Truer words were never spoken. Great post by Seth Godin.

Reality TV on the Internet

Although I think the site is boring and could use more interactivity, it's an interesting concept and innovative. More and more, TV is coming online. In this case, Brawny has spent so much attention on producing the video segments, which are done pretty well, interactivity the web offers is not capitalized upon. The vote contest is minimal. RSS, why? Obligatory sign up and a mega map download round out the site. They could have done several interactive things:

• Stop the video and ask the viewer to participate. Real TV is dying to do this.
• “Your Ideal Brawny Man” contest - have people create a profile to win something.
• Some sort of game like – an ideal Brawny man would, a, b or c…
• Maybe something to advertise the strength or absorption of the towel – How many pine cones will a wet towel hold up? How many cans of beer will a roll soak up?

The cast of characters is cliché and presentation campy, no pun intended. The meterosexual Brawny Man is kind of creeping me out, but at the same time reminds me of Jeff Probst.

Cutting edge technology, Flash steaming video and big bandwidth, is providing the Internet viewer bigger and better experiences each day and this site pushes that envelope regardless of its advertising and brand building effectiveness.

I understand you’d like to make some changes to the design of your web site. It's certainly your prerogative to do so, but please allow me to provide some rationale and justification for the design and recommend the best way to make changes.

While planning the design, specific requirements were determined that dictated several aspects of the design: style, structure, features, and ease of maintenance to name a few. During the creative process these requirements were integrated into the design along with current designs trends, compatibility with existing collateral, and coexistence with the company logo. The designer and creative team also infused their vision and expert judgement into the design and the results are the culmination of several iterations of this process.

Once completed, a design has balance between individual elements and overall integrity. Any changes to these elements should be done to maintain this balance and integrity. The best way this is achieved is by using, through repetition and variation, the graphical lexicon already available from the design: colors, type choices, textures, lines, shapes and effects. Introduction of any new elements into this lexicon can easily upset the balance and weaken the integrity of the design.

You like the design, or at least you say you do. We like the design. It represents your company well in the market place. It stands up against current trends and styles and it meets the requirements. Before changing anything, we ask to go through the same process as initially done, letting those you trusted to create the site workout a solution that addresses the need for a change. Don’t just go with someone’s suggestions even though they may seem valid at first and the person is respected. Before making changes, the benefits of the changes should be fully considered and weighed against the potential impact and resulting expense.

I’ve never claimed the title of web designer. I find good designers to work with on projects, but I’m very slowly stepping into the realm of web design. Sure, I’ve designed a few sites, am pretty good with Photoshop, have an art degree, a professional photography career and worked with some very talented people, but that isn’t the same as being a designer, although it hasn’t hurt. As part of my continuing education in design, I study typefaces; good designers use type well and type is tough – so many choices – so much bad use.

Type is so important. It is the thing people stare at most when looking at a web page and the web is not type friendly. The low, screen resolution destroys subtlety in rastorized type and the limited variety of system fonts for HTML text can be boring. However, new web design trends have focused more on typography. Mixing serif and sans-serif styles in unique ways, oversized headline type, pixel fonts and CSS techniques haven given the web new flavor and improved readability.

I have found several notable font resources in my quest to learn more about type. Here are a few favorites:

http://www.fontlover.com/ - portal

http://www.fontscape.com/ - portal

http://store.adobe.com/type/index.html - nice histories for each face

http://www.emigre.com/ - cool type foundry

http://www.p22.com/ - artistic fonts

http://www.microsoft.com/typography/default.mspx - yes, Microsoft. They have a nice resource list and have been doing quite a bit of R & D into new screen type faces.

I found this story quite interesting irritating. After being in the business of creating visual communication for over 15 years, I have never been a proponent of producing spec work.

The problem here is larger than spec work; it’s ethics -- as the post points out with its reference to the AIGA. Spec work, low-balling, plagiarism, bait and switch, work for hire, and flat-out lying are all related in my book and shouldn’t be done. They ruin the playing field and cheapen the services that are so difficult to keep priced appropriately.

The elimination of these practices has to come from the top, just as any example is set and the little guy always pays the price for such business practices.

It’s simple. Get paid for your work. Do your best job. Be respected. Everyone wins.

Unfortunately, It's not a utopia and you gotta do what you gotta do, but be prepared for the consequences of your actions and don't bitch when your working for half of what is appropriate.

I haven't found many sites about designing. Sure there's hundreds of sites that showcase work and have information on the act of producing the work or the author's experience, but not many that have information on designing from a academic or intellectual perspective.

