Filed under: design (and branding) | Tags: cincinnati, cincinnati logo, maple knoll village
Today Cincinnati.com reported on the city of Cincinnati unveiling their new logo.
Upon seeing it I had 2 thoughts. First, that it was nice to see a good logo developed for a city that seems so stuck in the 1970s… at least the local Baby Boomers are. This city deserves better – deserves something that reflects how rich it is in diversity of arts, entertainment, food, and people. It really is a great city to live in.
My second thought, however, was… I know I’ve seen that before! And it appears I was slightly wrong. The logo I thought of isn’t an exact match (I know I can expect as much from LPK), but it’s… how should I put it… inspired. Heavily inspired.
Take a look:
The reason I knew I’d seen this logo is because I used to pass by Maple Knoll Village every day to and from work on Rt. 4 in Springdale (or is it Glendale… one of the -dales). It’s in an area with several retirement / assisted living villages, and I have always found it odd how clustered they are put together. It was and still does seem rather industrial.
Anyway, I’m not saying that LPK stole the Maple Knoll Village logo, or even knew about it. I just thought it was a bit odd that the City of Cincinnati paid $75k for a logo that looks really similar to another logo within a few miles of the City limits. I still think the new Cincinnati logo is good…just wish it wasn’t soooo close to Maple Knoll’s.
EDIT/UPDATE: For what it’s worth, I noted this because I am a graphic designer, and these things stand out to me 
See some of my business’ work here, or my older work here.
5 Comments so far
Leave a comment
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
I think I’m more bothered that they paid $75K for it… no wonder we’re broke.
Comment by Kristen June 12, 2009 @ 6:19 amThe Maple Knoll Logo isn’t just the Maple Knoll logo BTW. It comes from their parents company LifeSphere: http://www.lifesphere.org/lsw/Default.aspx?TabId=3, so I guess it is a lot of places across town.
Glad you also like the logo though. If you read message boards, that isn’t the popular opinion.
Comment by Patricia June 12, 2009 @ 11:09 amI really don’t like the logo at all – I agree this city needs some polishing of it’s image and diversity – but when I see the logo I think of a computer store . . . and now Maple Knoll Village. And when we can’t fund our schools, etc. should the city be paying 75K for this?
Comment by Candace Silvasy June 12, 2009 @ 12:47 pmoops, I meant to say “recognition of our diverse culture”
Comment by Candace Silvasy June 12, 2009 @ 12:48 pmhead’s up – Macy’s paid for the logo. no public dollars were spent. as a designer and business owner, i would have liked to get that $75k on a brand identity project!
but i think the reporter knew EXACTLY what s/he was doing when listing how much money the logo cost. if it were public money, i’d understand – need to be responsible in knowing where our money is going. but when it’s private enterprise, they should get to spend money they earn in whatever way they want to without Joe Public’s $0.02….IMHO.
Comment by danielredbeard June 12, 2009 @ 12:50 pm