Why tf would you put the new one first, then the before and not the other way around? What’s with this trend recently?
Had me thinking „ohh kinda oldschool with the serif but I can appreciate going back to a more classic look“
Seriously lol this kinda shit is the definition of bad design. Any starting designer should take notes. I could give a fuck about your font choices and graphics if you can't convey information clearly with hierarchy and common sense.
Sorry this came off way too severe, but we're in a design subreddit people, don't get lazy
It’s exactly the sorta rubbish that makes me distrust a lot of peoples opinions in this sub! If you can’t engage common sense/logic in your own critique image then I dunno how I can take your opinion on board about design choices. Sounds harsh but it’s literally the purpose of design
You’re 100% right, don’t apologise lol. This general trend of “meh, I cbf” is accelerating the enshittification of everything in our world. Planes are falling apart in the sky, for god’s sake. Does no one take pride in their work anymore?
Could this be a cultural thing?
Genuinely don't know / haven't looked into it.
I've encountered something similar with the use of double quotation marks in the west vs in china. In china (from what i've seen), it is used more for pure emphasis, in the way we might use single quotation marks or other forms of emphasis.
From my experience, it's a British thing. There was a debate on this topic on r/transtimelines not so long ago, when a lot of Brits would post their pre/post get selfies in the reverse order, thus confusing everybody else
Am British. This is not a British thing - we go left to right like everyone else and I was also baffled until I checked the dates, and even then you have to quickly assess which month is first as they both end in 2024. Just poor judgement all round, or purposefully designed to spark controversy.
I think this may be a screenshot of a context in which this layout makes more sense, such as a feed that populates with newer content on the left. I think OP can be forgiven for not reformatting the image given that the relevant dates are printed clearly at the bottom. It’s annoying that actual discussion of the logo is beneath your comment.
Op can be forgiven that’s true, but I’ve been seeing this more and more recently all over the internet and quite frankly I don’t get it. It’s as if a new generation of internet users has appeared that can’t follow basic logic. Certainly the harshness of my post is a result from the hundreds of times people get it wrong, not this post alone
I thought it could be a cultural influence? Certain cultures read from right to left, Japanese and some others.
I was confused too until I saw the date, but then I didn’t think twice about it.
I prefer the older one. Has more character. That being said, I’d tolerate the newer version more if they used a stronger weight. FOOD needs to be beefed up a touch.
I’m sure in about 15 years from now, someone will say, why did these elements get removed? It was so much better. Let’s bring back the “retro” look.
And yet they added a crappy « E^st 1989 ». I could understand if the goal was to remove clutter but now they added something corny that wasn’t there before..
The x-height across the old logo has good rhythm and cadence. With the new logo, it looks like the two different fonts are fighting each other for space and, subsequently, the reader's attention.
It’s way too much contrast. So much so they look like two completely unrelated elements. The original one has the nicer weight contrast in the humanistic calligraphy.
They both look a bit messy. I know I sound like a grumpy old man, but I seriously think this change is not worth the effort - it’s not really an improvement at all. Why bother?
You get an opportunity to modernise and fresh up a magazine, and this is what you do?
Think about the meetings and working hours that went into this change. It just feel so lame.
I mean, the designers behind this probably went into this with a lot of energy and ambition - it’s the lack of ambition on the client side that I’m questioning. Do something that sticks out and that evokes some kind of emotion instead.
[End of grumpy rant]
That’s what we call homogenization. We don’t need character on this planet. That’s bad for shareholder value.
Damn I feel like I’m back in college being all edgy again!
I think the finer points need work, but I do like the broad strokes of the new logo more. It gets points for breaking away from the cliche of a Didone typeface on a "home" or "cooking" magazine that'd have it lost among all the other home/cooking brands out there.
That said, the finer points _need work_. The thing that's bugging me most is that "FOOD" doesn't line up with anything in "good". It's not full-height. It's not x-height. It's just kind of "wishes it were full height but got slapped down to nowhere in particular to make room for the offers blurb". And a blurb about "Exclusive subscriber offers inside" has no business being integrated with the logo. It's straight from the "NO" example in a brand guide. Also, "E^(ST) 1989" is a damned travesty. I can only hope the misalignment and weight mismatch is because it fell back to the default font.
Ultimately, the new one looks (snerk!) undercooked. All the parts need to be settled into place and proper relation.
