NOTE: This is an archived version of the first incarnation of Brand New.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.
Originally established as a children’s museum in 1941 in the city of Fort Worth, Texas, growing in size and popularity to become the Fort Worth Museum of Science and History (FWMSH) is one of a handful of world-class museums in the Fort Worth Cultural District that also happens to boast architecture by Philip Johnson (Amon Carter Museum), Tadao Ando (Modern Art Museum of Fort Worth), and Louis Kahn (Kimbell Art Museum). Slowly deteriorating, and slightly frumpy next to these buildings, the FWMSH is currently undergoing a renovation under the design of Mexico City based Ricardo Legorreta’s Legorreta + Legorreta that will open 202 days from now (according to the web site’s counter).
Rendering of the new building, designed by Legorreta + Legorreta.
Known for his use of strictly geometric, clean forms, unexpected nooks, and bright, splashy colors — although, for my money, Luis Barragan did it much better, but that’s another post in another blog — the Legorreta design for the FWMSH served as the foundation for its new identity designed by Pentagram partner DJ Stout.
Stout and his team in Austin developed a logo consisting of three squares representing the letters F, W, and M (Fort Worth Museum) and an entire alphabet of Legorreta-inspired letterforms. The square letterforms can be stacked and rearranged like a child’s set of alphabet blocks. These symbolic “building blocks of knowledge” are a metaphor for the museum’s early roots as a children’s museum and its commitment to families and learning.
— Pentagram project detail
Designing logos based on architecture is tricky and rarely that successful or, if successful, rarely distinctive or overly engaging but this is a great way of interpreting architecture without it being a literal translation of a facade or a set of columns. This new logo allows room for interpretation and a leap of imagination as to what it actually is. When I first saw the logo I immediately read “building blocks” and made the instant connection to science and play. My second thought was “Is this a Luis Barragan building I didn’t know about?”. But I digress on my Barragan fixation.
To complement the logo, Stout and team designed an alphabet based on the same premise as the logo, and while some of the letters hit and miss on readability it’s an interesting exercise in building scalability of the logo’s look. For now, all the applications shown on Pentagram’s site are pie-in-the-sky renderings, so it will be interesting to see how the identity actually shapes up come inauguration time.
Jump to Most Recent Comment
Dale Campbell’s comment is:
I have to admit that other than the colors, I sort of like it.
It seems like this is the standard for developing icons and logos for museums - the whole geometric shape = letters thing.
But overall, I think it's pretty cool - which is exactly what you want to try and convince people of - science and history are cool.
: )
Keep well,
Dale
Scott’s comment is:
I like it. And I like the campaign as a whole.
Colors I could do without, they scream 80s. Which may or may not be by happenstance, considering the letterforms created remind of 1981 Atari or Intellivision.
The previous logo's colors are more approachable. In fact, it is quite nice, as well. There's reason enough for the change, and I think it will be a successful one.
On May.05.2009 at 08:12 AM
Saylor’s comment is:
Hmmm... I feel slightly less inclined to like the archetecturey logo.
It has an intriguing shape that people will mentally interact with, but the colors kill it for me.
The type treatment below does give it a nice strong base to sit on though.
On May.05.2009 at 08:20 AM
Saylor’s comment is:
I must say though... I really like the "M"
On May.05.2009 at 08:21 AM
theoxygenthief’s comment is:
The weight of the G sucks. Other than that I likey.
On May.05.2009 at 08:33 AM
Mrs. M’s comment is:
This is far more flexible and visually stimulating than the older logo.
The blocky letterforms intrigue me. They give off a vibe of glyphic coding or building cubes. Scientific, in other words.
The magenta and yellow combination I enjoy, but that purple is ghastly. I've never liked reddish purples. I've always associated the color with cheap products and grape soda.
Still, quite enjoyable.
On May.05.2009 at 08:34 AM
joanna’s comment is:
I love the new logo, the simplicity is just stunning. I can read it and relate it back to the architectural structure of the building as well. Job well done!
On May.05.2009 at 08:39 AM
emily’s comment is:
i can't believe this:
is on pentagram's website. really?
On May.05.2009 at 08:53 AM
josh’s comment is:
^^^ i liked the logo but now i am disgusted.
