In this design primer, Lupton and Phillips represent graphic design basics for 2008 with profundity and clarity. The text reconsiders principles from the Bauhaus legacy, but in tune with current digital tools and culture. The approach is systematic, rigorous and brimming with postmodern inspirational examples from professionals and students. Finally! I’ve been waiting for the celebratory return of formal language to design dialogue.

The book, published by Princeton Architectural Press and Maryland Institute College of Art, features expected chapters on point / line / plane, rhythm and balance, scale, and texture, but also prioritizes newer basics such as transparency, modularity, time and motion, rules and randomness. Succinct, tight essays frame the visual examples in relation to the historical notion of “language of vision” and the formal constraints implied by current software. Learn more:

Students and professionals alike will find the formal experiment in the book both inspirational and significant in defining current practice. The book is both one for the design lover and the student in all of us.

And how about you? What textbooks did you buy as a beginning designer? Did they serve you well? Please share your stories by posting a comment!

“Sustainable design gives an authentic value to the consumer.”– Katarina Graffman (Ethnographer)

In the second portion of this continuing essay, I turn my focus to another integral component to the graphic designer’s daily language: ink. Ink was developed, for commercial purposes, by the Chinese thousands of years ago and was constructed of various mixtures of pine soot, lamp oil and animal gelatin. Color was added through combining berries, minerals and a variety of plants/roots. As commercial printing (as we now know it) grew in demand from economic expansion fueled by the Industrial Revolution, the work of Johannes Gutenberg (moveable type printing in 1439) was continued by Friedrich Gottlob Koenig (flatbed cylinder printing press in 1810) and by Heidelberg’s “Tiegel” press (1914) which allowed for printing on a mass production scale. Ink for printing was typically made from burned rosin (pine/plant resin) suspended in linseed and other vegetable oils. This variety of agro-based ink dominated the market until the early 1960s when cheaper and better performing petroleum-based inks were introduced to the printing arena.

However, petroleum-based inks pose a host of hazards to our natural environment. They contain a range of heavy metals (barium, copper, zinc) that leach into and contaminate the soil and groundwater. Petroleum-based inks also emit VOCs (Volatile Organic Compounds) into the air. VOCs are hazardous irritants to print shop workers and contribute to our world’s smog issues.

In order to minimize health risks to print workers and ourselves, I have put together this simple “recipe” that creates a framework to help you choose the most sustainable inks for your next print job.

First of all, it is important to define what a sustainable ink should be. Sustainable ink should:
∑ Reduce emissions (VOCs)
∑ Create less toxic waste
∑ Use renewable resources
∑ Be readily de-inkable/reusable (C2C).
∑ Be biodegradable/Minimized in use
∑ Not include: additives or finishings – thermography, foil stampings, varnishes, and laminates (hard to de-ink/recycle)

Vegetable-based Inks
The best option on the market at this moment is Vegetable-based ink as it contains less VOCs, and IPA (Isopropyl Alcohol) solvents than petroleum-based inks. If you also print using waterless or alcohol-free methods, you will lessen your environmental impact. Some vegetable ink could contain some portion of Soya oil.

Soya-based Inks
These inks are also agricultural-based and contain less VOCs than petroleum-based inks (mineral-based), however it is hard to determine if the soybeans used were GMO (Genetically Modified Organisms) in origin. Moreover, there is not a universal standard for what “soy-based” inks mean. One could have one drop of soy oil to 100% soy oil content. However, it is important to mention that both vegetable and Soya-based inks could contain petroleum. And obviously, unless otherwise specifically mentioned, these inks are manufactured and shipped using fossil fuels. Ideally, their method of manufacture and shipping would be local and renewable. Soy-based inks would be the next best option after vegetable.

UV Inks
UV Inks are a mixed bag. They typically use less solvents and contain small amounts of VOCs, however they are not from renewable sources.

It is best to avoid petroleum-based inks as they emit higher VOCs (typically 25-40% distillates in printing) and is not renewable. Also avoid finishes like foil stamping, varnishes, and laminates as they are hard to de-ink and consequently make it difficult to recycle the paper.

