Ad Rant: Letting go, in a branding way

So. Brands, advertisers and everyone that is part of the advertising process/ chain of command needs to realize something. People, when left to their own devices, can sometimes be REALLY F-ING AWESOME. Need proof? Look at the videos below. Each one is about something different and has no real branding it. Each one is awesome, and has the potential to be used by a brand in a way that would not decrease the awesome at all. In fact, if done right, the addition of branding could make these better.

(yes you should watch each of these. I will wait for you to do so.)


NASA - The Frontier Is Everywhere


Streets Against The War


Stjepan Hauser and Luka Sulic - Smooth Criminal


(Did you watch them all? If not you really should!)
As previously stated, each of those were awesome. But, if a brand had tried to make something like that, 9 times out of 10 it would not be even as close to that level of awesome. Why? Because a lot of the time when companies make ads, they are scared. Scared of wasting money, scared of offending people, scared of doing something different that wont really help their business.
Those fears are not bad. They are reasonable concerns for a business, especially if it is a larger business that needs to appeal to a lot of people.

But here is what I have an issue with. There are people being awesome everywhere. Why not just pay to attach your brand to their awesome, and let that be it? Now, you should make sure that the awesome that you are working with suits your brand, because just trying to attach yourself to anything is a bad idea and will ultimately come off as fake. But once you have found the right person and work then just go with it. But it is that last part that gets brands in trouble: just go with it.

Brands and businesses are all about control, but it is that same control that can kill natural awesome. In this new world of social media, niche consumers, and "advertising being a conversation" the best thing a brand can resolve to do is to give up a little it of control.

Someone does something awesome for your brand for free because they love and believe in it (like the NASA vid), endorse it. Don't freak out that they are using an old logo or something. Someone created a perfect expression of your brand values in an unexpected way (the streets against war could be used for a nonprofit, or even as an endorsement for newspapers themselves), don't ignore that opportunity. Someone use your product in a way that shows it's best virtues by accident (like the Smooth Criminal cello video), ask if you can give them free equipment to do something like that again and endorsee the original video. Don't get upset because the product wasn't show "at the correct viewing angel".

If brands gave up a little bit of control and found the right kind of natural awesome, I truly believe the wold could be a slightly better place. Don't believe me? Below is an example of a company (Pixar) partnering with someone who is naturally awesome (The youtube remix artist Pogo) so that even more awesome could come into being.

Toyz Noize (Pixar Remix)

Ad rant: Jeep Grand cherokee and Huggies jean dipers

2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee TV Manifesto Commercial ''The Things We Make, Make Us''

I love the tone of this ad, and all of the direction for it. I even agree with the over all sentiment, America should move back towards a nation that makes things. However, I have a question about the choices of "things americans have made" in this ad. The cotton gin, and the colt revolver? In all honestly, they are right. Those two items are a HUGE part of the american culture and how we are perceived. America's long history of troublesome race relations, and a lot of government policy is still caught up in gun control (or lack there of.) But is an ad really the place to spark that debate?

With all the scrutiny that ads go trough those choices must have been conscious. Is Jeep trying to show an unbiased and hard line look at America? Or was Jeep attempting to find more "rugged" items invented in America? I'm not sure, but those two items just seem like bad choices to me. Ads should not be unintelligent, but there is a time and a place for everything. I'm just not sure a minute long spot is the place for that debate. Then again, will people even notice those references at all?


Huggies: I've Got Chic in My Pants
Now this spot makes me laugh just about every time. I love the dichotomy of high fashion and diapers. It is a little obvious, but I feel like the ad carries it off beautifully. Also the voice over is funny and spot on. it is a really clever ad that could have turned out horribly. Babies on a runway or digital babies "striking a pose" would have fallen utterly flat in my book. This take falls in to none of stereotypical pitfalls that those other ideas wold have. Also knowing how silly it is to actually have a "stylish" diaper makes the whimsy in the ad not only appropriate, but also wonderfully tongue in cheek as well. It's nice to see a spot for something so mundane done well, when it could have been a disaster.

Music and the work process

I have noticed that 99% (and yes these are all observational statistics) of designer, advertisers and artists in general like to listen to music as they work. Many of my colleagues even get mentally "lost" in the combination of working on something while listening to something. There is something that simultaneously calming and inspirational about music, and this combo just pushes the creative process along.

Sometimes I think it is because all of the arts are linked. My designs have been inspired by anything from photos, to movies, to books. Partly, I guess this is because of inspiration coming from everything. But I still feel like the arts in generally are linked to one another, in a way that "like breeds like." Music is especially potent; however, and I am not quite sure why that is. While a book my inspire me, I cannot read and design at the same time. And looking at a photograph could further help me with a project, but I would not stare at it the same way I can listen to a song over and over. There is just something about music.

Some of it might be the ability to capture a felling, which music is quite good at. However, that is not all music does. Especially when different types of music can make people feel different ways, not matter what the sentiment of the song is. Perhaps what it really boils down to is connotations.

Design has to take into account all the connotations of all it's elements. Does read mean passion or danger? Will the type be bold like a groundbreaking decision, or bold like a punch in the face? Music can give us the right connotations as well. Lets play a dangerous sounding song to work on the red composition, or something encouraging for the groundbreaking one. Most importantly of all, we can play a song that makes us feel comfortable, since the best work is done when someone feels comfortable enough to work

Since this post was all about music, here are a few random artists I like to listen to.
Pogo-SplurgenShitter
Efterklang- Mirador
Detektivbyrån - Om Du Möter Varg

Project 1- playing with type

This was just something I decided to play with.