Design Observer is just that

Nice post about the rash of similarly designed standards compliant sites from Some Random Dude.

I couldn't have said it better.

There’s a new breed of site that fulfills most of what the web has to offer, at least today’s web.  They have video and sound, collect user information, display data based on run-time events and provide a rich experience. We have the folks at Macromedia Adobe to thank. But it’s not just the technology. It’s applying good old fashion advertising creativity to the “new” medium that makes it work: clever concept development, good writing, slick art direction, all powered by technology - a multi-dimensional effort.

Prime examples: www.thebar.com, www.shaveeverywhere.com

One of my biggest gripes about many web projects is they are done too cheaply to be successful. Maybe not cheap on funds, but cheap on resources. The web guy can't do it all. Good work requires the proper people with the proper skills doing what they do best. Everyone has their role in a team effort.

I'm a student of advertising and design and like to keep up on trends, movers & shakers and other noteworthy goings on. I've recently been seeing Stephen Sagmeister's name here and there so I thought I'd learn more about his work.

I don't get it. Why is this guy so acclaimed? After reading a few interviews and some facts about his work and business, he seems to have an intellegent approach to his craft, but his work is not that provacative or compelling. His scribled text isn't really visually appealing and he isn't the first designer to do that. Although having text scratched into one's skins does show passion. Is it the fact his work is more personal expression than good design? Does he manage to bridge the gap between art and commercial communication?

Since 95%+ web users are viewing sites using PCs and MS IE, wouldn’t it make sense to design web graphics on the same type of computer with similar monitor color temperature, resolution, aspect ratio, browser and gamma? Designers I work with often do not like how their work looks on PCs when compared to Macs. Web sites meant for public consumption should be designed for PC display. The easiest way to make things look good on a PC is to design on a PC. If you love your Mac, you can create designs that view well on a PC, but there must be some compensation and adjustment.

Gamma

Pertaining to computers and the web, gamma is the tonal curve that a monitor displays: shadow detail, highlight detail, contrast and color temperature. Default gamma for a Mac is 1.8 while a PC’s default gamma is 2.2, much more contrast. You can change a Mac’s gamma to 2.2, but it just doesn’t seem the same. Shadow detail viewable on a Mac is often lost on a PC, same for highlights.

Brightness

PC monitors are generally brighter and flat panel monitors are even harsher. When creating graphics on a Mac the brightness needs to be adjusted.

Color

PCs are much colder, or bluer by default. Be cautious about skin tones, and earth tones such as olive, taupe, dark red, and ochre.

Scale

Since Mac went to the wonderful wide screen OS X monitors, some designers have had difficulty with scale. Sure it’s easy to say my layout is 750 pixels wide, but on that huge screen designers new to that environment can design elements larger than they expect them to look. Mac monitors have a default resolution that does not match the conventional 800x600 or 1024x768 sizes of most users’ screens. It is important to check size on a PC. Type and detail in graphics may be difficult to read, or not be in balance with HTML type sizes.

Type Anti-aliasing

Mac’s display web type anti-aliased, not bitmapped. Some new PCs also have this option as a default setting. Most users do not view sites this way. It is important to see how type looks bitmapped. It affects the clarity and size of the characters and general copy volume. If type is supposed to be bitmapped make sure it is checked on a PC to see if it has the desired appearance.

Fine Tuning Color

Color management on the web is a difficult battle. There are huge variations between monitors, settings, and color profiles on user’s computers. Even different browsers can render colors differently.

The best approach is simply to test on various computers. What may look good on your screen may not on others. Remember, acceptable is not perfect; there has to be some compromise. Create images that look the best for the widest number of users. Techniques that work with print color management are not standardized for the web.

I’ve owned and used both Macs and PCs. I love the Mac brand. The machines look great. The GUI is slick. Steve Jobs is cool. Their stock price is way up. Why do I still like PCs better? I have designer friends that will fight over dissing a Mac. I ask them, “Have you ever used a PC long enough to be comfortable with one?” “No”, they reply. Such loyalty. If it weren’t for font availability and compatibility, and this passionate loyalty, Macs would not exist today. Since the Intel PIII processor, PCs do graphics as just well. 

I'll admit Microsoft does make some really clunky GUIs for some of their software. Ever use PowerPoint, or for heaven's sake Visio?

Now everybody is excited that Macs can run Windows. Why is that such good news if the Mac OS is superior to Windows as Macs pundits tout? Could it be that deep down Macs lovers are tired of being the minority?

