I figured by posting this I will be the hero of every Mac Genius, Creative and IT worker in the US.

Short term plan is simply to have a table list. Long term is to have a searchable database. Any and all submissions are welcome.

I have so much to write about, so much to tell.  My world has just been bursting with inspiration in the last few weeks, but I have so little time to share. So I’m leaving you with a simple link to a site I’m working on.

The SiNNERMAN ensemble is a new upcoming theater production group based out of Chicago. They will be premiering their second play this May. I’m working closely with them on establishing their brand identity, including but not limited to: their logo and their website. Stay tuned.

Some of the less educated front runner fans will look at Torre and point the blame for the Yankees’ failures in recent years. But what they don’t remember is that in 12 years Joe brought us to the post season 12 times. Before Joe the Yankees hadn’t won the series since 1978 and even been there since 1982. The problem is in perception. Joe’s the best manager in the biz, I firmly believe this.

Joe Torre is not the problem with the Yankees. The Yankees are the problem with the Yankees.

I’m bitter right now about this but I feel in my gut this is the wrong move, though I’m glad it was ultimately Joe’s decision. My co-worker Frank said to me the other day that though he hates the Yankees, he loves Joe Torre. Joe really is the best and he’s an all around class act, Frank said it well: He deserves to work for an organization that really appreciates him.

I’m a Yankee fan for life, but today is a sad day and one where I really am at odds with the team I love so much.

Good luck Joe. Go win another ring.

Those words are from the chorus of a track entitled ‘Stop’ from Floridian rock group Against Me!’s latest release ‘New Wave.’ The album and this line are significant because it’s not just the group’s newest, it’s their first on a “major label.” A big step for a band who is known for being outspoken against the government, big corporations and the music industry. Although ‘New Wave’ has received praise from industry critics, the major label signing has caused Against Me! to be the target of an intense amount of scrutiny from the scene it arouse from and it’s one time “fans.”

Akiva Gottlieb of the Nation, in an excellently composed and structured piece, delves into the band’s recent struggles. However, the writer’s opinion of the group and it’s front-man, Tom Gabel, show through quite clearly. With lines like “If you can’t stop a war, you might as well make money, right?” peppered throughout, it steers far from objectivity. Even flirting with becoming an attack piece itself near the end, as if the writer herself were personally offended by the band’s actions. Although she took the time to interview Gabel himself and include quotes from him they are not without snide remarks about his recent arrest or criticism. She reinforces her ideas with a quote from another critic of the band’s actions, Mike Conklin of The L Magazine:

“when you say the same things over and over again, as loudly as [Gabel] did, into a microphone no less, to countless impressionable teenagers, you’ve effectively lost your right to just decide one day that you didn’t mean any of it.”

Against Me!’s position is that they are misunderstood and the whole ’sellout’ movement against them is a ridiculous waste of time and a case of hugely missing the point of their music. They push on and ‘New Wave’ is as harsh as ever on the industry with songs like ‘Up the Cuts’ and it’s title track. However many ex-fans critics feel differently. Some have even gone as far as to book protest shows against them and others have published guides to subverting the band’s concerts. The justification is often lacking however, just coming down to this whiney chorus from the peanut gallery of ‘They signed to a major label! How can they be critical! Hypocrites! Sellouts!” Ms. Gottlieb’s article for instance hinges on one sentence that the writer uses to justify much of her perspective on the band:

“Maybe the band’s subsequent jump to Sire Records–itself a subsidiary of Warner Bros., and thus a part of Time-Warner, the world’s largest media conglomerate–doesn’t pack the same epochal punch as Bob Dylan going electric, but the results again seem to justify the decision.”

However, it would seem this crucial line is horribly factually inaccurate.

Yes, Sire is in fact a subsidiary of Warner Music Group, however despite the name, they are not a part of Time Warner. WMG was sold off by Time Warner in late 2003 to an independent group of investors and is now completely independently owned an operated. These days, despite it’s ‘major label’ status, WMG targets it’s business much differently than it had in it’s past. In recent years WMG has focused on signing a lot of the bigger independent punk bands to get into more niche markets with less focus on the mainstream. Groups like Rancid and Less Than Jake have found homes where they previously wouldn’t have been considered “commercially viable.” Warner these days has become, apparently, a welcoming home to bands who want major label distribution and production without having to sacrifice their creative vision and values.