On May.05.2009 at 09:03 AM
John H’s comment is:
Yes, it's a bit 80s, but it has a more grown-up feel than it's hokey predecessor. I can dig it.
And it's a good point to note that it has to live side-by-side with the other outstanding museums in Ft. Worth's cultural district. The Kimball, Amon Carter and Modern and all very strong, very distinctive institutions. It's good that the FWMSH folks recognized that they had to bring an "A" game to the table. Besides, when you've spent a full day roaming the Kimball, the Amon Carter and the Modern, you can go relax with a margarita and a plate o' fajitas at Joe T's. Dallas can suck it. Ft. Worth is where it's at.
On May.05.2009 at 09:03 AM
Jonathan’s comment is:
I love marks that are abstract enough to let you use some imagination, but then there's also that moment when you see the "FWM" Clean, simple & clever.
Also, the alphabet is nice, minus the G. It's the only one thats inconsistent from the rest (too much negative space). I think if they would have tried a lowercase g, they might have got a better result.
On May.05.2009 at 09:29 AM
Rob’s comment is:
@emily. Yeah! I saw that the other day. They've got to be kidding us all.
Or in a couple years all the kids will be wearing those.
On May.05.2009 at 09:31 AM
Matt’s comment is:
of course it is better than the previous version, but this new logo looks very bland and boring to me. the geometric shapes have ZERO fun, an anti-cool feeling to me, i definitely wouldn't want to go, let alone make my kid go there and suffer through an entire day of that, I think he'd hate me/wanna kill me. thank god I don't have kids yet...
The alphabet is the best part of this, that looks like it begins to have a little bit of fun, but not enough to enjoy this. As stated above, the "G" stands out WAAAAAAAY to much.
On May.05.2009 at 09:32 AM
Andrew’s comment is:
I agree: the logo is great but the colors are a little too much 80's for me. Overall, a huge improvement for the museum.
On May.05.2009 at 09:44 AM
Ryan Adair’s comment is:
Eh. It's alllllllllllright.
It looks like the Fort Worth Museum of Science and History for Kids.
Are those foam hats for real? Aretheykiddingme? IsPentagramkiddingme?
On May.05.2009 at 09:44 AM
Flipping Out’s comment is:
@Universe and Armin:
Why does Pentagram get all of this work? Why do all American cultural organizations come to then to produce their identity?
Any ideas? The work to me seems to be not the best around. I've seen 2x4 and Saffron work that BLOWS their stuff out of the water!
So, why?
On May.05.2009 at 09:47 AM
TFHackett’s comment is:
I now realize the old logo is a spur, with an atom for the rowel (the spikey part of the spur), but at first it looked like a white bird with a big blue eye and no beak...flying headfirst into an atom...
Agree with theoxygenthief about the weight of the g; they made one turn too many. I'd have gone with something more minimal, maybe along the lines of this:
Maya’s comment is:
The fun look of it makes me like it more. Does make it seem like more for children.
Von K’s comment is:
I like it. It says building blocks, organized information, fun/play, experimentation, big (Texas). I "got it" right away, for whatever that's worth.
I understand why some people hate the colors, but they are so different from the laser blues, radioactive greens and deep-space blacks that are used so often in the "science-y" world. I think that's a good thing.
The alphabet creates a cool opportunity for indoor signage uses, too. Maybe even a giant letter sculpture that kids can climb and play on?
On May.05.2009 at 10:19 AM
MADPHILL’s comment is:
I loves it! I have to admit, while the old one was dated in aesthetic and approach the concept was nice.
Still...lots of promise with this new mark.
I guess we can thank Wolff Olins for this heinous comeback of early 90's color schemes?!
On May.05.2009 at 10:35 AM
Able ’s comment is:
I love it. They look like Hungry Hungry Hippos.
Num num numm num...
jRod’s comment is:
yeah, i am in total agreement on the "G" thing, and much prefer Hackett's version much better. it just makes more sense. its like they just gave up on the "G". The color scheme, although a little dated, is very kid friendly.
speaking of the color scheme... it reminds me of a hot wheels car that I had back in the early 80's...
Wünderwoman’s comment is:
Yawn.
Color, shape, abstract...it's all so overtly intellectual and...unoriginal. Hello 80s.