It’s time for the prestigious Red Dot Communications Awards again! The competition, which is organized by the renowned German design institute Design Zentrum Nordrhein Westfalen in Essen, is calling for designers, advertising agencies and clients of communication designers from all over the world to submit their entries. The communication award was launched in 1993 and the winners are awarded for outstanding achievements in the fields of corporate design, advertising, interactive media or sound design. However, competition is fierce: in 2007 there were over 3800 submissions from 60 countries and 336 winning entries.

Besides gaining industry prestige (winners have the right to use the well-recognized Red Dot logo to distinguish their products and earn the admiration of fellow designers), awardees will also feel like movie stars for a night. The winners are invited to attend the extravagant Academy Awards-style gala presentations at the Red Dot design museum in Essen, Germany. The prized entries are also exhibited in the Red Dot design museums in Germany and Singapore and touring exhibitions all around the world. In addition, the awarded projects will be present at www.red-dot.de.

Entries for the competition can be submitted until 13 June 2008 here

Building Findable Websites
Web Standards, SEO, and Beyond by Aarron Walter

I just read the excellent book, Building Findable Websites, and it truly is the book I’ve been searching for over the last couple of years. I’ve been interested in search engines and how they work for a long time and I’ve been dismayed with the emphasis on Search Engine Optimization over other methods of building findability. This book serves as a great introduction to findability and is chock full of how-to’s and how-not-to’s.

Who’s It For?
This one comes close to really being for anyone involved with creating a website, though I think the people that I most want to read it (the decision makers) probably won’t. It’s mostly for website developers and it’s great for one-person shows (like myself) because it covers coding, creating content, working with the server, blogging and even how to add search to your site and how to use a mailing list to bring traffic to your site.

Why I Loved It
Not only did I find information I could use immediately (a clear explanation of the current state of image replacement techniques, how to write meta descriptions, microformats), I also found support for many of my own beliefs about findability:
No need to put in the meta tag with keywords, search engines ignore them.
Following web standards will help your findability, but just web standards won’t make your site rank number one on Google. Blogging software like Wordpress isn’t penalized by Google for having content in multiple places (It seemed strange to me that Google would penalize the users of Blogger, which it owns).
And findability isn’t just about Search Engine Optimization. I love Aarron Walter’s explanation of the goals of findability:

“1. Help people find your website.
2. Help people find what they are looking for once they arrive at your site.
3. Bring your audience back to your website.”

Yep, that’s what it’s all about.

Minor Quibbles
Actually my only quibble is that the third chapter is about server-side strategies, which are pretty advanced and require good access to your web server, which you may not have if you get your hosting from someone outside your company. I would probably have put that chapter later in the book, but we do all know how to skim, right?
Final Word
This book earned a place beside the other books I always refer to when creating a website: The Principles of Beautiful Web Design, Bulletproof Web Design, and Web Standards Solution. I’m using some of the techniques I learned in the book in my current project and look forward to using more in the future.

Last week, 40 international graffiti artists and lots of enthusiastic amateurs proved that a little paint and color really can cheer up the dreariest place.

Banksy

The Cans Festival, organized by graffiti star Banksy, was a temporary art exhibition-cum-happening that took place in a disused tunnel underneath the Eurostar’s Waterloo railway station in South London.

Pure Evil

“I’m hoping we can transform a dark forgotten filth pit into an oasis of beautiful art - in a dark forgotten filth pit,” Banksy was quoted as saying in the Times of London.

And so they did. Armed with cans and stencils, artists like Pure Evil, Eye Saw, Dolk and Orticanoodles created a vibrant, provocative, humorous and –of course- beautiful collaborative installation that drew lines of visitors around the block. Viewers were also invited to join in and add their artwork to the murals.

Orticanoodles

The festival was a temporary event that was only meant to last for five days before being taken down, but supposedly, Eurostar have agreed to leave the stencil work up inside the tunnel for at least six months. But those of us who are not planning a trip to the UK anytime soon, can still enjoy the pictures from this amazing celebration of street art.

