National Maritime Museum:
This logo captivated me the first time I saw it. Initially my eyes focused on the wave graphic, unaware of the interruptions to form letters. The “flow” of the logo itself is very smooth and clever. The eye follows the line up and down in a wave, but is able to discern the n, m, and m hidden in such a simple design. I think if the stroke of the path was any thicker or thinner the letters would get lost within the graphic. I also like this logo design because of the white on a blue background, rather than a blue graphic existing in whitespace. With it this way, the graphic emulates the crest of a wave and provides a deeper oceanic connection as compared to the inverted option of blue on a white background. I also commend the designer for forming the breaks between each letter in a diagonal manner. If the division was vertical, I think the graphic would have literally lost it’s flow and subtlety. The only criticism of mine is that the written words “National Maritime Museum” are in an awkward spot. I find the alignment with the above path to be odd. If it were justified to one side or the other or even aligned underneath with the tracking and/or kerning adjusted, I think that would provide even more emphasis on the beautiful, curved line above.
Modern Container:
This particular logo pleases me for many reasons. At first it presents itself as a three-dimensional object, but upon closer inspection one notices the letters “M” and “C.” It reads very well because one sees the “M,” followed by the “C,” but the “C” leads the eye inside the object, making it very dynamic. The font is a very contemporary sans serif, and the narrowness of the lowercase letters provide contrast from the imposing, block letters on the “container.” Therefore, the logo seems balanced in modernity while clearly representing the product. I find the secondary stroke to be unnecessary in the design. I think it distracts from the cleanliness of the lines represented. In some ways the extra boundary reinforces the logo as an object surrounding the text and allows the depth to be more apparent as compared to having the gradient dissipate into the white space, but one single green line closing that edge might have sufficed and provided the same effect.
21C Museum Hotel:
21C Museum Hotel began in Louisville, Kentucky as playful, eccentric hotel with various themed rooms equipped with odd design surprises all over the building. There is a gallery space in the lobby of the hotel, but quirky art in all forms is located everywhere. Because of the kookiness of the museum/hotel itself, I think their logo could’ve been slightly more playful. The “mascot” for a lack of a better term is a minimal penguin, represented in different colors based on the urban location of that 21C branch, and I think this could be translated into the logo design in some aspect. Overall, the logo is extremely contemporary and clean, but I think that doesn’t represent the chain in its entirety. So far, all 3 branches of 21C have occupied a historical downtown building in Louisville, Lexington, and Cincinnati. The logo emulates a very high-class, highly modern design aesthetic that are less apparent in the actual decoration and art within these buildings. The concept of 21C is modern and forward-thinking, but also extremely playful and I find the branding does not quite match the mood of a 21C museum hotel. Design balance and alignment of the logo itself I think is overall pleasing. I appreciate that the “C” is mirrored in the “2” and that the Museum Hotels text is justified evenly at the bottom. It is also graphic while being slightly abstract in the re-design of the number “2.” Overall my critique of this logo only comes from the adequate representation of this phenomenal arts space.