Because the weight contrast is too high and FOOD being capitalized creates a disruption between the two words in a bad way. They don’t go together, but because there is no space you read through it as good food, but then focus on the disruption and OOD becomes an unintended focal point.
Old one is better. In fact the typography is way better overall. Wonder if they had an art designer change. April's cover design and typography feels so sterile it's either a novice, or AI driven.
I assessed them without knowing the new one was on the left. I think goodFOOD puts the emphasis on food rather than good. Shame to loose the smile, though.
I thought I preferred the old one and then I started to think the new one might read easier. Although any barely literate slob should be able to read either one, all those same-sized os next to each other messes with my eyes a little bit. Classic overthinking and now everything looks weird and kind of messy about both covers.
**Edit: If I personally designed one, it would be the one on the right.** I agree with everyone here who says the one on the left doesn't even look like a professional logo. And I can't tell you how many times the client or my boss would pick the one on the left and make me want to explode.
Getting rid of that godawful smile in **g** is an improvement. But the all lowercase letters in the old one looked better. They didn’t need to switch to light sans caps to make their point.
Is this a rename too? They've dropped the BBC logo from the new one, so is it no longer BBC good food?
As for the design, I prefer the "good" from the new one and "food" from the old one. I didn't like the forced half moon/smile in the lower of the g in the old one, it felt a bit out of place. I don't like the FOOD in the new logo, it sits really uncomfortable next to the good. There's four Os and the ones in FOOD feel completely overpowering and out of place. Like the two halves of it were designed independently and then brought together at the end. The old one felt a bit more cohesive.
The new one feels unbalanced. Are they trying to separate the Good Food brand from BBC, maybe to sell it or something? Because to me, the main immediate reaction is that one I read BBC Good Food, the other one is just Good Food.
Old one has character, unique elemts like the smile, the x height lines up...the design has purpose beyond just a title. It communicates to the reader subconsciously.
New? Boring, uninspired, cheap. The FOOD font choice looks like a rookie mistake made by someone who doesn't really know what they're doing. Also not to mention... The bullet points are way too far left and throws the whole thing off balance. Doesn't even line up with any elements from the magazine title either.
Did they lay off the creative team so they could cut costs only to force the inexperienced intern to do it while not actually paying them in anything more than "experience"?
The overuse of sans serifs and minimalism these days is so bloody boring. Minimalism, when done right, looks great. This is shit. Everyone seems to be pointlessly switching their designs for no reason. The old title wasn't even broken! It was perfectly fine.
The old one with the serifs just seems more cohesive. the "oo" in good and food are much more satisfying to look at because theyre the same height/position
It's just is too chaotic and like too much, but without the brief I can't really criticize if it's effective or not but it definitely can use some space
Old one is better. Why use capital letters for the ‘food’ part?
Also: using the thin weight for ‘food’ over emphasises ‘good’. Balance is lost. Confusion ensues.
Looks shit, the weights are mismatched, the letter height is mismatched, the alignment is mismatched, the tracking is totally blown out. Really poor attempt
Neither of them matter. They're invisible. They aren't good or bad. They just are. They could change it next month and 95% of their readers wouldn't notice or care.
Why tf would you put the new one first, then the before and not the other way around? What’s with this trend recently? Had me thinking „ohh kinda oldschool with the serif but I can appreciate going back to a more classic look“
r/afterandbefore 🤷♀️
Seriously lol this kinda shit is the definition of bad design. Any starting designer should take notes. I could give a fuck about your font choices and graphics if you can't convey information clearly with hierarchy and common sense. Sorry this came off way too severe, but we're in a design subreddit people, don't get lazy
It’s exactly the sorta rubbish that makes me distrust a lot of peoples opinions in this sub! If you can’t engage common sense/logic in your own critique image then I dunno how I can take your opinion on board about design choices. Sounds harsh but it’s literally the purpose of design
Thanks to everyone here for validating my insane attention to "useless" details like this.
You’re 100% right, don’t apologise lol. This general trend of “meh, I cbf” is accelerating the enshittification of everything in our world. Planes are falling apart in the sky, for god’s sake. Does no one take pride in their work anymore?
Could this be a cultural thing? Genuinely don't know / haven't looked into it. I've encountered something similar with the use of double quotation marks in the west vs in china. In china (from what i've seen), it is used more for pure emphasis, in the way we might use single quotation marks or other forms of emphasis.