Dolk

In recent years, Yves Béhar has emerged as one of the most important industrial designers on the contemporary scene. Through his San Francisco-based design and branding company fuseproject, the Swiss-born Béhar has shown that a futuristic, hi-tech approach to design can be deeply humane. The fluid forms and innovative function of his products are impressive enough, but it’s Béhar’s interest in the human experience and positive social change that give his objects real meaning. In this interview, Béhar chats with Kevin Kelly about his recent work for the safe sex campaign NYC Condom and other acclaimed projects, and shares his vision for how design can help shape our future.

Tell us about your work with the NYC Condom Campaign. How did you get involved with the project? What are the goals and objectives of the effort?

The New York City Condom and Dispenser is an initiative of the NYC department of Health: the free distribution of condoms is an effective measure against HIV infections and unwanted pregnancies. They will distribute 36 million condoms for free this year, and install around 2000 dispensers in diverse venues from bars and clubs, pool-halls and barber shops, homeless shelters and health care facilities.

NYC Condom Project

You redesigned the NYC condom’s packaging and created high-style dispensers that will be placed throughout the city. Tell us about the designs, and how they work together to both promote awareness and increase access.

Creating the condom wrapper and dispenser simultaneously, we were able to intertwine the visual relationship of both elements, and by making the NYC Condom and Dispenser visually iconic, New York City achieves two main goals: raising awareness and adoption of the condoms by its citizens, and driving adoption of the dispensers by private businesses and public organizations.

NYC Condom project

Reminiscent of a condom shape warped into the surface of a wallet, the NYC Condom’s dispenser is approachable and friendly, while the design of the brand creates an air of openness, removing the stigma of the condom as something to be ashamed off.

You’ve designed all sorts of things, including retail interiors, chandeliers and conductor’s batons. How is designing a condom dispenser different from, say, designing a watch or a shoe? How is it the same?

Designing the NYC dispensers is a little bit like designing a fire hydrant: it has to be easily identifiable in case of emergency, very robust, and become symbolic…in the case of the dispenser, it reminds us of a condom without being preachy, it looks friendly and approachable.

In your opinion, can design change people’s minds about condoms, safe sex, the environment, war, etc? If so, are designers especially well-equipped to effect change, and do we have obligation to lend our skills to the causes we support?

I think the dispenser is a good conversation starter, and starting a conversation about condom use is not always easy to do !

I have always thought that as designers we have a responsibility to put our vision at the service of others, specially in the areas of health and education: With the One Laptop Per Child with Nicholas Negroponte at MIT, we really pushed the boundaries of design in the electronic realm to a well integrated, low-power consumption, robust and very lovable tool for education in the developing world.

One Laptop Per Child

I think design sometimes forgets it’s democratizing power. I am not saying that all design should be a civic project, but we should balance the practice so that design can make the difference it can.

What can a designer do on a daily or individual basis to improve society and/or the world?

I have often said that “designers have a responsibility to create the future we want to live in”, so I think all we have to do is adhere to our own values, and apply these to our projects. We have a lot of influence today, let’s use this influence with our clients, because the VALUES we bring, are as important as the economic VALUE we create for enterprises and users. In fact, these VALUES create the very value that brands need and customers want.

The sustainable LED Leaf desk lamp

You obviously advocate safe sex and the use of condoms, and you’ve dedicated your time and energy to promoting those causes. What other social issues are you passionate about? How can others with similar interests contribute to those efforts?

As I mentioned earlier, we work on projects for educations such as the One Laptop Per Child, but also projects that create economic development in poor regions (we have a couple in Africa and South America). I am also passionate about a new type of enterprises that want to do good, and do well at the same time, we have a few projects in that space.

In an interview with Stephanie Murg from Unbeige, you said you “specialize in firsts.” What does that mean, and how did you develop that expertise?

It’s more like a lack of expertise ! But since we understand the design/manufacturing/logistics process in depth, we can bring new ideas and strategies to life. We’ve often had clients say “you have not worked in this area, and that is a good thing”…those are the best clients too.

The Y Water bottle, which has a second life as a children’s toy.

If you could change one thing about the design industry tomorrow, what would it be?

