Archive for the ‘graphic design’ Category

OLYMPIC BID 2016: TOKYO

Wednesday, September 30th, 2009

With just a couple days left before the International Olympic Committee names a host for the 2016 Summer Olympics, I thought it’d be interesting to check out the proposals from each of the four remaining contenders — Chicago, Madrid, Tokyo, and Rio de Janeiro. Today: Tokyo. Previous: Chicago, Madrid, Rio.

Designed by Kenji Ekuan of GK Design Group, Tokyo’s Olympic bid logo uses a traditional Japanese knot called a masubi to tie the five Olympic colors together in unity (slogan: “Uniting our worlds”).  While I’m not all that into the overall design when compared with the other three proposals, I think it does a good job of being unique to the city.  If they could have figured out how to create the appearance of a knot without so much gradient, I’d probably be more on board with it.

At this point, I’ve just resigned myself to the fact that these Olympic proposals are all about quantity rather than quality when it comes to the architectural renderings.  I was really hoping that this series would be an interesting look at how to put together graphics and renderings for a proposal, but alas, it seems that most of the work was put into the logos (which for the most part, all turned out pretty well).  The Olympic stadium above was the closest rendering I could find in the proposal that anything near a “wow factor” (FLOATING ROOF WOW).  The rest are SketchUp-style, like the other three proposals, with very little left to the imagination.  It’s almost as if the same person did the renderings for each of the proposals…

I’m still convinced that if one of them had broken from the prevailing trend of depicting things exactly how it could be and gone a little more toward the ambiguous end of things, they could have had an amazing proposal.  Like I said before, a rendering that leaves the specifics to the imagination can do wonders for a proposal like this.  It’s not like they don’t have six years to work on the details of this thing…

Proposal PDFs here.

Post to Twitter Tweet This /   Post to Facebook Facebook

OLYMPIC BID 2016: RIO

Tuesday, September 29th, 2009

With just a week left before the International Olympic Committee names a host for the 2016 Summer Olympics, I thought it’d be interesting to check out the proposals from each of the four remaining contenders — Chicago, Madrid, Tokyo, and Rio de Janeiro. Today: Rio. Previous: Chicago, Madrid.

Not to slight Rio or Tokyo, but these last two profiles will be quite short seeing as I have neglected my posting duties and the decision is just a few days away.

The top image above is the logo that Rio has been running with throughout their 2016 summer Olympic bid.  It was designed by Ana Soter and it’s suppose to illustrate Brazil’s passion for the games in the form of a heart-shaped depiction of Sugarloaf Mountain that overlooks their proposed site of the games.  Slogan: “Live your passion”.

The final two images are their initial architectural/planning proposals.  While clearly just a first attempt at depicting what could be to the Olympic Committee, I think these renderings really illustrate the importance of view point when setting up a rendering.  Personally, I don’t think the actual architecture in either of the renderings is much to look at, but the perspective that the shots are taken from leaves a lot to the imagination with the way that the mountains and water disappear off in the distance.  Of course it’s always helpful when your site is in a place like Rio…

More images here.

Up next:  Tokyo.

Post to Twitter Tweet This /   Post to Facebook Facebook

THINGS TO CLICK IS DRESSED FOR SUCCESS

Friday, September 18th, 2009

WOOOO! That perennial Pavement reunion rumor is finally true: Pavement, the KINGS of Indie rock, are back!  It’s still a year off, but at the moment they’ll be playing three shows in Central Park on September 21, 22, and 23 of next year.  Apparently the first show sold out in 2 minutes, so you’d better act quick:  tickets.

I recently had a conversation with a friend of mine where we agreed that a Pavement reunion show was tops on our must-see-live list, so you’ll be able to catch me at the Wednesday show screaming like a five-year-old watching Blue’s Clues.  WOOOO!  More info here and here.

A design dollar store. Like many designers, a personal aspiration of mine has always been to someday open a design studio.  However, deciding what discipline to specialize in, how to generate business, etc have always been the most difficult aspects (for me at least).  Perhaps it’s best to just do it all?  Design 99 is a retail space, exhibition space, print shop, and design studio all wrapped in one in Hamtramck, MI.  It sounds like a great idea to me and I love their ambition of making design accessible to the general public.  I think we can all agree that the world could use better design here and there.  Video:

Final Countdown. The winners of the Michael Jackson Memorial Competition have been announced and the winning proposal actually isn’t half bad.  Unfortunately, for such an interesting competition brief, nothing really caught my eye a few weeks ago, but this idea is at least intriguing.  While the winning image isn’t much to look at, it looks like the jury was going for something at least semi-plausible (read not laser-beams and/or spaceships).

LentSpace. Ever driven by an urban construction site that never appears like it’s under construction and thought, “well that’s a waste of space”?  Apparently at least one other person thinks the same thing.  LentSpace is a temporary project in Lower Manhattan that works as a “free outdoor cultural space” for a vacant site awaiting development.  It provides exhibition space, a tree nursery, and even performance space.  Check it out if you live in NYC and let me know what you think.