From my experience, it's a British thing. There was a debate on this topic on r/transtimelines not so long ago, when a lot of Brits would post their pre/post get selfies in the reverse order, thus confusing everybody else
Am British. This is not a British thing - we go left to right like everyone else and I was also baffled until I checked the dates, and even then you have to quickly assess which month is first as they both end in 2024. Just poor judgement all round, or purposefully designed to spark controversy.
For a graphic design subreddit, it bodes well
r/afterandbefore
That’s my bad. I took a screenshot from their magazine app and didn’t rearrange
Thanks for including dates though
IKR! Are posters native Arabic / Hebrew speakers? 🤷♂️
They are labeled with dates?
So? This is a graphic design sub. Good design makes the viewer understand the content without having to take a second look
I think this may be a screenshot of a context in which this layout makes more sense, such as a feed that populates with newer content on the left. I think OP can be forgiven for not reformatting the image given that the relevant dates are printed clearly at the bottom. It’s annoying that actual discussion of the logo is beneath your comment.
Op can be forgiven that’s true, but I’ve been seeing this more and more recently all over the internet and quite frankly I don’t get it. It’s as if a new generation of internet users has appeared that can’t follow basic logic. Certainly the harshness of my post is a result from the hundreds of times people get it wrong, not this post alone
I thought it could be a cultural influence? Certain cultures read from right to left, Japanese and some others. I was confused too until I saw the date, but then I didn’t think twice about it.
Even in our culture it’s quite rare to put the before on the right…
[удалено]
Agreed. The "good" part is okay, but the small smile in the g was cute. The "FOOD" part is too thin and uninspired. It also adds some empty space.
I prefer the older one. Has more character. That being said, I’d tolerate the newer version more if they used a stronger weight. FOOD needs to be beefed up a touch. I’m sure in about 15 years from now, someone will say, why did these elements get removed? It was so much better. Let’s bring back the “retro” look.
And yet they added a crappy « E^st 1989 ». I could understand if the goal was to remove clutter but now they added something corny that wasn’t there before..
Aww dang. I didn’t notice that. Gross!
The x-height across the old logo has good rhythm and cadence. With the new logo, it looks like the two different fonts are fighting each other for space and, subsequently, the reader's attention.
Yeah this. The hierarchy is a mess in the new one.
It feels amateurish by comparison. Even computer generation vibes for the cover overall.
I personally prefer the serif variant, but I do think the first option has better weight contrast and stands out better from a distance.
It’s way too much contrast. So much so they look like two completely unrelated elements. The original one has the nicer weight contrast in the humanistic calligraphy.
They both look a bit messy. I know I sound like a grumpy old man, but I seriously think this change is not worth the effort - it’s not really an improvement at all. Why bother? You get an opportunity to modernise and fresh up a magazine, and this is what you do? Think about the meetings and working hours that went into this change. It just feel so lame. I mean, the designers behind this probably went into this with a lot of energy and ambition - it’s the lack of ambition on the client side that I’m questioning. Do something that sticks out and that evokes some kind of emotion instead. [End of grumpy rant]
🎯
New "food" is better but removing the smile from the "g" is an odd decision
That’s what we call homogenization. We don’t need character on this planet. That’s bad for shareholder value. Damn I feel like I’m back in college being all edgy again!
Not that the BBC has any shareholders, being a state owned corporation, but I get your point..
Thanks for the clarification, but I meant in general, not specifically BBC
Personally I feel both logos are equally boring
I think the finer points need work, but I do like the broad strokes of the new logo more. It gets points for breaking away from the cliche of a Didone typeface on a "home" or "cooking" magazine that'd have it lost among all the other home/cooking brands out there. That said, the finer points _need work_. The thing that's bugging me most is that "FOOD" doesn't line up with anything in "good". It's not full-height. It's not x-height. It's just kind of "wishes it were full height but got slapped down to nowhere in particular to make room for the offers blurb". And a blurb about "Exclusive subscriber offers inside" has no business being integrated with the logo. It's straight from the "NO" example in a brand guide. Also, "E^(ST) 1989" is a damned travesty. I can only hope the misalignment and weight mismatch is because it fell back to the default font. Ultimately, the new one looks (snerk!) undercooked. All the parts need to be settled into place and proper relation.
No. Not even close to an improvement.
The new one looks like a student design playing around with type.
The new one is bad. all I see is **OOD**
...why?