What we are changing in our studio, is the financial model: less consulting, and more partnerships. I dislike the mentality that puts design in the self-defeating position to be a “vendor” to enterprises…I think this demands change on both sides of the equation: for clients to realize that designers are partners to their success, and for designers to put themselves in the place of both stake-holder and risk-taker.

I have been asked this question on several occasions: “Where is the best place to work: at an ad agency or an in-house design department?” So, I though it might be helpful to give a breakdown of what are generally considered benefits and drawbacks of both. For the sake of a broad comparison, I include design studios along with “Agency” because they have many similarities.

Agency Drawbacks:

1. Job Insecurity: You or your design team may be assigned only one or two accounts at a time. If they loose an account, they may loose you as well. Some agencies are not as well prepared to weather economic downturns as are the corporations that hire them.
2. Long Hours: These employers tend to “own you” and convince you that there is no life outside of your job. When you are just starting your career, “paying your dues” can be exciting, but it looses its appeal over time after you begin to develop other interests and priorities.
3. Burnout: Some agencies like to hire young designers, knowing they may only get 2-3 good years out of them before they move on, so they will work them until they are quite toasty. They also know that the pool of designers is huge and vacancies are easily filled after they leave.

Agency Benefits:

1. Great Creative: You tend to focus on one or two projects at a time and can devote more energy to experimentation. The projects you work on can be very prestigious and the final deliverables become premier portfolio pieces.
2. Great People: At an ad agency, there is a larger group of “creative types”, such as artists, writers and directors that collaborate on projects. This environment provides opportunity for more honest critiques and a higher level of inspiration can be derived from other members of the team.
3. Higher Budgets and Salaries: More money is allotted for custom photography, illustration, travel, and…you, provided you survive boot camp and advance to a senior or director level, which can take 3-5+ years
4. Cool workspaces: When I worked in Miami we had creative briefing sessions out by the pool… then we went swimming. There are some funky (good) spaces where the work environment is just a fun place to spend the day… good music, great food, friendly pets and mascots of varying species all add up to a great time.
5. Bonuses: Chances are you will share in the company’s successes by receiving an annual cash bonus that correlates to the year’s profits. They are great incentives to make you stay “just one more year”.

In-house Drawbacks:

1. Less Creative Challenges: Although there are some creative opportunities, a large quantity of “bread and butter” work with the same branded messages is produced in-house. This can get monotonous if you don’t find way to stay inspired. At times, there can be even no work at all.
2. Less Pay: I’ve noticed the salaries can be slightly less than agency and studio designers and there is a lower chance of receiving an annual bonus. Read on for some possible reasons why.
3. Dull Workspaces: Accountants and creatives work in the same environment. Enough said here.
4. Dress Codes: Goths and dreadheads might have a hard time getting hired, but then, they are the types that would probably not prefer working under such conditions anyway. Unless you are employed for Apple or Google, a more conservative dress is mandated.

In-house Benefits:

1. Job Security: Most established corporations have deep pockets and can afford to staff up on designers to make sure their services will be available on call. It is usually more cost effective for a company to have an in-house design staff than to pay for outside creative services. Even when you are idle, the company still saves money by keeping you.
2. Company Benefits: This has always been a good selling point for working in-house. High quality health insurance, disability, retirement, severance, daycare, etc., tends to offset generally lower salaries. These perks may appeal more to an older designer with a family and a mortgage than to a recent graduate, but they are very valuable part of the overall compensation.
3. Predictable Hours: “9-5” is pretty much the rule. There is usually little need to work overtime and lately, more employers are allowing for flexible workweeks.
4. Respectable Portfolio Pieces: If you work for a “Big Name” corporation, your portfolio featuring design pieces with a recognized brand will bolster your confidence and reputation when you decide to interview for your next job.

Hopefully, these points of comparison will help you decide where you would like to start your first job. If you are already employed, maybe this can be a revealing glimpse of “the other side”. I have had several opportunities to work in both environments and I think that your station in life will determine which scenario works best for you. There is no real good or bad and each company and employment situation is unique. When I first left school, I wanted to work in ad agencies and design studios so I could start creating “awesome”, award-winning work… I really didn’t care how much money I made. Later on, however, I began to care more about making money and paying bills, so had to adjust my expectations accordingly. Job security and 401Ks became more appealing to me.

