fred design

Are inspiration sites good for designers?

This post follows countless other designers posting about their favourite design inspration sites. Also an interesting post by Dead Wings Designs. A few years ago, I never used to find websites with the purpose of posting interesting work for designers to look at, yet now they are everywhere.

It is just another example of how the design industry has changed and become more fast moving. But in this post, I will ask the question is this change of information sharing good? Does it encourage creativity? Does it make design a ‘look and feel’ rather than communication industry.

A few weeks ago, I produced a contents page to a brochure running horizontally across both the front and back of the brochure. A few days later I saw something on a design inspiration site which was pretty similar. Obviously it did not look exactly the same – but pretty similar. I realised I had seen it before and subconsciously remembered it and used it myself. I had seen it on a design inspiration site. This is one example of how it maybe stifled creativity. I used an easy solution that was already available rather than displaying innovation to find my own.

OK, so from a personal point of view I love looking at design inspiration sites. Just last week, I wrote a post containing my top 5. But how can a designer be truly original or tap into his own creativity when he is surrounded by examples from everyone else. Like the above example surely he or she will note things subconsciously which will then pop straight back into the head when doing a project. Designers now tend to look outwards rather than inwards for their inspiration.

Another point to consider is the ease of them. Sure this sounds like a good thing. Inspiration – and fast. But is it too fast? Yes a designer has always been able to look at other work, but now this has become so easy. It takes a few minutes to display hundreds of designs from the past 50 years. But they are designs of anything. Displayed often more for their aesthetic beauty rather than communication.

In the past at least you would make the effort to research similar or alternative market places. Find other company brochures, by contacting weeks in advance in preparation of a project. It would give you an insight into the whole industry, marketing, sales approaches as well as communication design or good typography. Looking at design inspiration sights just give you a look at visual treatments and the tendency is to look quickly and move on.

Whilst in some ways this is great, it also must be noted that to me design is a research based industry. It is not enough just to look at the look and feel of things. Rather we should be analysing all competitors closely. Reading their brochures and not just taking an overlook. Designers in a way are no different from marketeers. It is not about just applying a visual, but rather the best way to communicate a message.

Currently I think the industry is in danger of not thinking enough. For me this is the difference between art and design. Art is a product in itself. It is something someone would buy on its own merit. Design on the other hand is always communicating something else. It sells another product, or gets a message across. Because of this it is essential that we analyse the whole marketplace. Start thinking like marketeers again, analysing the industry and doing our research. Not just doing things because they look nice.

I will finish this post by again asking do design inspiration sites stifle creativity? Indeed is creativity possible in a world filled with influence and inspiration? I would always argue no, it is not. I would also argue that it has never been truly possible and inspiration has always been everywhere.

But I would also argue that taking inspiration from things is not a problem. There is nothing wrong with borrowing ideas from other people. The skill of a designer is to look at current communication and question what is appropriate and what is not for their won project. I believe the skill of a designer or anyone whose trade is innovation is to add their own touch. Never do things the same, but add a twist. Take it that step further.

We must however keep questioning at the source of all our designs. We must not get carried away with quick inspiration and quick solutions. Rather we should analyse the whole project audience and market place. It is only with understanding that the correct and not easiest solution will reveal itself.

Design Inspiration Websites

I have seen lots of blogs containing design inspiration sites recently…so I want to do one too.

Below are my five (you don’t need more than that surely!!!) favourite design inspiration sites…

September Industry

Form Fifty Five

It’s Nice That

ffffound

TypeNeu

The problems with the Rebrand London project

So a bit of back story first of all. The Greater London Authority and specifically the mayor himself decided that the time was right for London to be rebranded. Simple as that? Pretty much actually. With the Olympics just round the corner they argued that there was now a need for a unified visual approach.

Firstly lets look at the reasons for this project. The whole brief looks like a bit of a whim from people who really have no idea about anything branding or graphic design related. It looks a little like the main purpose is to drum up publicity and gain public interest without any real clear reasons why a rebrand was needed, what they wanted to convey and what it was going to be used for. Could it be about merchandising? After all I read on several blogs that they were aiming for a brand similar to the I heart NY logo from our friends across the pond.

A rebrand for a city as visual as London is always going to very difficult. For one thing it has about a thousand recognisable brands anyway which have been developed over 100’s of years. Any new mark would have to fight its way through all of this and also contest with history, itself an undefeatable opponent when trying to make something iconic. Imagine comparing any new logo to the underground symbol and asking what is the most iconic or recognisable. It is a battle no matter what you design, you will never win.

With the New York brand, I am by no means an expert, but I think it happened spontaneously rather than a need to rebrand the city. Maybe cities such as New York and London are too big, filled with too much current imagery to ever be branded by process. You cannot force so many visuals under one umbrella. Rather imagery and symbols rise up naturally. Almost voted up by the popularity of an un-judging public. Surely something becoming an icon is something that happens over time and cannot be forced – so why try?

Another major issue I have with this project was the way it treated the design industry as a whole. I think it was really bad that such a high profile project was put out to different agencies asking for unpaid work. The design industry in general struggles for credibility and is constantly arguing for people to recognise it, not just as a look and feel industry, but one of expert communicators. The fact that the city of London itself and the mayor have the audacity to just ask for unpaid work undermines the whole industry. If they wanted a rebrand they should have done their research and hired a branding agency, paying it and supplying it with a clear and concise brief. Obviously this wasn’t the case.

