DesignYak

Why designers hate 12pt Arial

I went with work to a lecture on Thursday, given by typographer Bruno Maag from Dalton Maag. It was a really interesting talk, and we loved his passion for type and form. During the talk an interesting topic came up surrounding Arial and Helvetica. There's a perception that Arial is easy to read, and is often the type of choice for clients, demanding their work should be produced in 12pt Arial to optimise readability, especially for people who are visually impaired. I've always known this to be tosh, and it was good to hear world renowned typographer Bruno Maag back this up. 

This article is actually pointless as I'm guessing most will agree, so it's preaching to the converted. But as we all know, both Arial and Helvetica is regimentally designed. It's very consistent. Visually impaired people can often get confused when reading large amounts of Arial and Helvetica. For example, the letters e, o and c. The shapes are practically the same, due to the open counters being very 'clawed' in. The letters r and n also confuse as many start to join them to become a m.  

 

I don't think designers generally like using Arial, but I do get annoyed when clients (mostly councils, government organisations etc...) try to enforce this typeface, saying it helps visually impaired people when it really doesn't. Rant over.

Design for Life

BBC's Design for Life is nearing the end of it's first series. Will it return for a second one though? I've found the program entertaining, but does it shine the best light on British design? No. I think everyone on the program is shocked and awkward. The students seem shocked at Starck's high expectations, and Starck seems shocked at the students inabilities to meet them.

Starck set out with the ambition of invigorating British design, creating a new style, but from early on he has seemed resigned to failure. It's a shame, because I think this show could really work. Ben Terrett said on his blog 'designing does not lend itself to exciting TV,' but I think it could. 

For a start the people on the show have to improve. Or at least seem to want to be there. I know it's edited, but they seem to moan a lot about the tasks they've been given, and it's blocked their ability to do the job. They also moan about the time given to complete tasks, which supports what I've said previously about university projects being too long and makes students relax too much. It doesn't really simulate reality.

I'd be surprised if Starck returned for another series, but you never know. Who'd be up for a graphic design version?

Learn Graphic Design – FAST!

On my way to work this morning, reading the Metro and I noticed this ad from Shillington College, entitled Learn Graphic Design Fast. It's a course you can take, 3 months full-time or 1 year part-time, and says you come out of the course with a professional portfolio and in-depth knowledge of design programs (no prior experience necessary). 

It also claims that students are getting 'top design jobs' as a result of the course. Is this how our industry is now perceived? A profession where you can be qualified in three months? 

Would anyone employ someone who had this qualification? Or am I judging, someone could as a result have a great portfolio, who cares what qualification they have? I thought there was very few jobs kicking about at the moment, is this deluding people into thinking there are opportunities that aren't really there? 

Opinions please...

Would you create a new brand for a high-strength beer?

Ethics is important in design. Would you create a brand for a new high-strength beer? Would you just take the money and run? Or would you feel guilty every time you saw a drunk teenager or tramp clutching one of your cans? These are important things for designers to think about.

*Mark Rogerson has created the branding for new high-strength Sri Lankan beer Grand Blonde. (not yet available in the UK)    

Is there a need for design agencies to have a blog?

Interesting article on Design Week's website...

Consultancies should invest time in launching blogs, rather than creating a quick-fix effort, says Christian Barnett, planning director of Coley Porter Bell.

Writing in the forthcoming issue of Design Week, Barnett, who recently launched CPB’s Making Brands Beautiful blog, says consultancies should allow a couple of months for the process, in order to fully prepare and get everyone on board.

He says the most important factor is to work out the purpose of the blog, adding, ‘Many blogs fail because they are rudderless, leading to a never-ending series of “What we/I did today” posts.’
Barnett also advises taking time to find compelling content and finding the consultancy’s ‘natural bloggers’ to ‘lead the way’ in postings.

I'd take this article one stage further and ask is there a need for design agencies to have blogs? I think it can work and be useful. It's good for graduates who want to research and get to know agencies. But I think the agency itself has to ask itself what's the purpose of the blog, is it just a selling tool? 

What annoys me about design agency blogs is that some are hardly ever updated. I think if you've got a blog on your site then use it, if you don't use it, what's the point in having it?

As a blogger myself, I'm free to say what I like on here, you can agree or disagree with what I say, but can a design agency blog give an opinion? Is this why a lot of agency blogs just end up being “What we/I did today” posts? – Because this is safer and won't alienate clients/potential clients? 

Do you know of any successful/unsuccessful design agency blogs?

Is university culture dead?

I visited my girlfriend's sister's art foundation exhibition in Bristol last weekend, and it was a great show. Lots of exciting work and it got me thinking about my foundation year. I loved art foundation as did everyone on my course, art and design at school can be a bit restrictive at times, but art foundation allows you break free and have a good time whilst creating a massive amount of work. I think there is an expectation for art foundation students to attend class all day everyday, it bridges the gap between school and university. I think this creates a good working culture and as a result, a lot of good work. I never found this to be the case though for most of my time at university. Try as the tutors did to get people in to work, this never happened, and not much of a working culture ever developed. In my opinion, this impacts on the quality of work produced. I just wonder if this is a nationwide trend in art & design courses. I talk to people higher than myself in the industry and they say they worked really hard and attended university all day everyday. I think the impact of the personal computer has something to do with this, students find it convenient to come in, pick up their brief and go straight home. I think the sense of privilege and opportunity is missing in some students who attend university.

We had someone in for work experience recently, and set them a brief that we had worked on and they asked if they could go home to work on it. I craved for a working culture at university, and there was many a time I'd be at uni on my own. If any art foundation students happen to read this, eagerly waiting to go away to uni, remember you art foundation, by all means have a great time, that's what your there to do, but also remember that your time in university is an opportunity to better yourself both personally and professionally, a unique time that can really pay off. The phrase has never lost it's impact, work hard, play hard.