a strong and unique voice which ties together the many activities of the Museum. Designed by Pentagram Design, Inc., the typeface also has formal connections to the history of art and design from Josef Albers to lettering styles from the 1960s.

The logo is sculptural and lyrical…a work of art in itself.

 

 

• currincy
  12/04 04:34 PM
  

  I’m for anything designed by Pentagrams!!!!

• revolu
  12/04 04:38 PM
  

  hahaha….not as cool as i’d thought it’d be

• ridge
  12/04 04:50 PM
  

  Hmmmm.

• corey3rd
  12/04 04:56 PM
  

  looks like the cover of a high school yearbook from 1978

• CJT
  12/04 04:57 PM
  

  Ah hmmm.  Like hmmm and huh?

• rb
  12/04 06:58 PM
  

  Horrible.  Rather be wowed than have someone talk me into it being art.

• Dan
  12/04 07:40 PM
  

  The point of a logo isn’t to be “wowed” but rather give something that’s going to communicate for the establishment when it’s not in a position where it can itself and can withstand fads and styles. Coca Cola has done this without changing their logo for a century. Pepsi tries to reinvent the “wow” with each new logo because they fear of their brand becoming weak. It’s not about making a life-changing logo, it’s about how you implement it.

  Honestly, I think this is a great success. It contains a very modular form that, as the partners were talking about, make it great for using in patterns and moving around the forms within the letterforms. Can’t wait to see this in person.

• corey3rd
  12/04 08:38 PM
  

  the font is blocky, ugly and nearly unreadable. I deal with fonts and to stick that font on anything would mean that I just don’t care.

  It does reflect the ugly warehouse additions to the museum.

  “contemporary, yet timeless”- there’s nothing timeless when it looks like what I’d see being done at art schools in the the ‘70s in the post-hippie Hodge-Podge-Lodge craftiness movement.

  Ultimately, It’s hurts my eyes to look at it.

• Skillet
  12/04 09:35 PM
  

  Wow.
  corey3rd, you’re just being mean to the 11th grade designers of yearbooks from 1978. They didn’t know any better.

• Brian
  12/05 01:57 AM
  

  I can’t say it any better than Corey did.

• rip van winkle
  12/05 03:07 AM
  

  you’d think a museum of this stature wouldn’t go for a gimmick

• T-Plain
  12/05 11:37 AM
  

  corey3rd nailed it.

• VaNC
  12/05 01:17 PM
  

  I agree, kinda hurts my eyes to look at…and not very readable.

• les
  12/05 02:04 PM
  

  I agree with the naysayers. I find it to be very unreadable, especially when not in context.

• DK
  12/05 05:29 PM
  

  I’m a brand identity designer just relocated back to my home turf of Raleigh-Durham after a five-year stint in Seattle.

  Last year I got really excited about Pentagram’s great work for the New York City Ballet—they hit the exact right note with it. But I have to say I’m totally disappointed with this one, maybe because I am personally attached to the NCMA. Remember when they started those outdoor movie summer nights in the new amphitheater? That was fun. This logo, though, is not.

  Honestly? I have a feeling this was a case of “design by committee.”

• ct
  12/05 05:40 PM
  

  Hey, give them credit: the new font looks better than the exterior of the new building. There are more attractive commercial warehouses in RTP.

• am
  12/05 08:13 PM
  

  i’d be curious to see how this will be implemented.

  the way the “logo” (why do people who should know better still insist on presenting it on its own without context i don’t know) is presented here and by the NCMA folks isn’t giving this re-branding a fair chance.

  for example, how does the “NCMA” version of logo look on, say, a letterhead? brochure? What about what Bierut talks about; words like “play” being presented in this (admittedly, rather awkward) typeface? How would it appear? What typeface will be be paired with?

  the PR/marketing folks at NCMA obviously seems to be awfully pleased by this new logo (and perhaps, the fact they got these celebrity designers to do it), but how do the whole staff feel about it? Design should definitely NOT be done by a committee, but the ideas and inspirations should be flowing through the organizations undertaking, implementing, and “owning” the re-design.

• penny pincher
  12/05 11:12 PM
  

  Any idea on how much this logo cost?

• Todd
  12/06 04:24 PM
  

  I’m with Corey, I just don’t get the direction the Museum’s going for over the last year or so…the new building will be fantastic but I’m hoping some of the decisions on new pieces and vision will be more thought out in the future.