On May.05.2009 at 10:46 AM
christina’s comment is:
wow, as a native texan and someone who has lived in fort worth for the last five years, i was so excited to see our wonderful museum's rebrand on brand new–except that once i looked through pentagram's site to see how this new identity would play out i got more and more disappointed with it. the colors are so feminine, it doesn't seem like they considered that this is a place for children both male and female.
the conceptual thinking behind the letterforms is very appropriate, but the colors and some of the proposed products for kids are completely ridiculous and embarrassing.
On May.05.2009 at 10:50 AM
Ryan Adair’s comment is:
So wait.
Is it or is it not a children's museum?
On May.05.2009 at 10:52 AM
Carlo’s comment is:
I'm a little ashamed that I didn't see the block letters as "F", "W" and "M" sooner. I'm a little in love with it, even though my instinct tells me that it doesn't explain itself quickly enough. But hey - that's the mystery of love sometimes.
On May.05.2009 at 11:06 AM
Myles Dumas’s comment is:
I dig it. I think its fun and not filled with the usual cliches of many museum logos. I don't mind the color palatte either, kids will love it. I really enjoyed the solve they came up with for the letter "q". I just designed a very similar logo for a client, its great to see someone else embrace a logo along the same lines. I'm a big fan of turning the alphabet into simple geometric forms. Well done.
chris ’s comment is:
Charles Rennie Mackintosh would be delighted. But, kids might not be.
On May.05.2009 at 11:26 AM
Orna’s comment is:
I like it a lot. It is simple and sophisticated at the same time, it brings back the fun in learning (and being a child). I also feel that the colors are not interesting enough.
On May.05.2009 at 11:28 AM
Glenn Sakamoto’s comment is:
Sound idea but the end result looks unfinished and - dare I say it – amateurish.
Pentagram you can do so much better.
On May.05.2009 at 11:30 AM
bonojerry’s comment is:
I love the block alphabet idea because it is not arbitrary and grows from the actual structure of the museum.
I think the color palette is not as strong as it could be. Sampling colors from the museum's architecture and then building a palette from that would be less arbitrary, stronger, more beautiful, etc., etc.
Here is a new palette based on riffing from the perceived building colors, then going to the richness of child colors:
Ruben Navarrette’s comment is:
I agree Glen, this does feel a little Amateurish to me.
Geometric letters made in Illustrator? Sigh.
Every first round of Identity design always has a geometric logo. That's because it's easy.
The mix of styles within the identity seems unresolved to me. The kerned out, all caps letters, have a conservative, scholarly feel, while the symbols scream 80's computer game / pixel font. They seems totally mismatched, and not in an interesting way.
On May.05.2009 at 11:58 AM
V as in Victor’s comment is:
I really like the thought process and research that went into this project. In a lot of the new redesigns we get a press release trying to make us believe the new logo/design has a reason, a purpose, but is more fluff than anything else. So good on ya to Pentagram for that.
That said, when I saw the execution, I saw elephant paws. A good icon for a zoo or wildlife habitat, but I don't get it for a science museum. It doesn't inspire me, make me feel anything. I agree with a lot of the mismatched comments. Great thought process, but a slightly lukewarm execution.
On May.05.2009 at 12:42 PM
Wes’s comment is:
Gotham does not an identity make.
I'm a fan of both Pentagram and Hoefler & Frere-Jones, but this is yet another instance of a typeface being overexposed in identities (I also cried foul on SEGD's identity for the use of DIN, the Gotham of the early-'00s). Because both typefaces "just work well," seeing them used in such consistently undercooked ways is cause for concern.
We've all seen how effective Gotham can be when expertly employed in an identity—a certain 'O' has left an indelible mark on our socio-political consciousness—but here it just appears weak and subservient, not really adding anything to the FWM mark.
I understand the geometric alphabet is the proprietary alphabet for this identity, but to use a similar example, the identity Pentagram designed for MAD (also a three-letter acronym using a proprietary geometric alphabet) has Futura as a secondary typeface to complement the geometry of the alphabet. The result is a striking, well-balanced identity that differentiates itself from hundreds of other identities that use Futura because it does so in a smart, reasoned way.
Gotham was slapped onto this identity on its way out the door, and it pains me to see a potentially memorable mark get thrown onto the mile-high heap of mistaken identities.
