NOTE: This is an archived version of the first incarnation of Brand New. All posts have been closed to comments. Please visit underconsideration.com/brandnew for the latest version. If you would like to see this specific post, simply delete _v1 from the URL.
If you live in one of our nation’s larger metropolis and you have found yourself either late in the office or at home too lazy to cook, chances are that you have ordered through the menu heaven that is MenuPages, the 7-year-old web site that catalogs every conceivable menu in a city and puts it at your fingertips. When I first used it, I think it was here in New York, I don’t remember using it in Chicago, I had the impression that my only options would be flavorless diners or MSG-laden Chinese holes in the wall — no offense to either — because of the web site’s kitschy, beveled logo. Of course, nothing could be further from reality, MenuPages has always had menus for the best restaurants in town and it’s only now, with a new logo by the über typographers at Mucca Design, that the web site reflects a more varied and interested selection than your typical take-out joint. The new logo is more upscale, and may perhaps feel too New York-centric, like something you would see tiled on a subway platform, but the improvement is undeniable and attractive. The web site is a fantastic improvement as well.
Thanks to Courtney Dolloff for the tip.
Jump to Most Recent Comment
Mark’s comment is:
first! hahahahaha
anyway......
I like it it's a BIG improvement over the Rage Italic-tastic old one.
reminds me of something you'd see at an NYC diner.
On Jan.22.2009 at 06:52 AM
Tom H’s comment is:
Neutraface?
On Jan.22.2009 at 07:39 AM
Grant’s comment is:
I don't think it is Neutraface 2, as the inline does not border the outside like it does here, and the "G" and "E" don't look quite like Neutraface for sure. It is quite similar though. If you told me it was a modified version, I'd believe you, but considering Mucca Design did it, I'd have to guess it is a proprietary typeface they created for the logo.
On Jan.22.2009 at 08:40 AM
Paul Lloyd Johnson’s comment is:
Lovely
On Jan.22.2009 at 08:48 AM
Jacob’s comment is:
The new one is kind of kitschy, too. Just not fake-50s-diner kitschy.
On Jan.22.2009 at 09:06 AM
tinabeans’s comment is:
it is totally ny subway meets las vegas neon. my initial reaction was that i liked it. but in the context of its very rigid, very blue site, it feels just a little sapped of life.
On Jan.22.2009 at 09:35 AM
jRod’s comment is:
The logo is pretty good, although if they would have removed the beveled look, checkerboard strip, stars and the "the", i really think that the old font isn't all that bad. i have seen much worse script fonts. then change "Menu" to dark blue and the "Pages" to light blue and it would have looked pretty good.
the site is a nice one, but you totally lose the new logo in it.
On Jan.22.2009 at 09:53 AM
Dammacx’s comment is:
I like it, the only thing is I think they could tweak the "G" and the "S" in "PAGES" a bit more.
They seem a tad big and make the rest of the letters in that word seem a bit small.
colormist’s comment is:
Granted, the new logo is nice and fits the encompassing quality of the gathered menus, but I really love 50's retro. Maybe, somewhere out there, as one 50's logo dies, another takes it's place.
I'm going to agree with Dammacx's comment on the G. It's Bothersome. The S I can live with.
On Jan.22.2009 at 10:10 AM
Glenn Sakamoto’s comment is:
Love it.
On Jan.22.2009 at 10:23 AM
Mark’s comment is:
I just realized something, the old logo wasn't that bad, I'm sorry about it looking like Rage Italic that was a bit unrealistic.
The font actually looked nice, it did need and update though.
The "G" in the new one looks odd. It needs fixing. It doesn't look like the same width as the other letters! The top part of the G looks unfinished.
On Jan.22.2009 at 10:23 AM
Courtney’s comment is:
Thanks for posting this Armin!
I agree that the new logo may be a bit New York-centric, and that the "G" could have been tweaked a bit more. But overall I think it's a gigantic improvement.
On Jan.22.2009 at 10:24 AM
Mark’s comment is:
I just realized something, the old logo wasn't that bad. I'm sorry saying about it looking like Rage Italic, that was a bit unrealistic.
The font actually looked nice, it did need and update though.
The "G" in the new one looks odd. It needs fixing. It doesn't look like the same width as the other letters! The top part of the G looks unfinished.
