Archive for the ‘Stuff’ Category

The Post about this Blog

Sunday, October 19th, 2014
Sean Adams, Burning Settlers Cabin, 2014

Sean Adams, Burning Settlers Cabin, 2014

 

One of the tenets of post-modernism is self-referential expression. This post, then is the post-modern one. This is a post about this blog.

When burningsettlerscabin first launched, I designed a nice Victorian logo for the masthead. It worked well with the minimal layout and I had fun making it. After awhile, I grew tired of that version. And its started to feel vertiginously close to hipster design. So I made a new one. This became an on-going hobby. The point of this blog is as shallow as it gets. If I’m interested in something or find an inspirational artifact or solution, I write about it. It’s that simple. If I want to, I write. If I don’t feel like it, I don’t. I know this is absolutely the most wrong thing one can do with all the rules of social media. But, I have so many other rules in life: typographic, social manners, organizing linen closets, age appropriate clothing, and the list goes on.

The masthead follows the same logic. If I feel like making a new one, I do. If it’s heinously hideous but I like it, I use it. So, in response to the requests to post one or the other mastheads here they are.

While some have said burningsettlerscabin is their “lite” (yes, spelled that way) version of Design Observer, consider this: In this post, self-referentiality [and the epistemological skepticism it implies] is central to postmodernism and takes its typological and typographic cue from the self-referential, though not mutually exclusive, aesthetics of nostalgia, irony, and satire.

See, the settlers at the cabin are way smart.

 

 

 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

FacebookTwitterTumblrGoogle+PinterestShare This Story

Erotic Abandon

Monday, September 22nd, 2014
Eros magazine, Herb Lubalin Art Director, 1968

Eros magazine, Herb Lubalin Art Director, 1968

This is frustrating: I suggest that a student have more fun and freedom on a project and they return the next week with the most itsy-bitsy slight change. I don’t understand the timidness. It’s as if they believe God will strike them dead if they use a quickly drawn gesture, or too much color, or an enormously scaled grainy image. So I get the tidy and polite vector art solutions or lovely but dead photographs. It really drives me to murder. I’m the opposite of the cranky professors who say, “Oh, that’s gone too far.” I beg them, “Please, please go so far that everyone in the room is shocked and aghast at your complete lack of restraint.”

I’m not pushing students to go outside of their comfort level and work in broad strokes to be mean. I don’t want them to spend their lives designing tasteful wine labels and polite brochures. I want them to be wonderful.

The example I use is Herb Lubalin and Ralph Ginzburg’s Eros magazine. Eros was short lived, only four issues from 1968 to 1971. By today’s standards it tame. You can find more explicit imagery by doing a google search for “cat”. Lubalin uses the page like a giant canvas, not a small magazine. When he uses negative space, he does past the comfortable spot. When he handles headlines, he does bad things like smashing the copy together in a corner. The images are dramatic and play with radical scale and cropping. At the same time, the thing is refined to death.

Partners at a law firm usually make more than graphic designers. That’s ok because they have to wear real life work clothes and we don’t. And we can have fun. That’s the trade-off. Why be miserable and uptight, and a graphic designer. You can do that as a financial analyst and make much more money.

Spread images via: http://westread.blogspot.fr/

DSC00058 DSC04320 1600x1124xeros3.jpg.pagespeed.ic.pf715PJEhaeros32 Eros 1 003 DSC00077 DSC04286 eros17Eros+1+031DSC00076 DSC00110 eros21 eros34

Helvetica is Jan

Friday, August 8th, 2014
Neue Haas Grotesk, Christian Schwartz, 2004

Neue Haas Grotesk, Christian Schwartz, 2004

Speaking after Stefan Sagmeister at a conference is a bad idea. I’ve done this many times. It’s not that Stefan is nothing less than a true gentleman and good friend, it’s that when he finishes, I can look out at the audience from the side of the stage and see people streaming out en masse. “Well that’s what I came for, time to go,” they must be saying. I’m not crazy about doing this, as I tend to come off as, “and now for the easy listening break.”

Years ago, I spoke at a conference following someone, not as generous as Stefan, who was one of the hip and cool designers at that time. She talked about the critical theory and deconstruction of meaning regarding a logo she designed that looked exactly like Helvetica, but the crossbar of the “A” was removed. People seemed enthralled. I just thought, “and…”

Now, I’ve become that person, waxing on about the importance of the differences between Haas Grotesk and Helvetica. Sorry. I know everyone has a major hard-on for Helvetica, but I can’t look at it as anything but the less attractive sister of Haas Grotesk, like Jan and Marsha. Originally, Helvetica was Haas Grotesk, but over time changes were made for expediency. Christian Schwartz redrew Haas Grotesk in 2004, based on Max Miedinger‘s 1957 version.