On May.05.2009 at 12:54 PM
Anonymous’s comment is:
I do really like this. Like others have said though the colors are a little questionable. I would have like to hear their rationale.
On May.05.2009 at 01:09 PM
mm’s comment is:
Those aren't the colors I would have chosen using my Pacific Northwest biased color pallet.
However, if I was building an identity based off of the bright colors of Mexico City architecture, then those are exactly the colors I would have chosen.
Bright colors that look good in the bright sun. Loud colors that will still hold some character after the sun has done it's best to fade them out.
Are they the right colors for Fort Worth? Should their color scheme be influenced by the more muted tastes of the cloud dwelling countrymen to the North? Or will it work to take on the loud energy of the colors of your neighbors to the South? I don't know, never been there.
Given that the renovation is being done by a Mexico City architecture firm, if I were designing the logo, I might just go with the loud colors.
On May.05.2009 at 02:13 PM
mm’s comment is:
Eeep, sorry about the image size, the height/width tags get stripped off the html. :[
On May.05.2009 at 02:15 PM
Josh B’s comment is:
Overall, I like this identity. Unfortunately it follows closely on the heels of Michael Bierut's identity for MAD, which has a similar geometric feel. But taken on it's own, it's quite elegant yet still fun.
My biggest gripe is that the letter forms don't appear to be based on a grid. The letters were obviously not built on a 5x5 matrix or anything like that. Which is why the G stands out so badly, because the "rules" of construction were too loose. I'd also call out the V, and probably the Z for missing the mark too. That said the Q is amazingly effective.
It's easy to pick on the "applications" on Pentagram's website. Most of them reek of intern work, so let's just ignore most of it. However, I do want to pick on the grid-of-squares pattern as applied to the dinosaur and other silhouettes... it's just boring, and lacks distinctiveness. The pattern of the logo shapes as outlines that's on the van is much better.
On May.05.2009 at 02:16 PM
Gordon P. Hemsley’s comment is:
No comment on the fact that they dropped "of" from their logo?
On May.05.2009 at 02:31 PM
Mark’s comment is:
It's a big improvement at least I can tell What I'm looking at now.
The old logo is vague, I can't tell WTF I'm looking at when I see it, a belt? an atom with some abstract form? what? It drives me crazy.
I'm glad it's gone.
On May.05.2009 at 04:12 PM
Jamie P.’s comment is:
This immediately reminded me of Ellen Lupton's header for her website.
On May.05.2009 at 04:26 PM
Proverbial Thought’s comment is:
I love it. The only exception I have is the fact that the U and V ar indistinguishable from one another. I would have used 3 squares then 1 to create the illusion of angled lines on the V; but other than that I think this is a REAL winner!!!
On May.05.2009 at 05:08 PM
Ryan’s comment is:
Do a search on Pentagram's site for 'Gotham'. I think it's being overused. I like this logo, but the type underneath seems like an afterthought.
On May.05.2009 at 05:29 PM
Ty’s comment is:
Was anyone else, upon seeing the blocky alphabet, instantly reminded of Tetris? especially the Q, T, and U.
And seriously, they couldn't do more to differentiate the U and V?
On May.05.2009 at 11:42 PM
PGMullen’s comment is:
Here's another museum logo based on architecture. The Cleveland Museum of Art's original 1916 building plus Marcel Breur's 1971 addition, plus Trajan galore. No attempt to turn it into an alphabet, yet.
Mia Parparita’s comment is:
Looks a little hokey to me.
Sorry, makes me cringe.
On May.06.2009 at 12:44 AM
eMGie’s comment is:
I like it.
Really good job.
On May.06.2009 at 02:21 AM
Anonymous’s comment is:
THAT is awesome.
Fish’s comment is:
I gotta say, I love the pictures of the kids in the doofy hats the best. That little boy is gettin his pimp moon-walk on. LOL! Cannot believe Pentagram did that fantastically horrible Photoshop job. Whoever did that must have been laughing the entire time they were executing it.
That said, love the new identity, shapes, type as usual from Pentagrams work. Though I am not a fan of the colors like everyone else, the overall execution feels right.
On May.06.2009 at 09:15 AM
Von K’s comment is:
I like this identity, but the hat photo was just begging for it.
Cam’s comment is:
Love or hate the new one, that old logo is hilarious...