Furthermore the fact that any work is being judged by a panel of people who seem to have no understanding of design is only asking for trouble. I read on Designweek that there has been no decision made as to a winner or solution yet and this was because they are not satisfied with any entries. There is little doubt that London has plenty of graphic design talent, so the questions should be asked instead of the brief, or of the opinions of the panel itself. Indeed, Jim Prior, chief executive of The Partners (one of the agencies pitching) agreed with this saying ‘either the collective design industry of London is incapable of designing a London logo, or the criteria against which they are measuring good design is based on a subjective beauty parade of rubbish’.

Creative review wrote on its first blog regarding the mayors whim for a rebrand project that London already had its ‘unofficial identity’ in the shape of the tube style logo, and to be honest they were probably right. I think to sum up, an iconic brand cannot be forced, especially when it is trying to muscle out so many brands that already have iconic status. Surely an icon is something developed over time and a fluid rather forced process.

More really is less in graphic design

I went to a lecture last year to see Wim Crouwell talk. It was a great talk and one of the many things that inspired me was the way he spoke about graphic design being solely a tool for communication. The way it was described was that his technique was generally to find the simplest and most effective way of communicating and nothing more. To almost boil a design down so far that you are left with only the purest of elements.

I think this is probably how all designers should approach projects. Whilst it sounds really simple it is usually a long process of subtraction. It involves really analysing something and asking what core elements make it what it is? It is also a lot about looking at the brand and defining the key features.

But designers are after all communicators and this process is one all about communication. I wanted to share a couple of examples of really minimal design which relies on only the absolutely necessary of information to achieve the purpose.

A good example of this is the apple logo. One of the most recognisable symbols of the 20th century it is the form of this I want to look at today. It is made entirely from such simple features and geometric shapes to do the bare minimum to be a symbol of an apple. But most distinguishing thing for me is the lack of a stem and simply placing the leaf above the apple is enough.

Daniel Eatock also showed a great example as an alternative to the London 2012 logo. It is based on the classic British RAF symbol combined with the olympic rings. Again it is the simplest of forms and seems wonderfully obvious once its out there. Someone once described genius as seeing something that has always been there and yet noticing it.

I tried to use this approach for this logo for a dog show I did last year. I spent ages playing about with the shape of a dof or complex combinations of type faces and then realised that the correct solution was probably the most simple.

Another wonderful example of this is these posters I found by  Exergian. These are great examples of taking the most recognisable features and illustrating with the simplest of forms. The knightrider one in particular is so simple, in a way so obvious and yet also splendidly original. It leaves you with the envious feeling of why didnt I think of that?

Especially in logo design and branding this can be a really useful process and one more designers should go through. Much of design has become about making something pretty or dressing it, but we must remember that first and foremost the trade is about communication. Even when complication is needed, it should flow from the simple and necessary information building upon this to achieve the desired technique.

Hope you enjoyed the post. Do you have any examples to add to this list?

Great thick headline fonts

This post contains some cool fonts I have used, or tried to use recently. Fonts are an essential part of any design and finding the right one can indeed transform a design, make it bland, or turn it into something wildely exciting.

Hope you think these ones are as good as I do. I have tried to put a number of good free ones on too, for those designing on a budget. The fonts are all really thick and great for headlines or experimental typography.

Stilla
I love this font. I know plenty of top design agencies who use it frequently. Its a lovely bold italic font with a real difference. I have seen a couple of versions of this. I have found a downloadable file here,  looks slightly different in certain characters but still really cool. It seems to work well in both uppercase and lowercase.

Babyteeth
This is essentially an all caps font. Its really original and perfect for unique typographic experiments for a front page or poster, or anything else that needs a bit of impact. Spin recently used it on their mythologies graphics. They have adjusted it a bit by reducing the spaces on the gaps but apart from that is pretty much the same. It helps a lot actually and is probably a good idea if your gonna use this. The great thing about this font it is free and can be found here.

Val

I wrote a post about this one previously as I liked it so much. Again it appears to be free and can be downloaded here. Its really thick as you can see and has options to slope characters such as A or V in either direction by changing the case. Again its great for poster or cover typography. Obviously not so good for body text due to legibility.

Bifur

This is another free font and again really original. It really uses the positive and negative space well. Great for a freebe and can be found here.

Giza (nine)

Not a freebe and to be honest not that new or anything, definitely a classic though. I have only recently used it and absolutely loved it. Its so thick and expressive and can add a real geometric order to a page because its so bold and such thin spacing. Its not free afraid, but can be found here.

Beans
This is a lineto font so obviously not free. Seen Build use it a few times. Its so original and really opens up a design. So powerful it works perfectly on its own. Found here.

Fart Deco
Great name and also a great font. And guess what? thats right, its also free. Lots of really interesting characters. Can give a real arty feel. Get it here.

Bifurk

another lovely thick font which again has such structure to it. Works wonderfully well at large scales taking up most of the page. Seen lots of the top agencies use this one. Also free and can be found here.

Hope you enjoyed. What are your favourites? Any more to add to this list? let me know?