Go Blue - Fight for the Night - Beat the Irish

It's been literally two years since I posted the original Go Blue design.  But the group planning the student pep rallies at the University of Michigan came back to me this fall and asked for a new design to reflect the rivalry with Notre Dame, to be lived out in the 2011 season.

The final design is above.  It does the following things:
• keeps within the same traditional feel and historic brand image as the first one
• pays heed to the new stadium renovation
• reflects the rivalry
• features the slogan "Fight for the Night" and the block M
• incorporates architectural details from another building on campus (the Martha Cook residence)
• portrays helmets true to form (the "winged" helmet of Michigan and the "gold dome" of Notre Dame should be recognizable to fans)
• uses fonts that are partly familiar and partly new

Again, I'm pleased to report the group was happy with the result.  And it didn't take me quite as many drafts this time around!

Hope to be back to blogging more soon.

Megan Landfair, Harpist

I'm pleased to announce the launch of my talented friend Megan Landfair's website (designed by yours truly!).

She wanted it to be simple, chic, mostly black and white, clean, and effective.  A place to send potential customers to learn more.

We added a hint of color to make it pop, with the overall message being "you're classy, you're getting married, you need to hire me!"

So if you've got a wedding or special event that calls for a harpist, she's your gal!  Honestly, you couldn't ask for someone more down to earth and accommodating to work with.

http://meganlandfair.com/

Go Blue, Beat OSU

Oddly, I've done a lot more graphics work for U of M since I've left, than when I was in school there. Currently, I'm working on the design for the Go Blue, Beat OSU game t-shirts. The first design was a retro simple look, with a derived image of the Big House (Michigan stadium for you non-wolverines) that aimed to feel bold, intimidating, yet understated, not flashy, reminiscent of the Roman Coliseum. While they liked the retro look, the resounding feedback was that it did not reflect the rivalry enough. Very true. So I went back to the drawing board. Sometimes it takes seeing one design before you can figure out what's missing to make it your ideal design. I coaxed some commentary out of them, and compiled a list of things they wanted the design to accomplish:

• Clearly brings the rivalry to life
• Goes beyond the basic "college sweatshirt" look
• Feels timeless, sophisticated and/or retro
• Incorporates the "block M" prominently
• Can be printed in a monotone color and still look good
• Can effectively translate to other applications, such as a poster

Design 1 and design 2 are above. I think the group is very happy with the second one. The detailing around the edges is an impression of the frieze work from the arch of the law quad, (off of South U. street) that I extracted from a photo. I try to incorporate details like this into my designs that help them more authentically portray what/who they represent.

Fenix de los Ingenios gets a facelift

I've been putting in a lot of hours this week on a website job. I befriended the lovely directors of Fenix de los Ingenios, an early music ensemble out of Bloomington, Indiana, last year when I designed their season brochure and concert posters and postcards. They are ready to take the plunge of updating their old website, and I am delighted to be asked to do the project. Here is the old site: fenixdelosingenios.com. And below is a sneak peak at what the new design will look like. It's not all built yet, but hopefully within our three week timeline, I'll have it up. More to come!

Banners!

I've been helping the University of Michigan Men's Glee Club, for the last few months, with their graphic design and brand image for their 150th year of existence. The most exciting pieces so far are these banners, currently hanging on 18 lamp posts on and around the campus in Ann Arbor, Michigan. I designed them and sent in the final digital drafts, but haven't made it back to see them in person yet. Fortunately, a photo found its way to my inbox! I'm thrilled - I think they look quite good! They'll be up all school year.


(Photo thanks to the Club, I did not take this one.)

very sneaky Starbucks

I thought this was really interesting:
Stealth Starbucks: Seattle-based coffee giant opening neighborhood shops in disguise

One Starbucks location "is being rebranded without visible Starbucks identifiers, as 15th Avenue Coffee and Tea. Two other stores in Starbucks' native Seattle will follow suit, each getting its own name to make it sound more like a neighborhood hangout..."