Can people finally have their cake and eat it too? Imagine a cool guy at Starbucks on his Mac laptop wearing his headphones. The stereotype is creative, iTunes loving, individualist. Further investigation reveals he is running Windows and listening to some right-wing podcast while doing his taxes. What is happening?

My prediction is the Macs OS will become another OS one can run on their Dell. Open Type fonts will take over. Steve Jobs has a coronary and people will be sitting around remembering the good old days when they lost four hours of beautiful design work because their Mac crashed again.

It’s tax time. I think I’ll buy a Mac laptop and a cappuccino, but only if I get one on sale.

Feast your eyes on these selected works.

http://awards.fitc.ca/pc/

On Wednesday, March 22, 2006 I posted comments on the closing of Arnold Worldwide in St. Louis and the state of the ad market here.

In today's St. Louis Post-Dispatch newspaper there is an article about the changing industry. I wanted to bring the article up because it supports some of my observations.

It also has some vague information on Kupper Parker Communications morphing into a new entity. Too bad Kupper isn't as good at producing good ad work as he is at corporate shananigans.

I failed to mention in my post that two large ad firms are recent new comers, J. Walter Thompson and VSA Partners, but I'm not sure how much creative is actually produced here.

Is TOKY That Good?

Yes, TOKY is that good. The best graphic and branding shop in STL.

"TOKY took home 19 out of 79 professional awards in the 11th annual AIGA Awards, more than any other firm." - from TOKY.com

What is important to me is they are good at web - way better at web than most shops. TOKY has risen from the ashes of Influence, which at one time was the leading web shop in town, and has eclipsed its success.

How?

1. Eric Thoelke, the leader, and great designer in his own right has built a team by thinking bigger than St. Louis. Most of his talented resources are from out of town.
2. They measure their work on a global scale.
3. Every project is executed as it if were a dream job. They make them dream jobs.
4. Style with substance that meets qualitative and quantitative measure.

Kudos to Kuhlmann-Leavitt, Inc. for also creating kick-ass design, but I don't think they do web as well as print. Too bad.

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

It has always perplexed me to look at what is possible to bring to the marketplace compared to what is accepted. So much work sucks and so much more is so bland it has no meaning. Is it the fault of the creator or the buyer, perhaps both. On one hand the creator, because more often than not the person paying for it doesn't know better. On the other, companies should have more savvy buyers. It's a complex issue for which I have no answer other than don't do work you are not 100% proud of and put 100% effort into.

A Call to Arms

Let's use the caliber of work produced by these 2 firms as inspiration to help us do better work. Be proactive and take the expert approach to get good creative out of the conference room and into the public domain. Teach your clients what is good and what should be.

St. Louis is loosing ground in the world of creative communications. Agencies are closing. Talent is leaving. Clients are going out of town for work. No one can stop this cycle except the people doing the work. Do your part to do your best.

Arnold Wordwide announced it is closing its St. Louis office this year -- another nail in the advertising coffin for St. Louis. When I first began in the industry in 1987 we had several large agencies that produced work here for large clients: BHN, TBWA, DMB&B. Luckily, we still have two players in sales promotion, Zipatoni and Momentum, that are owned by big corporations and have national accounts, but that’s about it. Oh, and Fleishman Hilliard, but that’s not advertising.

Why has St. Louis continued to decline as an advertising hub for the Midwest?

Globalization? It allows companies to work wherever they want.

Chicago? It is a CITY with talent and resources for which St. Louis cannot compete.

Specialization? The typical agency has evolved into small agile firms that provide a narrow range or services and have relationships with only a few clients. The best work comes from these companies founded by big agencies refugees.

Few Good Clients? St. Louis has lost a few big clients. SBC moved to Texas, but still brings enough work to support Rogers Townsend agency (old DMB&B people). PET moved. No retail type of business here, except AB, or at least no one with sizable budgets and good taste. St. Louis is an industrial town with transportation and manufacturing at its core. The old money has tight purses and does not use innovative advertising.

No Talent? Inability to keep talented creative resources and the ability to attract them leaves St. Louis a bit dry. Who is to blame for that?

It’s a shame. We DO have a lot to offer. I know a lot of talented people, but they are not producing work up to their ability. If only there was an answer.

So come on clients. Get your head out of the sand. Listen to the ideas presented to you daily and don’t make your next brochure like the last one. Don’t make your web site so your wife likes it. Do something interesting. Remember, you don’t have to understand and like It for It to be effective. Help the St. Louis advertising community pull its foot from the grave.

Props to the people actually getting good work out the door: TOKY, Oliver Kuhlman, the little boutiques and the younger talent.