Speaking of New York… Check out some images of Morphosis’ Cooper Union academic building here.  I was in NYC about a month ago and walked by it but was unable to find a way in.  While I tend not to mind Morphosis’ buildings new, I always wonder what they’ll look like in 20 years.  You have to imagine with all of those crazy forms and irregular spaces that it’d be tough on the up-keep.  More info here and here.  Thoughts?

Post to Twitter Tweet This /   Post to Facebook Facebook

OLYMPIC BID 2016: MADRID

Wednesday, September 16th, 2009

With just over 2 weeks left before the International Olympic Committee names a host for the 2016 Summer Olympics, I thought it’d be interesting to check out the proposals from each of the four remaining contenders — Chicago, Madrid, Tokyo, and Rio de Janeiro. Today: Madrid.  Previous: Chicago.

GRAPHIC DESIGN

“Hola everyone.” Hola indeed.  That multicolored hand you see above (in the middle) is Madrid’s rather playful final logo for their 2016 Olympic bid.  Designed by Joaquín Malle, the logo on the far left was chosen by popular vote in a contest that saw an astounding 2700 submissions in September of 2007.  After a bit of tweaking and a copious use of the Paint Bucket Tool, the logo went from something that looked like it was pulled straight out of the 90’s to a pretty memorable and fun (FUN) design.

From Madrid 2016’s official site:

A bright and colourful open hand that, in the words of its author, represents “unity among the different cultures, people, and nationalities that coexist in Madrid.” As well as “a friendly greeting where one appreciates the freshness of Madrid and its people.”

Combine that with the slogan “Hola everyone” and you get a lethal Olympic logo that just screams safe Olympic bid.  While the typography definitely seems a bit off, the graphic itself is scalable (notice the tiny favicon on the official site compared with this image) and can quite easily be applied in various settings.  Overall, well done.

ARCHITECTURE

Between Chicago and Madrid, I’m noticing a common theme here with the proposals: A large amount of time and resources put toward creating a great logo, with whatever is left over put toward architectural renderings.  I understand that the logo is the face of the bid and rightfully more important at this stage, but I still think you can do better than this:

At this point when everything is so nebulous anyway, a few intriguing architectural renderings, even if they’re completely out there, would do wonders for an Olympic city’s bid.  I don’t want easy, fleshed out ideas.  Give me something that I can actually get excited about and be in awe of rather than this.  A proposal: Why not hold an architectural competition like you did for the logo?  In this economy, I know for a fact that there are thousands of eager, young architects out there who would be willing to put together a few renderings for nothing more than a bit of publicity in return.

That’s much better, although interesting renderings like this are too few and far between for this proposal.  More SketchUp renderings here and here.

ETC. Did you know the term given to someone who lives in Madrid is Madrilenians? Weird, wild stuff.

Up next:  Rio.

Post to Twitter Tweet This /   Post to Facebook Facebook

OLYMPIC BID 2016: CHICAGO

Tuesday, September 8th, 2009

With just over 3 weeks left before the International Olympic Committee names a host for the 2016 Summer Olympics, I thought it’d be interesting to check out the proposals from each of the four remaining contenders — Chicago, Madrid, Tokyo, and Rio de Janeiro. Today: Chicago.

GRAPHIC DESIGN

The image above shows VSA Partners first two attempts at a logo for Chicago’s Olympic bid, as well as a secondary application of the graphic language (image on the far right).  The middle logo is the most recent version after the original design (on the far left) had to be ditched following a rule change that prohibits the use of the Olympic torch in a proposal.  Despite the headache this probably caused for VSA, who is apparently working pro-bono on the project, the newest iteration isn’t half bad.  Check out some of the posters that have been popping up around town:

More images here, here, and here.

From VSA’s website in June:

The identity is a tribute to Chicago’s unique physical attributes—a world-class location united by water, green space and architecture. The Chicago 2016 logo blends the colors of the five Olympic rings surrounding the city’s six-pointed star, evoking serene blue lakefront, vibrant green landscape and fiery skyline.

While I’m usually not a huge fan of gradients, I’d love to get my hands on one of those posters with the city in the background. Overall, logo v2.0 provides a very strong graphic language for a city looking to host its first Olympic games in FOREVA.  It’s simple, unique, flexible, and actually ties into the city quite nicely.  However…

ARCHITECTURE

More images here, here, here.

I know this is just in the proposal stages, but seriously, those are the best rendering that the city of Chicago could come up with?  If the logo is a 90/100, I’d give these renderings a 15 (baseline 50 for trying; +5 for not using MS Paint; +5 for interesting points of view; -40 for using SketchUp screen shots and poor Photoshopping; +15 for boats underwater; +15 for trying to make Chicago look like Miami in the 80’s; -35 for not even trying to incorporate the various aspects of the kick ass VSA logo into the visual language).  On the other hand…

Ok I guess those renderings are a bit better, although the design seems a bit derivative.  It seems like they put everything they had into a couple legit renderings and then slapped the rest together in the 11th hour, which ok, we’ve all been there.  However, after Beijing, who completely pulled out all the stops with the Water Cube and the Bird’s Nest in 2008, Chicago is going to have to come up with something a little more intriguing if they do indeed win the bid.  I’ll reserve judgement on the architecture and siting of the various venues until such time, but until then, it definitely appears as if the graphics put together by VSA are pulling most of the weight in this proposal (which makes sense considering they haven’t even won anything yet).