Generally a reputable brand wants to be identified as themselves - their logo is a mark of the quality their consumers have come to expect from their products. Signaling is important here. This is such a powerful influence, we have trademark law to prevent others from using the all-powerful logo.

So what happens when your logo marks your brand so well it becomes a problem, and what it connotes to consumers isn't desirable anymore? Coffee drinkers apparently want a local joint, not big corporation. Can you keep peddling your product, but under a different brand image - not going to the trouble to reinvent your brand - but just covering it up? Will the consumers suspect (as Steve Johnson expects they will) the truth? And will it cause feelings of betrayal - or a realization for the consumer that the brand might be what he actually wanted? Maybe Starbucks will tell us.

the experience of airlines, before you get anywhere near the airport

I stumbled across this guy, who designs websites, and got so angry with his poor experience on the American Airlines website, he critiqued it, redesigned it, and sent them a letter about it. He's a smart guy - he rightly points out that we're at the point with marketing and technology that a poor website design, that does not provide for easy navigation, usability, and sale of services, is beyond useless, but detrimental to a company; it not only limits revenue possibility, but damages the brand.

As a part of my job at the NCTA, I book airline travel for our contract staff, up to 70 flights for a single event. Airlines prices are way down this season - fewer people are traveling for vacation, fewer companies can afford to have employees travel for business. It's not a good time to be an airline.

Curtis points out that "new, young, and innovative" airlines like JetBlue and Virgin America gain repeat business and thus market share by providing an "excellent customer experience."

What is the excellent customer experience? I might argue that once you're at the check in counter, and especially once you're on the plane, the service is all about the same. All the airlines pass out peanuts, and have equally educated pilots and polite attendants - no real difference there. The airline's only real chance to differentiate themselves is before you're provided the service - when you're making the ticket purchase, that is, when you're on the website. They differentiate themselves by how difficult or easy they make this process, and the emotions they inspire when the traveler is making a reservation. Do they feel calm and confident? Or stressed; bogged down with tedious search functions, nebulous options, and unclear pricing? This experience of booking a ticket may turn a consumer totally on, or totally off, to your brand (exactly as Curtis claimed it did for him). And consumers are both emotional and loyal - once they don't get a good feeling from your brand, or don't connect with it as a part of their identity, they'll quickly develop a disdain for it, and probably tell all their friends to do the same.

Who knew we'd come to a point where the actual product we're paying for is all homogeneous. It's the high or low quality of the free experience we get beforehand that determines which brand we prefer. This isn't always true - quality of actual experience certainly counts...sometimes. But more often, it's all in the packaging; the feeling we get when engaging with the company's image.

Logo heaven at Danziger Projects

I'm working on designing logos for a couple things right now, and in reading for my last post, I looked up the Danziger Projects in New York City. (They're the ones selling Garcia photos that the Obama Hope poster was based on, for $1200.) What they have that is even more interesting, is an exhibition of graphics and art from the Obama campaign, including a draft page of early-on possible logos. I maintain his campaign is one of the most brilliant marketing stunts of recent history. Seeing the preliminary sketches, as a designer, is awesome.

Shepard Fairey and the Obama poster

This flashed me right back to Langvardt's art law class.

Artist Shepard Fairey is the creator of the famous Obama "hope" poster. But the high-contrast, red and blue shadowed images were apparently based on an Associated Press photograph, taken by freelance photographer Mannie Garcia. (Additionally, there still seems to be some contention about who holds the copyright between Garcia and the AP, but we might suppose Garcia took the photo on a work-for-hire basis granting the AP the copyright). The parties sued and counter-sued, and I've google-news searched it and I can't find any results. So the question stands: did Fairey violate copyright law?

Fairey's poster is a derivative work, and only the owner of a copyright maintains the right to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work. Strike, he's out?