On Jan.22.2009 at 10:24 AM
Chris Herron’s comment is:
Unique and appropriate. Much more inclusive of the various restaurants they represent. The border is interesting. They did a good job of optically correcting the points on the M, N, and A. But I agree, the G and S extend too far beyond the baseline and ascender line. Overall, a strong word mark.
On Jan.22.2009 at 10:25 AM
Nate’s comment is:
I find it odd that the new logo doesn't use any imagery related to menus, pages, food, restaurants, or eating for that matter. Come to think of it, even the color choices don't evoke anything hunger or food related.
This design solution could just as easily represent a mid-century modern furniture store as it could a website for take-out food.
Someone dropped the ball on this one.
On Jan.22.2009 at 11:01 AM
Kim Siever’s comment is:
By "our nation", do you really mean Canada, where I live?
On Jan.22.2009 at 11:07 AM
Nate’s comment is:
By "our nation", do you really mean Canada, where I live?
Dang Armin, way to offend the Canadians.
Armin’s comment is:
huh? Canada? When did Canada get into the discussion?
On Jan.22.2009 at 11:26 AM
Mike’s comment is:
Don't forget Serge Bloch, the man behind the brilliant illustrations.
On Jan.22.2009 at 11:43 AM
Carlo’s comment is:
I'm glad that they managed to make sure the web icon for an iPhone bookmark automatically updated as well.
On Jan.22.2009 at 11:53 AM
mm’s comment is:
As someone not from NY, I don't feel the appeal of the Broadway lights look. To me, the font looks pulled right off the playbill of a high school play. (Because that's where I've seen that style of font the most.) As a result the whole thing feels cheesy to me. *shrug*
Lucky for them, that doesn't matter, since I live outside of the markets they serve.
On Jan.22.2009 at 02:59 PM
mm’s comment is:
Also, the illustrations by Serge Bloch are fantastic. Too bad they didn't carry that style into the logo somehow.
On Jan.22.2009 at 03:03 PM
mk’s comment is:
I agree with the comment that it looks a little 'cold'. Perhaps if they had maintained the colours of the original it would have worked better:
Scott’s comment is:
B-L-A-N-D
Can you say phone book? I can, and it's outdated.
I appreciate the clever overlap on the m, e, n, a ... that's about it. Better or worse than the previous? I'd say it's just about equal but lacks the 'sparkle' of the previous.
Perhaps as the previous poster showed, it's partly because of the color choice.
On Jan.22.2009 at 11:02 PM
Ampersanderson’s comment is:
Thank God!!!
On Jan.23.2009 at 01:43 AM
Clark’s comment is:
Oh no. Oh no you didn't. Please tell me I don't see a "first" at the top of this thread.
*sigh* Just when you thought your favorite comment board was safe.
On Jan.23.2009 at 02:40 AM
Mark’s comment is:
Yeah, that was me.
I was making fun of the stupid "first" comments you always see on Youtube, it's really annoying stupid and not funny. So you were the first comment big f&*^ing deal NO ONE CARES. it doesn't help the conversation and it's plain inane. Plus I wanted to take advantage of being able to comment before anyone else, so it was basically for fun as well.
Back on topic I think it would have helped if the kept the previous colors, it does look a little cold. The illustrations are excellent.
On Jan.23.2009 at 08:43 AM
louis’s comment is:
While not a hit out of the park you have to say its better then the previous one. The website is leaps and bounds better though.
PS: Does anyone else notice their NYC map is missing Chinatown?
On Jan.23.2009 at 08:51 AM
logos’s comment is:
I liked the before better. the after photo is so cold and plain. The before photo had a lot of spark and personality.
On Jan.23.2009 at 01:29 PM
Kevin’s comment is:
I looks very Art Deco-ish. Streamlined, and from the world of tomorrow.
On Jan.23.2009 at 02:59 PM
DG3’s comment is:
wtf?
On Jan.23.2009 at 03:24 PM
Filipe’s comment is:
mk's version is better indeed :) but anyway, it's such a great improvement in relation to the old one.
On Jan.23.2009 at 06:45 PM
DanR’s comment is:
Uh, this new lifeless thing stinks. I'm not sayin' the old one was great, but is this seriously the best option for FOOD?
And the website is horrible too.
On Jan.23.2009 at 11:16 PM
Comments in Brand New, V1.0 have been closed.
