<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Ben Kessler</title>
<link>http://blogs.graphicdesignforum.com/bkessler/</link>
<description></description>
<copyright>Copyright 2010</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2010 12:12:06 -0500</lastBuildDate>
<generator>http://www.movabletype.org/?v=4.31-en</generator>
<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs> 



<item>
<title>AIGA Metro-North Panel Examines Spec Work and the Future of Design</title>
<description><![CDATA[<img src="http://blogs.graphicdesignforum.com/bkessler/reSPECt_Button_3up.jpg" width="400" /><p>

Spec work is the Comic Sans of design-project models. Much like the hated typeface, spec work appears to spell death for design as a profession, not to mention contempt for the designer's craft. So last night's <a href="http://metronorth.aiga.org/events/2010/06/45898262">AIGA Metro-North panel discussion</a> at the Ossining Public Library, whose purpose was "to explore if, why, and how spec work has a rightful place in the way projects are structured," had an apt title: RE<strong>SPEC</strong>T. 
]]></description>
<link>http://blogs.graphicdesignforum.com/bkessler/2010/06/post-2.html</link>
<guid>http://blogs.graphicdesignforum.com/bkessler/2010/06/post-2.html</guid>
<category></category>
<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2010 12:12:06 -0500</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>All Things Typographic: 9</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.veer.com/ideas/galleries/jukeboxrecords/default.aspx"><img src="http://blog.graphicdesignforum.com/chrisd/veertop.jpg" border=0 width="450" height="338"  /></a></p>

<p><strong>Veer</strong><br />
Veer recently cameup with an imaginative setting for its exclusive Jukebox Collection. Jukebox is the name designer Jason Walcott has chosen for his collection of fonts that evokes "the golden age of sign painters and Madison Avenue. A treasure trove of typographic Americana." For its latest promotion, Veer created a number of faux vintage album covers to show off some of the faces, an example of which is shown above. Click on that image to view all the covers.</p>]]></description>
<link>http://blog.graphicdesignforum.com/chrisd/2010/06/all-things-typo-8.html</link>
<guid>http://blog.graphicdesignforum.com/chrisd/2010/06/all-things-typo-8.html</guid>
<category>Type</category>
<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jun 2010 08:18:41 -0500</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Universal Principles of Design</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://blog.graphicdesignforum.com/chrisd/june10.jpg" width="450" height="312"></p>

<p>It just makes sense that when something is created, whether it be a work of art or a corkscrew, its success will depend to a great extent on the degree to which the creator kept the end user in mind. But how can you anticipate with any certainty just how people will react to your latest poster design, website or application, to bring things closer to home? An updated version of the bravely-named <em>Universal Principles of Design</em> proposes to help you do just that.</p>]]></description>
<link>http://blog.graphicdesignforum.com/chrisd/2010/06/universal-princ.html</link>
<guid>http://blog.graphicdesignforum.com/chrisd/2010/06/universal-princ.html</guid>
<category>Graphic Design</category>
<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 2010 04:59:24 -0500</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>May Paper Roundup</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Sure, everyone's keen to design for the iPad and the upcoming onslaught of tablet-based systems, not to mention smart phones and even good old websites. But for most designers, print remains their meat and potatos (admittedly a metaphor that no longer reflects our newly-healthy dietary habits). Yes, I'm talking about paper and you can bet that manufacturers of this still-ubiquitous substance are working harder than ever to keep designers attached to it. Accordingly, what follows is the first in a series of regular roundups of what's new in the world of paper, as well as more exotic substrates.</p>]]></description>
<link>http://blog.graphicdesignforum.com/chrisd/2010/05/may-paper-round.html</link>
<guid>http://blog.graphicdesignforum.com/chrisd/2010/05/may-paper-round.html</guid>
<category>Graphic Design</category>
<pubDate>Wed, 26 May 2010 08:47:05 -0500</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Soft Stuff Rant</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p><img alt="car1.jpg" src="http://blogs.graphicdesignforum.com/skirkland/car1.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="margin: 0pt 20px 20px 0pt; float: left;" width="216" height="146" /><strong>Please buy our $1000 product for all the wonderful things it will do with your inspiration</strong>. It will make you feel like an artist. Yes, it will occasionally and unexpectedly quit, causing you to lose everything you created in a day, but we've remedied this with a cute saying, <strong>Save Often Stupid</strong>, which puts the blame elsewhere. The real irony is that when you want to quit, our software will sometimes crash, causing an additional waste of precious time. </p>

<p><strong>We realize we are the only industry that can sell an expensive product without working out all the bugs;</strong> that's because you can't test-drive a car without tires,  brush your teeth without bristles in your toothbrush, or use a nail without a point so it's understandable a sale would not result without working out those bugs. But, in fact, offering a free trial gives us the advantage; thirty days is just long enough to enjoy all the good things we've built into the stuff but not nearly long enough to locate all the bugs. The fact that we don't know where all the bugs are in our product in no way makes us liable.  In fact, once you open that cellophane, you own it because there are no returns. Now, you may think this is unfair; and to this sentiment, we say with great empathy and complete and utter understanding, <strong>tough cookies</strong>.</p>]]></description>
<link>http://blogs.graphicdesignforum.com/skirkland/2010/05/soft-stuff-rant.html</link>
<guid>http://blogs.graphicdesignforum.com/skirkland/2010/05/soft-stuff-rant.html</guid>
<category>Irritating Opinion</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 21 May 2010 16:34:51 -0500</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>All Things Typographic: 8</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://blog.graphicdesignforum.com/chrisd/top.gif" width="450" height="250" ></p>