So, again as I recall writing in an earlier post, it’s about balancing what you want with what you need. The best advice I can give is just to get some experience of your own working at an ad agency, design studio and a corporate job, then decide for yourself where you want to invest your time.

This is by no means a comprehensive list of “pros and cons” since I have not worked in every type of environment, so please share any experiences or observations you could add that might be helpful.

“They don’t care what I actually do, what my credentials are, what genres I’d like to work in or what audiences I know best.” Beth writes, “I’m a woman, therefore I know what all women want, and I can give them the secret key into awhole new market of money. Oh, that and it looks good for them to have a woman on the team if they’re going to make games for women.

If we’re so precious and have some special knowledge, why aren’t we getting paid as much as men? On average, we get about 10k less per salary, although this changes relative to the position.”

The post immediately elicited a slew of passionate and eloquent responses. Which made us think that women in the game industry are probably not the only ones that feel stereotyped by a male-dominated tech industry. So we would love to hear what women
in the web design and design business have to say. Please join the game dev women and post your comments here

In my typography course project at Maryland Institute College of Art, sophomore students are designing packages for eco-friendly compact fluorescent light bulbs. Not surprisingly, eco-asethetics have inspired their work and became active parts of class discussion. We debated hotly the role that design plays in creating expectations for the quality of the product.

Many “green” products are relatively under-designed with simple typography and color palettes. This tissue box for Seventh Generation downplays the use of packaging to sell the product, but rather emphasizes the integrity of the product’s manufacturing process. Other pared-down samples utilized hand generated-typography, visuals lacking uniformity, recycled paper, low-saturation colors, broken typographic rules, outdated typefaces.

My students seem to intuitively respond to the strategy of simple design as establishing credibility of the product. Likewise, my students’ own solutions seem informed by simplistic design approaches; most of their solutions utilize restrained color and typography and smaller labels, all in the name of eco-friendliness.

Emily Goldfarb hand-knit protective pouches for her bulbs, those pouches can be reused and are created of biodegradable fibers.

Nicolette Cornelius worked with recycled paper and geometric forms.

David Woo’s concept utilized repurposed drinking bottles cut apart to protect the bulbs.

Jasmine Sarp created a no-glue form the elegantly unfolds like a flower.

Students seemed skeptical of eco-chic packages, interpreting that an object of stylish design might not be faithful of the product’s concept in making the world a better place. This created an interesting dialogue in the classroom, in which the more designed a product was, the less sustainable it was perceived by my students.

Melissa Nemec’s solution was criticized for relating too much to expensive cosmetics.

Jillian Erhardt’s solution incorporates stunning typography and modernist shapes, and prominently features the affordable $1 price tag for the bulb itself. Eco-chic = greenwashing? All packages contain the same bulb. See the entire range of student solutions here:

I do appreciate that search engine ranking is a concrete result (for that moment in time, at least) and it’s easy to point to (look, we rank number 2 for this keyword). I feel a certain satisfaction when a client’s site ranks high on the keywords we are targeting.

But it seems like the SEO experts (and their clients) often see the search engine (most usually Google) as the enemy, something to beat or trick.

There’s one big problem with this view.

If you’re constantly trying to beat the search engine, you run the risk of stepping over that invisible line that they have that results in your site being excluded from the search engine. You really don’t want to get kicked out of Google. If you think your site ranking low is a problem, imagine your site not being in Google at all. It’s not good.

The way I look at it, you and the search engine are partners, not enemies. You want people to find your site through the search engine and the search engine wants to give people the best result for their search. You’ve created the best web site you possibly can, right? And you’re client is offering the best product, right? So searchers want to land on your site and the search engine wants to take them there.

Now, what do you do to make it easier for the search engine to find, index, and serve up your pages? That’s a subject for other posts (Search Engine Optimization: It’s Not Rocket Science, for instance).

It’s a subtle difference, I know, but I think those subtle differences in attitude can make all the difference in putting you head and shoulders above your competition.