• PJ
  12/06 09:03 PM
  

  I like it actually and it seems pretty thought out to me. As for how it will look on brochures, etc., that is ultimately how folks will view it and Beirut addresses that in the interview.

• MJones
  12/06 09:21 PM
  

  The first time I saw this, it was in NCMA’s ‘Preview’ newsletter. At first glance, I figured it was some logo that had been wisely kicked to the curb 30+ years ago and that maybe the newsletter was paying tongue-in-cheek homage to the museum’s past while also saying “look how far we’ve come.” 
  Then, I discovered that this was the museum’s “new look.”
  Corey3rd hit the nail on the head: It’s dated, and it’s uncomfortable to look at—two cardinal sins of logo design.
  And, how myopic to design a logo with the new building in mind only.  Isn’t it the ART that draws people to visit NCMA?  Maybe the designers should have taken a cue from the timeless nature of the art collection itself rather than that ugly concrete shed that’s eventually going to house it.

• art nerd
  12/06 10:22 PM
  

  For me, the design mimics my first experience with say, a Motherwell painting. At first glance, I wasn’t so sure, it’s just a bunch of blobs of paint/blocky letters, right? Upon closer inspection of each, I was drawn to the beautiful balance of positive and negative space and a thoughtful overall composition. Challenge us, NCMA! If you’re not going to, who will?

• Genius Loci
  12/06 11:21 PM
  

  Hideous.

• Thinker
  12/07 08:29 AM
  

  Take another look. Put it away, even. Sketch your own modular alphabet, A through Z,  work each character to fit a modular pattern yet express itself with clarity—-place it together in an elegant way that evokes architectural skylights, structured building elements, and at the same time exudes grace, wit, and confidence. Look again. It is a window into a state treasure. I’ve been immersed in the place for decades and seen all sorts of changes. This logo fits my multifaceted art museum experience like a glove. Ever since I first saw it I’ve been thinking of Louise Nevelson’s layered power and beauty, and I can’t shake her.

• TD
  12/07 09:47 AM
  

  Oh dear.  I’m trying to like it, but it is just evocative of the more hideous examples of late ‘60s through mid-‘70s architecture.  It reminds me of all those concrete buildings with arrow-slit windows that popped up on college campuses all over the state during that time.

  I totally agree with Corey3D on this design nightmare.

• Randi
  12/07 10:28 AM
  

  At first glance, I was a little confused - there didn’t seem to be enough white space to read the letters.

  But on a second look, the logo makes sense.  There’s the horizontal tension of the oval letters give the logo almost kinetic energy.  And the vertical white lines that appear as you read the logo top to bottom are aspirational.  I see architecture and light and air. 

  Yes, there’s something 1960s-70s about it.  But it also has the feel of early 20th century block printing and the contemporary binary feel of the black and white.

• Betsy
  12/07 12:38 PM
  

  With the new building, the Art Museum doubled down on its suboptimal suburban location, so now it has no choice but to go all-in on that bet.  Thus, this fairly awful logo—bravely backed by a lot of high-sounding rationalizations about architectural themes, which don’t make it any more readable or timeless. 
  —
  Identifiable, it certainly is:  It already looks dated, like those blob-shaped eggplant-purple sofas in every new coffeehouse in 1995.

• Betsy
  12/07 12:39 PM
  

  Is there something about Raleigh that makes famous international designers deliver less than their best?  First Plensa, now Pentagram ...

• DPK
  12/07 01:51 PM
  

  What the heck?  That’s so hard to read.

• Fate
  12/07 03:41 PM
  

  awkward.

• Chico
  12/07 04:41 PM
  

  Don’t like it. And it does look like a ‘78 yearbook cover.

• John in Raleigh
  12/07 05:59 PM
  

  http://www.dafont.com/theme.php?cat=103&page=15

  Check out “free style”

  Also, it looks like the typeface on the cover of the first Doors album.

• John in Raleigh
  12/07 06:00 PM
  

  

• Kurt
  12/07 06:02 PM
  

  It’s crap.

  Is this a hat tip to free fonts online?

• Jon
  12/08 09:02 AM
  

  The NCMA homepage shows the logo in context and the reveal of the logo to me shows the beauty and the balance it has.
  http://ncartmuseum.org/interim/home.php

  And yes, the logo challenges us—but it’s for an ART museum, not a product you’re gonna by in a store. Same audience maybe, but very different goals, asking us to look at things in different ways.

