<p>I think the new shield is, frankly, sloppy and unpolished. The black outline of the old shield lent it a sense of completeness and refinement. It completed the design and set it off from the background, establishing it as an independent-standing symbol. The new one not only looks like it was drawn in Windows paint, but isn’t set off well. At least on the website, it looks out of place and crude. The typeface seems fine, though.</p>
<p>At any rate, I don’t see the purpose of changing Princeton’s “graphic identity”. The prior one looked dignified and appealing; changing it simply for the sake of “modernity” or looking new is a rather silly rationale. It sounds like something a marketing consultant would say: bring in something new, because you’re paying me to find something to do, and telling you to stick with the old design isn’t going to make me more money.</p>
<p>I liked the scroll under the old shield. Under it all, it looks like it is Princeton trying to be more politically correct. I think this issue really comes down to the scroll under the old emblem saying, “Under God She Prospers” in Latin more than anything else.</p>
<p>FWIW, yale went through a similar re-design process a couple years ago, using the very same type designer. i appreciate princeton’s effort to standardize its branding, but like GR, i feel that the new signature just doesn’t work in its place on the homepage, as that space was initially laid out for a much larger logo. i also sympathize with GR on the change for change’s sake idea. princeton has not only changed its “signature” in recent years, but also its athletics graphics and (also in the last couple weeks) its mascot costume.</p>
![http://www.justifiedbelief.com/personal/princetonlogo.png]View](http://www.justifiedbelief.com/personal/princetonlogo.png%5DView){kind=link}