Compared to standard issue system Helvetica, it’s elegant, crisp, warm, and legible. It doesn’t suffer from the “generic” look of Helvetica. I’ve been using it probably more than I should. I promise, however, to not talk endlessly about the lower case “r” at my next lecture. Maybe just a little.

Screen-Shot-2014-08-08-at-11.04.51-AM Screen-Shot-2014-08-08-at-11.04.17-AM Screen-Shot-2014-08-08-at-11.03.46-AMNeue_Haas_Grotesk-alphabet notebook-1957-May-07 specimen-1963-Neuburg_Rudin poster_front_website_905

Haas Grotesk (L) Helvetica (R)

Haas Grotesk (L) Helvetica (R)

Helvetica in Switzerland

Helvetica in Switzerland

Helvetica in Switzerland

Helvetica in Switzerland

 

Mutilated Bodies

Monday, July 14th, 2014
Herb Lubalin poster, Davida Typeface, Louis Minott, 1965

Herb Lubalin poster, Davida Typeface, Louis Minott, 1965

Some fonts are bad. They are like that photo of a horrible car crash that you can never unsee. It’s not because they are cursed or especially ugly (well, some are), it’s because they have been mutilated and left to die. As I’ve grown older, I’m drawn to typefaces that may, perhaps, strain the limits of good taste.

Last week, I used Davida, designed by Louis Minott in 1965, on an annual report project. Noreen suggested I was not following the corporate system and could be opening the door to future infractions. I saw it as adding some zest and excitement. I see so much good taste sans-serif typography on a daily basis that I’m starving for something wrong.

The problem was getting a good cut of Davida. The original is really well drawn and formed. But someone along the way discovered it in the bin of forgotten typefaces and beat it regularly. The digital version is a far cry from where it began. It’s been around the block. My only choice is to redraw it myself and try to save it.

The lesson here is to find the original version of any font, see what it was meant to be before someone redrew it in a dark basement. I pledge to continue to rehabilitate Davida regardless of the current typographic style du jour.

 334010_CAFEDUMONDE_BEIGNETMIX

Good-DavidaDavida3 Davida1Louis-MinottP1050758

Sense and Sensibility

Thursday, June 26th, 2014
Screen Shot 2014-06-26 at 3.05.21 PM

Foundations of Layout and Composition: Marketing Collateral

Call me old-fashioned, but I think it’s important for a designer to know certain basic issues like the size of a business card and what information belongs on an envelope. Nevertheless, I see a great number of portfolios that have envelopes with phone and fax numbers, business cards that are unwieldy and oddly sized, and examples of 3-dimensional promotion that goes against the laws of physics. No this isn’t the fault of the owner of the portfolio. Clearly nobody took the time to explain these basic issues. I’m guilty of this myself. I’ve often talked to students and assumed someone else already taught them the information.

So, I can complain and be the cranky designer who laments that world isn’t what it was when I was a youngster, or I can help. When the good folks at Lynda.com asked me what course I’d like to do next, I suggested we dig deeper into basic issues of layout and composition and move into the stuff we make. Foundations of Layout and Composition: Marketing Collateral gave me a chance to start at the beginning with issues like audience, determining a budget, and what items to produce. I then added basic information on business cards, letterhead, swag, 3-d promotion, and posters.

I’m hoping the examples I use are interesting and inspiring. I rounded up some of my favorite firms like Eight and a Half and Modern Dog. But the main goal is to explain simply the most basic information with collateral. Don’t get me wrong; I’m fine with something being unexpected. In fact it should be. But it’s best when you know why it’s not ordinary. Nobody should be in the position that I witnessed a couple of weeks ago:

Me: Why did you decide to make the letterhead a unique size?

Designer: What?

Me: I’m not sure that a 5×7 card is a poster. What was your intention?

Designer: What?

Me: Is the envelope mailable? It looks like it will fall apart and cost a ton in postage.

Designer: Why are you so mean?

Screen Shot 2014-06-26 at 3.32.08 PM Screen Shot 2014-06-26 at 3.31.30 PM

Screen Shot 2014-06-26 at 3.03.01 PM

Screen Shot 2014-06-26 at 3.04.27 PM Screen Shot 2014-06-26 at 3.03.52 PM Screen Shot 2014-06-26 at 3.05.04 PM Screen Shot 2014-06-26 at 3.04.48 PM Screen Shot 2014-06-26 at 3.07.11 PM Screen Shot 2014-06-26 at 3.02.17 PM Screen Shot 2014-06-26 at 3.07.55 PM