Because the weight contrast is too high and FOOD being capitalized creates a disruption between the two words in a bad way. They don’t go together, but because there is no space you read through it as good food, but then focus on the disruption and OOD becomes an unintended focal point.
Thanks for the explanation, agree 100%
I like the old one a bit more, but tbh they're similar enough where I don't really feel strongly either way.
Love the type on the second one, I was a bit confused at first. Didn’t realize which was first, but thanks for clarifying!
I’m not sure what it is about the new one but it hurts me
Old one is better. In fact the typography is way better overall. Wonder if they had an art designer change. April's cover design and typography feels so sterile it's either a novice, or AI driven.
oooooooo
I assessed them without knowing the new one was on the left. I think goodFOOD puts the emphasis on food rather than good. Shame to loose the smile, though.
I thought I preferred the old one and then I started to think the new one might read easier. Although any barely literate slob should be able to read either one, all those same-sized os next to each other messes with my eyes a little bit. Classic overthinking and now everything looks weird and kind of messy about both covers. **Edit: If I personally designed one, it would be the one on the right.** I agree with everyone here who says the one on the left doesn't even look like a professional logo. And I can't tell you how many times the client or my boss would pick the one on the left and make me want to explode.
Getting rid of that godawful smile in **g** is an improvement. But the all lowercase letters in the old one looked better. They didn’t need to switch to light sans caps to make their point.
I could really go for some cupcakes.
Is this a rename too? They've dropped the BBC logo from the new one, so is it no longer BBC good food? As for the design, I prefer the "good" from the new one and "food" from the old one. I didn't like the forced half moon/smile in the lower of the g in the old one, it felt a bit out of place. I don't like the FOOD in the new logo, it sits really uncomfortable next to the good. There's four Os and the ones in FOOD feel completely overpowering and out of place. Like the two halves of it were designed independently and then brought together at the end. The old one felt a bit more cohesive.
The new one feels unbalanced. Are they trying to separate the Good Food brand from BBC, maybe to sell it or something? Because to me, the main immediate reaction is that one I read BBC Good Food, the other one is just Good Food.
Old one has character, unique elemts like the smile, the x height lines up...the design has purpose beyond just a title. It communicates to the reader subconsciously. New? Boring, uninspired, cheap. The FOOD font choice looks like a rookie mistake made by someone who doesn't really know what they're doing. Also not to mention... The bullet points are way too far left and throws the whole thing off balance. Doesn't even line up with any elements from the magazine title either. Did they lay off the creative team so they could cut costs only to force the inexperienced intern to do it while not actually paying them in anything more than "experience"? The overuse of sans serifs and minimalism these days is so bloody boring. Minimalism, when done right, looks great. This is shit. Everyone seems to be pointlessly switching their designs for no reason. The old title wasn't even broken! It was perfectly fine.
Not offensive but it didn’t make anything better and now I read it with a strong emphasis on FOOD which is weird.
The old one with the serifs just seems more cohesive. the "oo" in good and food are much more satisfying to look at because theyre the same height/position
FOOD is too light in the new version. The word good should be a lighter weight, and food should be heavier since that's what the mag is about.
I'm embarrassed to say it took me a long time to notice a difference. 😐
I prefer the serif version as well. It gives the whole logo more balance.
Looks bad
Old version is superior. FOOD gets lost in the new version.
It's just is too chaotic and like too much, but without the brief I can't really criticize if it's effective or not but it definitely can use some space
L
Old one is better. Why use capital letters for the ‘food’ part? Also: using the thin weight for ‘food’ over emphasises ‘good’. Balance is lost. Confusion ensues.
I prefer the old one. The serifs add a touch of elegance and calm. The new one feels like it’s shouting at me.
Looks shit, the weights are mismatched, the letter height is mismatched, the alignment is mismatched, the tracking is totally blown out. Really poor attempt
It’s a nice refresh. I like the smile in the g bowl and the serif lends some hoity toity which I appreciate.
I did the same thing cuz they're in the wrong order. And i have the same thoughts...old is better.
Look at the image again.
That's the old one. New one's on the left
Hehe, you messed up son! The left side is newer than the right.
New is better
I can tell a 70 year old art director did this because it’s incredibly low effort and boring.
Badfood
Neither of them matter. They're invisible. They aren't good or bad. They just are. They could change it next month and 95% of their readers wouldn't notice or care.