decent

http://www.vulture.com/2016/02/metropolitan-museums-new-logo-the-met.html

This article is pretty bad. I don't understand people's obsession with "The" needing to be half the size (or significantly smaller) than "Met". I think there is a wonky balance happening between the two words but I would think that had more to do with the line width than the size of the words.

>>257113

Sucks Egyptian dick. Really bad. Did the CEO of Yahoo cobble that together in her spare time?

So is it good or not?

>>257113
I like it, all my colleagues hate it to death though
I think "THE" should be aligned optically because the T space on the left is bretty bad

>>257136
>This article is pretty bad. I don't understand people's obsession with "The" needing to be half the size (or significantly smaller) than "Met".

"The" isn't a major part of their identity. It tells you nothing about who or what they are, and by itself has literally zero meaning. Unless they're trying to position themselves as THE one, singular, and only entity on earth named "Metropolitan" it's a retarded decision.

Comparing this to the older one, I think the new one is way clearer to anyone who isn't familiar.

There's no way a tourist who's never seen the met logo would associate the old one.

I agree with >>257210 tho

>>257213
It's the only one with branding that specially names itself "The Met" that I know of so yeah that makes sense to me. It's playing off the existing nickname and if the "the" was smaller you wouldn't have the same effect (because you refer to it as "The Met" more than just "Met").