• corey3rd
  12/08 09:14 AM
  

  now that I see the logo in context with the expansion, I completely understand - we’re supposed to think our Art Museum is being stashed inside a U-Store It. Maybe they should have put a little wheels under the logo.

  And for that whole “not a product you’re gonna buy in a store” concept -really? Because the art museum has a store that wants you to buy art to take home. Art is a commodity.

• oakcity
  12/08 09:15 AM
  

  regardless of the graphic or what i think of it.

  NCMA should have used a local firm for that design, there are tons of NC firms that could have produced an equally attractive (or better) design.

• critter
  12/08 11:14 AM
  

  putting this in “context” does not change the forms, which are at best awful. using forms inspired by something relevant, something perhaps unique to the ncma, is no excuse for creating a poor mark. this is assuming that pentagram actually designed the letters. like others have suggested, the type looks to have been found through a quick search for “modular” on freefonts.com. modular elements can be fun and creative. these are not. i am thankful we have this quote to inform us of the appreciation we owe this logo: “The logo is sculptural and lyrical…a work of art in itself.” ...words that, unfortunately for pentagram and ncma, are less convincing than actually seeing the logo. also, if “The goal was to develop a distinctive logo ... that was contemporary, yet timeless.” then this goal was certainly not achieved. i wish my mind could get past the word “atrocious” to find another word to describe the logo. i agree with oakcity, ncma should definitely have looked locally for a designer. i am unable to think of one that i know that would deliver something of this quality. unfortunate!

• Sarah
  12/08 11:14 AM
  

  I agree with Jon, the reveal on the website is beautiful!

  Regardless of whether you like or dislike it, hopefully we can agree that it’s a pretty bold move for a state museum. And, perhaps, an art museum should be in the business of bold moves—in their identity AND with the art they present?

  That said, I happen to like it a lot, especially the movement created by the white vertical lines. It’s visually strong and memorable. As a system, it will lend itself well to other treatments—pins, patterns for bags or wall graphics—all the things that museums use regularly.

• Chris Johnson
  12/08 11:19 AM
  

  Unlike the bland corporate logos we put up with daily, it’s bold and memorable. I imagine that’s why it’s eliciting such strong responses.

  One complaint:
  The logo might not scale down very well. The hairline spaces between the letter parts will disappear at small sizes. We’ll probably see an acronym version (just “NCMA”) introduced quickly to address that problem.

• corey3rd
  12/08 11:39 AM
  

  how dare we unwashed, barefoot Southern Bumpkins question the genius of Pentagram!

• gd
  12/08 12:50 PM
  

  i like it a lot.

• Kate
  12/08 04:38 PM
  

  oh dear.

  It looks remarkably like it says “NORTH CAROLINA MECONIUM OF ART.”

  Nice as a lyrical piece of art but hideous as a logo.

• sub_q
  12/08 04:40 PM
  

  http://ncartmuseum.org/untitled/2009/12/capturing-the-essence/

• corey3rd
  12/08 05:09 PM
  

  from that blog: “I recently saw Malcolm Gladwell give a talk about his theory that there are two kinds of creative thinkers, the conceptual and the experimental. He thinks that today, most creative thinkers have to be experimental. They go down blind alleys, they start and stop, they try new things and then, voila! His example was the fact that Fleetwood Mac’s “Rumours” album became the biggest thing on the musical planet only after sixteen previous Fleetwood Mac records. Practice, practice, practice.”

  Malcolm and Barbara here have zero clue about Fleetwood Mac and their “practice.” Sure there were 16 previous Fleetwood Mac albums - but what made Rumours different that at least 15 of the earlier albums was that it had Stevie Nicks and Lindsey Buckingham as members of the band. And their first record “Fleetwood Mac” had quite a few hits including “Rhiannon,” “Over My Head,” “Say You Love Me” and “Landslide.” Does someone have have to go Allen Iverson on these people with a “practice?” You’re calling that record practice?

  What truly made Rumours work is the fact that everyone in the band was cheating with everyone else in the band. That’s not practice that made that record great.

  No wonder the NCMA became victims of the graphic design version of Froghammer (see Slings and Arrows in case you can’t understand the reference). Practice? Nicks and Buckingham brought a one-two punch. Maybe these people need to stay away from music history, too.