ETC. Brand New on the bid; more renderings from the Chicago Tribune; PDF of the full bid proposal; official Chicago 2016 website.

Up Next:  Madrid.

Post to Twitter Tweet This /   Post to Facebook Facebook

IKEA: FUTURA VS. VERDANA

Monday, September 7th, 2009

I guess I’m a little late to the party with this post, but for those of you who don’t follow various graphic design happenings, IKEA, everyone’s favorite purveyors of mass produced Scandinavian furniture, has decided to make the switch from their classic Futura typeface to Verdana. WHAT!? HULK SMASH!! Ok so maybe your reaction to this news wasn’t one of absolute fury, but the change has caused a minor brouhaha among the graphic design community over the past couple weeks (and yes, I have been looking for a place to use brouhaha for a while). Users over at Typophile, Brand New, and IDSGN have been venting for some time, and there’s even an online petition against IKEA’s use of Verdana that’s nearly six thousand signatures strong already. So what’s all the commotion about?

Well as you can see in the image above, the change is a pretty dramatic shift in aesthetics from Ikea Sans (a customized version of Futura that they’ve been using for the past 50 years) to the more industrial Verdana typeface. For those of you unfamiliar with Verdana, it was created by Matthew Carter back in the mid-90’s for Microsoft with the specific intent for it to be more legible on a computer screen and at smaller sizes. Since then, it’s been used almost exclusively online, and was one of Microsoft’s original “Web-safe” fonts — along with Arial, Times New Roman, and Georgia — way back in the nascent stages of the web (you may also recognize it as the primary font of choice here at onThebackwall). Futura on the other hand, was created by Paul Renner in the 1920’s and has the unique distinction of being the only typeface on the Moon (and thus the only one that can handle its 5… thousand… dimensions). Other major applications of the typeface include Absolut Vodka, Domino’s Pizza, Red Bull, Costco, and various Wes Anderson films. In short, they’re both wildly popular albeit for very different reasons.

On IKEA’s side of things, they’ve been pretty firm with their decision (AP, Aug 30th):

“We’re surprised,” said Ikea spokeswoman Camilla Meiby. “But I think it’s mainly experts who have expressed their views, people who are interested in fonts. I don’t think the broad public is that interested.”

Which, umm, it’s a designer’s job to be interested in this type of thing, so ya, that makes sense.   According to another interview with an IKEA spokesperson, the switch would allow them to use the same font in all countries (specifically in Asian countries, where characters are supported by Verdana) and provide a cohesive image for the company online and as well as in print.

A before and after shot:

When compared side-by-side, it’s a pretty noticeable difference, trading a warm familiarity with something a little more modern and clean. Whether that’s good or bad I think is entirely based on personal preference, but let’s be honest, how many non-designers do you think will even notice the change? I’m willing to bet very few. That’s not meant to minimize the effect of the switch, which is clearly quite a large alteration in terms of graphic design for a company as globally recognizable as IKEA. However, if your intent is to simplify and to create as neutral of a message as possible, I’d say Verdana is a pretty good fit. It seems as though most of the backlash from the design community isn’t based on a perceived misguided intent, but rather on a subjective distaste for Verdana and the homogeneity it has come to stand for in the field of graphic design.

Take a look at the 2010 IKEA catalog. The most noticeable aspect to me isn’t the font change but rather the direction IKEA has slowly been headed: toward a designer version of Wal-Mart. A cursory flip through the catalog reveals an obvious attempt at OMG-LOW-PRICES with the frequent use of a “New Lower Price” icon, highlighted price tags, “SUPER DEALS” (in all caps), and the epic-ly cheesy “slashed price” graphic that I don’t remember being quite so prevalent in the past. Don’t get me wrong, I love cheap (especially in this economy), functional, simple furniture as much as the next person, but it’s clear to me that this is as far as IKEA is attempting to go these days. It’s not high design. It’s not custom made. It’s practical. It’s commercial. It’s everywhere. It’s I-just-got-out-of-college-and-need-something-cheap-to-put-my-computer-on. It’s Verdana.

Put all of this together and it seems to me that the new font is not the primary change here but rather the result of a fundamental change, and in that context, I honestly don’t mind it.   Perhaps in this day and age of IKEA, Futura was the out-of-place typeface?  Sure you can argue that Verdana is over used, not designed for print (it’s not like Futura was designed for the web either), and not the most inspiring choice, but is all the hate really warranted?  It’s like an architect who dismisses a Gehry building without actually experiencing it in its context (I could probably be included here). Most of the time the bias is probably legitimate and informed, but every now and then, it just works.

I’m not saying they didn’t lose something by ditching Futura, but I do think that the switch makes sense.  As designers perhaps we should direct our ire towards IKEA’s actual designs and construction, rather than our dated perception of IKEA?  Because let’s face it, the Futura-based IKEA did not match up well with most of the products they’re churning out these days.

Post to Twitter Tweet This /   Post to Facebook Facebook