On May.06.2009 at 10:15 AM
Anonymous’s comment is:
"the overall execution feels right."
Err, not for me.
Spaced out all caps Gotham, and Latinesque pixel/block letters just don't match.
It all feels uncomfortable to me.
Those hats! OMG!
On May.06.2009 at 12:18 PM
Matt’s comment is:
hahah@von K. that's awesome
On May.06.2009 at 12:19 PM
Derrick Schultz’s comment is:
I think the color palette is not as strong as it could be. Sampling colors from the museum's architecture and then building a palette from that would be less arbitrary, stronger, more beautiful, etc., etc.
That's exactly what they did. The outside may be all brick, but I doubt that Legorretta won't throw his signature colors in somewhere inside the building.
Those of us in LA will be very familiar with Legorreta's color choices. See Pershing Square:
mario's pant’s comment is:
Regardless of the pueblo-influenced glyphlike design language, it reminds me waaaay too much of the Memphis movement of the 1980s. Doesn't help that the colors are straight out of Miami Vice.
Well, it's pop culture and although Avid tried the same color treatments in their branding back in the late '90s and failed, it's possible that the market (moms, pops and kids) will find this friendly and fun.
On May.06.2009 at 03:40 PM
Jesús Pr’s comment is:
The color palett its not only for Mexico refered designs, however this its like an logo from tutto pelle furniture store in Mexico.
raymond’s comment is:
absolutely awful. while i appreciate the attempt at using the grid to create a 'new' typeface, this elementary exercise falls flat of what pentagram is supposed to stand for. i am in agreement... why does pentagram get this work when there are so many equally inventive firms out there pushing out beautiful and innovative work? i suppose it's the same reason why everyone drinks coca-cola... not because it's delicious, but because they know it.
On May.08.2009 at 09:10 AM
raymond’s comment is:
one last thought: scrolling through pentagram's site, i see a lot of great design... a lot of winners... and their explanation for the fwm design... while it makes sense on paper... i still don't think it has legs
On May.08.2009 at 09:16 AM
Taylor Burkum’s comment is:
I like the old color pallet, but the new logo is much cleaner and alot more attractive than an atomic spur. Sorry Texas. I messed with you.
On May.11.2009 at 10:36 PM
alex’s comment is:
I think most things have been covered already but I do disagree with whomever said that the alphabet is the best thing regarding the design. I actually think its the least developed.
Unlike the letters that make up the logo "F",W" and "M", the rest is currently inconsistent which is okay, as long as it gets some attention. It has nice potential as a set and should be revisited.
What I do like about the "F","W" and "M" is how balanced each letterform is in regards to positive and negative space. Each has equal amounts of positive and negative space. I also think the colors work, not so much in their selection (because I don't believe the color selections are arbitrary) but in their progression. The positive color from the previous letter becomes the negative space in the next.
The font choice is fine although it feels like the most arbritrary element of the design. I'm sure it can be argued that the architectural integrity of the block letterforms are nicely contrasted with a typeface with a lot of personality. But whatever.
As a whole, it's nice. I would like to see the mug pushed further. Currently, the handle makes up the "F". I'm not sure if it's better as is, or if it would be better served having the handle in a more traditional spot on one side, with the other 3 sides containing the acronym letters.
On May.14.2009 at 11:39 AM
Jerome’s comment is:
Pentagram produced this? If a logo is intended to be a progression of brand, then consider this one dead on arrival.
Everything about it feels dated and amateurish. I'm all for logos that challenge us to grow but when the first thing you relate to when seeing this logo are musky arcade dungeons filled with mulleted teens wearing tight fitting clothes eating pizza and drinking Coke, you may want to rethink your logo.
On May.25.2009 at 11:02 AM
Kristine’s comment is:
I really love this! Although, I'm not sure if it fits entirely speaking to a science and history museum.
On May.25.2009 at 08:32 PM
Panasit’s comment is:
It certainly is a beautiful logo. But basing it on the shape of the building is kind of strange to me when they could have played with science and history. But I guess for the people who are familiar with the place it will be okay.
For someone who has never been there because they live in other states, they may look at it and wonder what the heck it has to do with science and history.
On May.27.2009 at 03:02 AM
Comments in Brand New, V1.0 have been closed.