• roi
  12/08 05:23 PM
  

  Damn. Like many others who have commented, I don’t like it.  I hope they didn’t pay more than $20 for this design. I also like Corey’s comments.  I know one thing it does hurt your eyes if you look at it for a few minutes.  It is so ugly that you will not forget it.

• suz75
  12/08 06:02 PM
  

  Awful, but not surprising. There are fewer creative thinkers at that museum than at your local Burger King. That’s why they waste a wonderful outdoor venue on the same acts year after year and rarely sell out a show. Place needs some fresh blood.

• nate
  12/09 05:06 AM
  

  i hope this was free. i agree on the fact that they should of used a local firm or even a local freelancer. i personally could of done a million times better on this. seriously, no lie.

  either way, pentagram took total advantage on this. either they downloaded a free font and took but all of 1.2 minutes to complete this then laughed or they outsourced it another firm that is running on an apple II, well maybe an apple II+.

• lauren
  12/10 09:21 AM
  

  It shouldn’t surprise me the level of snark and inarticulate “critique” in a public forum, but the level of hate spewed still stuns.

  While I agree that maybe using an outside firm like Pentagram is poor form, it should be noted that this process began in 2007—before the economy tanked—and Pentagram has a lot of experience with museum identity and a higher profile in the world at large than any local firm (or FREELANCER).

  Maybe one of the museum’s goals is to raise visibility for NC, and it’s still a work in progress? Is it possible that we, as citizens and taxpayers, could chill out a little and maybe be more positive about the architectural and identity changes? Go along for the journey?

  We should be challenged by our art museum, as several others have noted. Maybe more of us should stop complaining from our comfortable computer chairs and start actually contributing. For starters, actually visiting once the re-open occurs and see how the logos forms are used in different applications.

• johninral
  12/10 11:12 AM
  

  Lauren.  Hate?

  Come on.

  Generally speaking, if something is supposed to speak for itself just from looking at it, the way a logo is supposed to work, it is not helped by needing paragraphs of exegesis to explain itself.

  The positive reviews above sound like caricatures.  I envision the writers in berets and long scarves, flipping through the thesaurus to find new ways of saying “oooo, pretty” in no less than 56 syllables.

  It’s a logo.  It’s supposed to pop.  It’s supposed to be memorable.  It’s supposed to [shudder] be ADVERTISING. 

  It can be as artsy and impressive and intellectually challenging as you want it to be, but if it fails at advertising, it sucks as a logo.

• helen
  12/10 11:16 AM
  

  This doesn’t say timeless to me at all. In fact, I think they’re going to need a new logo in 10 years or less.

• cdm
  12/10 03:01 PM
  

  Yeah, not a fan of the logo.  Hopefully the art inside is better.  And btw, why is the state using a foreign company to develop the logo in the first place….someone in NC should be doing this!!

• Betsy
  12/10 05:25 PM
  

  corey3d - exactly.  And we haven’t got enough confidence in ourselves to hire local designers, so we gladly lick up whatever atrocity is delivered from what we seem obligated, in our humble bumpkitude, to regard as “on high” (New York, etc.)

• critter
  12/10 07:07 PM
  

  lauren has an alright point about “inarticulate critique.” but, i think the inarticulate critique, for some people, is in part due to near-speechlessness. and frustration. and aggravation. soooo, after some time away from this logo, maybe we can have a more thoughtful discussion.

  since i brought up the forms of the letters, i will elaborate. the shape of the coffers (admittedly a “basic ellipse unit”) is the inspiration for the letters. this seems to me a strange place from which to draw inspiration for the identity of an art museum. but perhaps this wasnt the designers choice. maybe someone with a lot of say at the art museum wanted the logo to be inspired by something “signature” in the new building. (luckily, i am familiar with the task of succumbing to clients wishes and creating lots of things i would not normally make. however, i have yet to be so bold as to call any of these things “a work of art in itself.” but i might start using that term just for fun.) additionally, the shape of the roof as seen from the side seems, or the shape of the roof in conjunction with the coffers, seems more characteristic, or “signature,” of the building than just the coffers. but i have yet to even experience the coffers so what am i talking about? okay! so, coffers it is.

  at this point, id like to know what kept this basic ellipse shape so absolutely flat? was this because, after many iterations [that may have included overlapping ellipses, ellipses seen from different angles, ellipses of different sizes and shapes, ellipses rotated in an apparent three-dimensional space, ellipses casting light and creating shadow to form letters and words, and/or ellipses that bend and fold to reveal new shapes and new letterforms], it was decided that what would best represent this museum is a bunch of flat, dimensionless letters that sit in a tight, boring grid? i have a hard time believing that.