Fairey might argue "fair use." Fair use includes use "by reproduction...for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching..., scholarship, or research..." and is not considered copyright violation, meaning you can use someone else's work without permission and without paying them if you're using it for these purposes. Fairey might claim commentary, but this wouldn't be obvious without his explanation. These four factors must also be considered in determining if the use of a work is fair use: (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes (Purpose of the original was to report the news, the purpose of the derivative was to influence a campaign and project an opinionated image of a candidate, giving the derivative some transformative boasting rights; that said, Fairey sold his posters and kept the money); (2) the nature of the copyrighted work (the photograph had been published); (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole (derivative used one of the two significant features of the photograph); and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work (use has definitely INCREASED, not damaged, the market value for the original work to $1,200 apiece for prints).

What do we think?

I might argue an additional consideration is that Fairey's Obama image is not so obviously derived from Garcia's photo, until you put them side by side. Obama is a consistent looking guy, generally lacking any drastic facial expressions - most photos of him look similar. A talented arist could render an image of him that looks seemingly identical to a thousand pictures of him. Garcia himself did not recognize Fairey's image as a derivative of his own. A Reuters photo by Jim Young was so similar, the photo was incorrectly reported as the source of the poster image, for some time. Fairey used only a portion of the original photograph; if the original was a zoom-in on Obama's face, it might be different.

Copyright infringment is qualified by three factors: (1) access to the original work can be proven (Fairey found the pic on google. Check.), (2) there was copying of the distinct expression of the original work, not just the idea, or style, (Maybe...AP/Garcia has a copyright on the composition of the photo, not on Obama's facial features and posture.) and (3) the substantial similarity to the original work is evident – that is, there is enough copying that it could not seem coincidental to an average observer (The buck stops here....) If I looked at Garcia's original photo, and all other Obama photos, and realized as I have that his facial expression is about the same, the copying of the head tilt in Fairey's poster would probably seem coincidental to me. It's not; Fairey did use Garcia's pic. But it took months for anyone to notice, and hours for image searchers to put the two together.

Arts supporters walk a fine line regarding which way we wish copyright law to fall - both sides are worthy of support: 1) you want intellectual property to be protected so artists can make a living from what they create, and have incentive to create, but 2) you don't want it too strict, so other artists can make new art from old art and not stiffle new work.

Illustrators

I've been thinking a lot about design recently, as I've been busy with my graphic work. Here are a couple of my absolute favorite designers' websites.

http://www.invisiblecreature.com

http://hughillustration.com

Digital Graffiti

Now THIS is cool. This entirely white-painted Florida town makes its starkness useful for the Digital Graffiti Festival, the world's first outdoor projection art festival, where new works of art are projected onto the blank walls. The pictures are stunning. Organizers say that design, technology and architecture intertwine to create entirely new art forms. More info here.

Top 40 non-profit websites

It's always fun to see good design, especially in non-profits.
Here is a list of the Top 40 Non-Profit Websites of the year by the DesignM.ag website
http://designm.ag/inspiration/non-profit-websites/
They're worth a look.
The webguys here at Sundance were pleased to make the list.

the girl effect, and new marketing

A guest speaker in our Fund Development class shared this ad campaign with us. I have passed it on ten-fold since then because I think it is so brilliant (and a good cause!).

Watch this:
girleffect.org

There are a few things that make this video so captivating. The music gives it a rhythm and emotional momentum. The design (font, color, movement) is well done; easy to navigate, effective. But I also think it is unusual because it treats the audience as a thinker. You better read fast and keep up. It is respectful in that way; different from the "whiter! brighter! better for you!" commercials from retro days of marketing past that treat you more like a drone to be inundated with preferences. It treats you as a person who is capable of making choices, and invites you to join the group of those who are committed to making some type of change (buzzword of the year). It's more personal, as if it's having a two-way conversation with you as an equal, about a problem you can fix together. This is appealing, as we all like things that make us feel smart and capable.

Others are catching on:

Starbucks and voting

HPV prevention (click on "HPV facts on tv")

Do these ads hold your attention? What is it about them?