Unveiling the New Grand Central Terminal Logo
The historic global landmark in Midtown Manhattan of transportation has changed the way it will be perceived. Earlier this month, Grand Central Terminal revealed their new logo. Their new logo generated some different opinions, especially among the design community in New York. Since February 1913, Grand Central Terminal became one …
The historic global landmark in Midtown Manhattan of transportation has changed the way it will be perceived. Earlier this month, Grand Central Terminal revealed their new logo. Their new logo generated some different opinions, especially among the design community in New York. Since February 1913, Grand Central Terminal became one of the many landmarks of the Big Apple. For years the clock has symbolized the terminal and even became part of the official logo. In this modern day, it’s important to change the look, but sometimes it is not a satisfactory change.
The iconic clock will still be in Grand Central but will no longer will it be on the logo. The emblem of this famous transportation system has had a drastic change and is now represented by a monogram. The creatives in charge of making this happen were New York-based agency, The Watsons. The mission for them was to modernize the logo into something elegant and somehow represent the more than 100 years history of this terminal. The designers of The Watsons looked back into the original architecture mark that has been stamped on the walls of this terminal since 1913. This built-in monogram is repeated five times throughout Grand Central and was somehow applied the first logo of this terminal.
As mentioned earlier, this mark was designed to look modern. The monogram consists of three letters “G,” “C,” and “T” in an engraved font and accompanied with the words “Grand Central” in Sackers Gothic. According to the Grand Central logo statement, there is a spike in the “G” which replicated the shape of the train spike. It is here when you start noticing the malfunction of the emblem.
Personally, I feel that is not supposed to be said when the logo is supposed to be good. Adding extra details just overwhelms the visual identity. I like the approach the design team took, using the architecture as a reference. Yet, somehow that one element threw everything off in this logo. Using the monogram symbol might have already been enough, but adding an icon to the “G” might affects the elegant letter’s shapes. The double rings around the monogram made me feel that this is starting to look a little like the NYC FC logo. Overall the logo seems too tight and needs some air around it.
Overall, I’m not a fan of the final design, but I feel something great could come out of this concept. What do you think?