  next, i have a problem with the counterforms. where does the vertical “bar,” that cuts through the center of most of these letters, come from? i would argue that these vertical [and sometimes horizontal] lines are of as much importance to the form as the ellipse shape. on a positive note, i think their adherence to a strict grid is a pleasing characteristic. that the letters (while not monospace themselves) contain mono-width elements, so that when put together they create a sort of monospacing, i find to be a nice aspect. [im sorry that last sentence is such a mess]. i also like! that the counterform in the letters is equal in width to the space between each letter. that is nice also. but i cant figure out where these vertical lines come from.

  the problem with the lines that run from top to bottom is that they create a vertical emphasis on the mark as a whole. this is confusing to me. what is vertical about the ncma? the necessary movement of its visitors heads to notice the coffers in the first place? the last time i drove past it, the ncma seemed short. i think, though i dont know, that the new building is one story. at any rate, it is much more wide than tall. if it were four stories, i may think this logo was completely on the mark [pun maybe intended]. if most people saw the building as a structure with four significant levels, with frequent, equally-spaced vertical lines along its walls [which i think it may have], then this logo could be incredible. maybe. what if the logotype was skewed to show perspective, as if the logo existed on a horizontal plane? then it could speak to the way these coffers actually exist in the museum. what if… ?

  moving on, i would like to talk about turds. this is one of the least vulgar words in the vocabulary of a professor i had while studying graphic design. among other things, he would use the word “turd” to describe individual elements that did not fit within the whole. which brings me to the crossbars of the t and the f in the new ncma logo. from where was this nearly-squre rectangle derived? oh. i think it comes from the dot of the i. (crap!) it feels too forced, but i can appreciate that there is a reason for it. without seeing the i, though, the crossbars feel completely out of place. on the f, it could have a slightly rounded right edge to imply to ellipse shape. on the t, ...i dont know. but, what is most problematic with the letters with crossbars is the enormous negative space that is created around them. this feels so off because the rest of the letters are so dense and dark. the t has a gap that is comparable to the space that is used to separate two words in this typeface. to somewhat fix this, and fit within the system at the same time, the t could have a tail that uses the exact piece that is used in the lower right-hand corner of the e and c. why doesnt it?

  i believe it doesnt because this logo/type/logotype hasnt had enough iterations or critiques that it needs to have before it is appropriate for the identity of a museum. i think that is my general gripe. the ncma logo that we see above just seems to be the result of a lack of iterations / effort / time / whatever. it doesnt seem finished. it seems uninspired. my first reaction to this was that it seems to be the result of so little thought. the process seems so simple [not knowing it! but assuming it]...

  1. need idea for a typeface
  2. use a piece of the architecture
  3. create a modular alphabet
  4. type “north carolina museum of art”
  5. stack words
  6. done

  i would love to see that it was more than that. however, just the ideas i threw out in the third paragraph from the top, would take me to places that would eliminate the option of the current logo, i would like to think. i mean, i may create the typeface for fun anyway, but as for the logo, i would not feel done with its most public-facing form by just putting it in the typeface i had created, and stacking it up.

  so yes.

  i would like to end by saying that my biggest complaint is not necessarily that it looks like a free font, but that this logo appears to be the result of such an undeviating and non-exploratory line of thought and creation (doesnt art naturally deviate and explore?!). to see this typeface-as-logo as the identity for the state of north carolinas museum of art is surprising, especially[!] considering that “Pentagram has a lot of experience with museum identity and a higher profile in the world at large than any local firm (or FREELANCER).”

• Skillet
  12/10 10:25 PM
  

  Critter for City Council.

• Jamie
  12/12 08:09 PM
  

  Being a Pentagram fan, I was a little surprised to read about this first on New Raleigh. I check Pentagram’s blog daily, where they always announce new work. Apparently they didn’t feel that this work is worth a full write-up, although they did include it in the left-hand column as a “Quick Link” to NCMA’s Web site. (http://blog.pentagram.com/)

  This logo looks dated and is illegible. It also looks oddly goth if you step far enough away and simply look at the contrasting forms against the white space. I would have assumed it to be a first attempt from a design school student, not a final product from one of the most notable firms in the world.