Type is such a functional design element that sometimes we can forget how elegant/pretty/interesting it is in it's own right. So I wanted to push type to abstraction in order to appreciate the from rather than function of letters. Also I wanted to make it a bit of a challenge to myself so there were rules.

Each tile could only have in it: two letters, two colors, and I could not change change the structure of the letters in any way. I did tilt or enlarge them but that was it. Lastly all of the letters are in the same typeface: Times New Roman

Can you guess all the letters? Hint: I only used the letters a, f, b, e, k, b, q, s, and g. Oh and I used caps and lower case.

Too much to see

It's funny that there is so much design in the every day world. Too many people don't quite know what graphic design is or what graphic designers do, but their work is just about everywhere you look. Good or bad, some form of design is usually within arm's reach.

However, so much design also presents an interesting problem. We are inundated with design, so much so that most people only process it all on a very subconscious level. Even designers themselves forget to take this into account. While we can't design in a vacuum, and we take into account where objects will be seen, sometimes we forget how many other objects will be around ours. What we have worked on may be wonderful, but it could be missed do to the visual cacophony surrounding it.

My favorite example of this is the grocery store. Not only is there so much to see, most people aren't even interested in seeing it. Most go to the store with specific needs in mind and brands they like already. This is also a good place for impulse buys, and those can be due to how the product looks and what is actually inside. However, everything still has to fight to be seen. Recently, while in the store I almost missed this little jem of design by Chiquita.



Each bunch of bananas had a different face on them, and it was easy to tell that no one else had spotted them. While I stood at the banana display and took several pictures, the rest of the shoppers looked at me like I was crazy. After I walked away, I saw a store employee look at the bananas and soon a quiet "...Oh I see!" escape him. Not even the people who are around these items ever day notice the design of them.

Another place that struggles with visual inundation is the book store. Books have a slight advantage over produce though; people expect to linger looking at books and don't necessarily have a choice of book in mind when they get there. Plus, books can catch a break in terms of how they are displayed. I never would have spotted this collections of books on the shelves, but due to their own display I now plan on buying at least one of them.



As a designer I attempt to take in all that is around me, and to point out interesting things to those I am with. But sometimes even I just tune out all the visual data that bombards us every day. I think that every designer has to find that balance within their own world. There is just so much to see that trying to truly see everything would drive you crazy. But then again, every once in a while being hyper observant allows you to see something you wouldn't have expected. :D

Names

The other day I was in the car with my sister and we were straining to read a bumper sticker. Indignantly she yelled "why do bumper stickers have fine print?" Almost as soon as the words left her mouth I started thinking about how I would make that bumper sticker better. Which got me to thinking about how design is generally inspired by some kind of problem. But that thought lead me to how designers are generally called "problem solvers."

This term has always bothered me. Yes, designers solve problems but that is not all we do. Take this wonderful Delta ticket redesign project by Tyler Thompson. In truth, the problem that existed was that you need to tell people where to go, and a paper way to keep track of them. This problem alone has been solved by the original delta ticket. But the first ticket has several problems left within it. It's confusing, there is too much data to look at, and just sort of blurs together visually.

The redesign tackles all of these problems, and ads something more. It is now visually pleasing. The color draws the eye, and I don't know if everyone else reads this much into plane tickets, but to me it is much more friendly. That ticket makes me feel like flying should be fun and calm.

Now some would say that getting me to feel this way due to a simple ticket is part of the design problem. And perhaps it is, but I don't feel that those types of problems are thought of when you say the words "problem solver." That particular term sounds impersonal and some what one-dimentional.

However, it could be that I am simply adding baggage to a term that doesn't actually have those connotations. If I apply deeper meaning to the word, then I can understand how designers would be called problem solvers. But then so would everyone else. Teachers, scientists, therapists, contractors, doctors, and retail workers all solve some form of problem. So I don't believe that design can simply be explained as just problem solving.

There is still a lot of art and craft to design. It's not just about solving a conundrum, but making things better, more useful and more beautiful while you are at it.

While I may not like the term "problem solvers" to be the only explanation for designers, there is something nice about thinking that the world is filled with problem solvers.

Beginnings

Each project has a start, and it is generally with some apprehension and a lot of joy that I approach them. Beginnings represent a blank slate just waiting for a revolutionary idea, and no idea is unheard of yet. However, things can go sour fast and that is where the apprehension comes from. Sometimes projects just look like they are going to be trouble.

I don't know about most people, but I tend to like beginnings. Feeling like you are getting a fresh start and an open world of ideas at your fingertips is kind of intoxicating in a good way. Besides, design, like a lot of things, is all about what you put into it. So starting a project in a happy frame of mind is always a bit better in the long run. Then when the challenges come later hopefully you can still like the project on some level.

But thinking on beginnings can also get you thinking on endings, and for me that is the conundrum of starting a new design project. You are beginning work that is a means to an end. Each project generally has a definite purpose and all of those wonderful ideas from before must serve that purpose above all else. So is the beginning still just as open as before? I still think so. It's one of the first things you have to learn with design: limitations and purposes are not really as restricting as they seem at first glance. It is the wonderful job of limitations to help a solution take form from the primordial-head-soup of the initial idea. But that delves more into process than beginnings.

Sufficed to say, I enjoy beginnings. They give me hope and make me smile. So, in the spirit of good starts I present this:



What is that? The raw form of my sisters FANTASTIC cinnamon rolls. Their beginning was a little strange, but they ended up being awesome. That bit of delicious kitchen magic gives me hope for all beginnings, design or otherwise. :)