<p><a href="http://blog.graphicdesignforum.com/chrisd/2010/05/theyre-heeere-w.html">Last week</a> I took a look at the web font offerings of FontShop, Monotype and other commercial suppliers. I indicated at the time that while it was great to finally be able to use quality fonts on a website, the current metered pricing model might cause some designers to hesitate. Several of the vendors offer free trials of various kinds, providing a good way to experiment with the viability of web fonts. But I've since come across a site providing some decent free ones, which could provide a more flexible environment for your tests, since you can host them on your own server. For client work, you'll naturally want to employ top-quality, commercial fonts. But for use in personal projects, these might form a good starting point for building your collection of free web fonts.</p>]]></description>
<link>http://blog.graphicdesignforum.com/chrisd/2010/05/all-things-typo-7.html</link>
<guid>http://blog.graphicdesignforum.com/chrisd/2010/05/all-things-typo-7.html</guid>
<category>Type</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 18 May 2010 12:09:37 -0500</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>They&apos;re Heeere. Web Fonts, That Is</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://blog.graphicdesignforum.com/chrisd/6may2010b.jpg" width="450" height="323"></p>

<p>Goodbye Verdana. Take a hike, Arial. After suffering through a decade and a half of purgatory, website designers are now finally free to take advantage of the typographic riches of those creating print publications. Bring on the dancing girls! Let the festivities commence! Or has a new nightmare only begun?</p>]]></description>
<link>http://blog.graphicdesignforum.com/chrisd/2010/05/theyre-heeere-w.html</link>
<guid>http://blog.graphicdesignforum.com/chrisd/2010/05/theyre-heeere-w.html</guid>
<category>Interactive</category>
<pubDate>Thu, 06 May 2010 12:39:45 -0500</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Decoding Design: A Review</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p><img alt="header.jpg" src="http://blog.graphicdesignforum.com/chrisd/header.jpg" width="450" height="298" /><br />
Image via <a href="http://www.wordle.net">wordle.net</a></p>

<p>An accomplished designer, author and teacher of symbolism and logo design at the University of New Mexico, Maggie Macnab believes that at some point designers lost their way. They became disconnected with nature and increasingly were less able to understand its patterns, which for so long formed the basis of how humanity grasped the fundamental mechanisms of existence.</p>]]></description>
<link>http://blog.graphicdesignforum.com/chrisd/2010/03/decoding-design.html</link>
<guid>http://blog.graphicdesignforum.com/chrisd/2010/03/decoding-design.html</guid>
<category>Graphic Design</category>
<pubDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2010 12:20:18 -0500</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Hollywood vs. The People of Walmart</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://blogs.graphicdesignforum.com/bkessler/Walmart-Image.gif" width="450" /></p>
<p>The immensely popular website <a href="http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/">People of Walmart</a> is easily as enjoyable as a screenful of LOLcats, in addition to being many times more meaningful. The amazing array of&nbsp;common freakery on display calls one's attention to a part of America that is ignored by mainstream media, sneered at by sophisticates, and pandered to by politicians. </p>]]></description>
<link>http://blogs.graphicdesignforum.com/bkessler/2009/12/hollywood-vs-th.html</link>
<guid>http://blogs.graphicdesignforum.com/bkessler/2009/12/hollywood-vs-th.html</guid>
<category></category>
<pubDate>Fri, 18 Dec 2009 14:24:00 -0500</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Aol. Debris</title>
<description><![CDATA[<img alt="aol4.jpg" src="http://blogs.graphicdesignforum.com/skirkland/aol4.jpg" width="139" height="192" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">A Poorly Made Shoe</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">The Brothers Grimm and </span><a href="http://hca.gilead.org.il/emperor.html"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">Hans Christian Andersen</span></a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"> fairy tales seem to parallel some business transactions.</span>  Take the recent flood of new logos for companies who have defecated where they eat, like <a href="http://www.brandfreak.com/2009/03/aig-looks-into-buying-a-vowel-to-change-sullied-image-.html"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">AIG</span></a>.  Much like a pig that's rolled in mud, the new logo gives a good scrub to a bad little piggie.</div><div><br /></div><div>"Keep talking. History shows I can be convinced of a-n-y thing."</div><div style="text-align: right;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">William Hurt as Ned Racine</span></div><div style="text-align: right;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">in Lawrence Kasdan's <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold; ">Body Heat</span></span></div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">Sometimes, the pig's owner is the one who gets the bath</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">.</span>  In our business in particular, where hot shot executives think they can do every job in the company, they may rely on the same <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">know-how</span> to select corporate symbols.  Big mistake, especially when led by a helpful sales staff whose only wish is to convince the buyer his preferences are right on. This makes me weep. <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">But I understand why the Texas Longhorns will love this version of the <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/aol-unveils-a-new-brand-identity-2009-11">new AOL logo.</a></span></div><div><br /></div> ]]></description>
<link>http://blogs.graphicdesignforum.com/skirkland/2009/11/aol-debris.html</link>
<guid>http://blogs.graphicdesignforum.com/skirkland/2009/11/aol-debris.html</guid>
<category>Art Direction</category>
<pubDate>Sat, 28 Nov 2009 17:40:26 -0500</pubDate>
</item>



</channel>
</rss>