  And, if you scroll down to the end of the first page of Pentagram’s blog, you’ll see the work Michael Bierut did for the Museum of Art and Design (MAD) in NYC. You have to wonder if NCMA’s work was one of the early iterations he did for MAD, because MAD clearly got the more sophisticated variation on the exact same theme. Our version looks like it came about when he uncrumpled a MAD first draft from its pile on the floor.

• DPK
  12/12 08:22 PM
  

  <3 critter

• bird
  01/12 03:39 PM
  

  It’s a hard read.  i know what they are trying to do - but it’s too focused on the plan of the new building(which is going to be great oh ye of little hope and vision).  they put their b team on this and didn’t try too hard - c’mon really?  stop at this font? and really - not to be flippant at the graphic arts, but it is just a font - it’s not really that hard to come up with something tasteful - i say fail by committee.

• Charlie
  01/19 12:54 PM
  

  I like it. Three more months…

• architect77
  02/10 12:54 AM
  

  Y’all are craaazy… This logo is HOT! It is faceted, dynamic, has movement, and is quite abstract.
  The shape is directly tied to the light-filtering roof bays for which the museum will soon be known for.
  Great design always takes some getting used to as its intended lifespan is well into the future. What delights the masses today and what’s appropriate ten years from now cannot be one in the same.
  Not to sound negative, but the Triangle has yet to be exposed to, embrace, then demand better architecture, because it hasn’t been exposed to such.

• balthus
  02/10 12:55 AM
  

  Hurts my eyes. And I spent 15 years in advertising, about half that as a Creative Director.

• wingateahe
  02/12 06:53 AM
  

  estimated gas anthropogenic pnas region combined

• beortbtrae
  02/17 07:06 PM
  

  evidence year volunteer driven differing 2100 investigate

• adronbroch
  02/18 05:35 AM
  

  december domestic product present decade least

• Sean
  02/27 10:13 AM
  

  I see a lot of problems with it, but especially that’s it’s not appropriate for a city museum. One of the main goals of a museum should be to get museum goers involved who are outside of the art community. In that respect, the logo fails to be inviting. You can’t tell these people that the don’t “get” the logo because they don’t find it aesthetically pleasing. The greatest thing about art is that you don’t have to be able to describe WHY you like something, even if others can talk for hours about it.

  I understand that the typeface is designed specifically for the logo, but designing a typeface that is unreadable is incredibly sacrilegious. It just looks like a stretched variant of Futura Black with some modifications. Closing the letter forms would have created a much better looking typeface that still retained the subtlety of the alignments, but even though the alignments themselves are clever, the negative space they create is extremely distracting.

  The designers admit that the logo is unreadable, but that doesn’t matter to them. The last thing you want is for a city museum to appear elitist.

• pBeez
  03/06 10:21 AM
  

  I share everyone’s disappointment.  Its far too busy, looks cluttered - its just ugly.  It doesn’t provoke anger, just deep sorry that this great museum can not get it together and live up to his potential - new hideous building that is an expansion of a hideous building, with a busy, ugly logo to go with it.  What a sad start to my saturday.

• pbeez
  03/06 10:27 AM
  

  correct that - sorrow, not sorry.  Not finished my morning coffee.
  You know what it reminds me of is big painting of the half circles in the museum!  With out the color.

• tripproul
  03/12 07:10 PM
  

  home world china special

• caldwiella
  03/12 07:33 PM
  

  back against sectors engine shut medium study

• derwanwalt
  04/08 07:55 PM
  

  partners exempt probably prepared late thermal model 2004

• architect77
  04/09 07:49 AM
  

  i agree the exterior of the building is disappointing, however experiencing the art in this “new light” might redeem the new addition. After all, the function of a building lies within it, not merely looking at it from afar.

  The ncma’s suburban setting, outdoor areas, and greenway connection do differentiate it from most other museums. Perhaps this bold logo is appropriate for this truly unique destination.

• samanta
  04/10 04:06 PM
  

  WbBexh http://fh6whUq3NnsPfj8g3vr0gQO4Yyzf.com

• gballz
  04/19 09:50 AM
  

  font sucks. corey3rd on top of it. critter talks too much. skillet farted.

• Real Estate Rebate
  04/30 10:54 PM
  

  I think it kind of grows on you.  At first I didn’t like it.  Now…..maybe.  I don’t usually consider a block of text to be a logo.