I think this often goes unknown or misunderstood by a lot of Against Me!’s fans and I imagine it has factored greatly in a lot of band’s signing to WMG labels.

The whole thing goes back to the age old ‘What makes someone a sellout?’ argument that any of us might have written about in out high school journalism classes. Unfortunately as trivial as that argument is, it still doesn’t have a clear answer. Personally, I tend to believe that the claims against Against Me! remain mostly unfounded and short sighted. I feel like it’s one more case of closed minded people who claim to be open. An unfortunate side effect often bred in punk culture. People who claim a “counter culture” but ultimately have a problem with anyone making a living selling their art or want to disrupt something other than a local basement show.

While I see some values in the criticism I think it’s unwarranted in this case. Certainly there is a moral difference between signing to a very large independent label that only makes music and signing to a global conglomerate media or electronics company that makes bombs for the government.

So in Against Me!’s own words:

“All the punks still singing the same song.
Is there anyone thinking what I am?
Is there any other alternative?

Are you restless like me?”

Sadly, I think “the punks” are missing the point.

Coming out here to Chicago has been a huge opportunity for me, there is always something new and inspiring going on that fascinates me. So much to learn.

Last week I was lucky enough to attend a screening of Wes Anderson’s Hotel Chevalier at the Apple Store. The screening was hosted by producer Roman Coppola. Afterwards Roman stuck around for Q&A. The crowd was excellent and his rapport with them was phenominal. While film is not my field of choice listening to Roman was really inspiring. He spoke about starting a project, from researching it and making compromises to achieve a vision. I’m really looking forward to The Darjeeling Limited.

It’s weird but I spent years in New York, the “cultural center of the world”, and somehow I missed opportunities like this. I think I’m just more in tune with the world around me now.

I’m excited.

Ultimately this discovery lead me to try something drastic and pick up and move to Chicago from New York where I had spent my entirely life until that point. While I miss NY and I miss my friends, I’m happier now and I’m carving out a new niche for myself here. I’ve missed web design a lot and I’ve lagged behind. Well, I made a decision to do something about it and last month I attended An Event Apart: Chicago with the hope it would get me back into things.

Boy was I right! Since the conference I’ve had design on the brain non-stop. I found myself creatively inspired in particularly by Jason Santa Maria, Jeremy Keith and Liz Danzico. I’ve been fussing over a site design for this site here for over three years and it gave me the guts to finally scrap everything I had and start rethinking. I’ve found myself re-energized. The new header graphic treatment is hopefully a taste of things to come as I plan to be a much more active participant in the design community so stay tuned.

The site in question, Mr. Ellis speculates that it may be tied to the movie release as viral marketing ARG (Alternate Reality Game, ala The Hanso Foundation and the TV show Lost). If he’s right it leaves much to be desired. Sure, the site makes mention of ‘Nova Express’ a fictional magazine from the Watchmen story and hawks the character’s ‘life changing methods,’ however the links are nonfunctional and even the mailing list box doesn’t work, it instead is a mailto link to ‘adrian@theveidtmethod.com‘. The site design is weak at best, I would imagine if Warner Brothers were to be getting into the viral game, they’d put a little more effort into it. A quick look at the HTML code reveals the site to be based off a free template webdesign credited to a ‘Joseph De Araujo‘. Lame.

Putting those things aside, the site still doesn’t make sense. For one, the Watchmen storyline takes place in an alternate reality, cold war era, 1985; a detail which is reportedly being retained for the movie. If that’s the case, a viral web ad campaign or ARG would be out of place. Especially seeing as how it’s not 1985 and the World Wide Web didn’t exist in it’s current form back then either.

The true telltale however is this: on the bottom left of the page there is a login link that brings up the following:

Real ARGs are never this sloppy. Suddenly it all makes a lot more sense. Looking a little harder one finds that the site is actually hosted at theonering.net: a Lord of the Rings fan site. Turns out, this isn’t their first attempt either, they’ve also been publishing a blogger website entitled ‘rorschach’s journal.‘ Some believe the guys at ‘theonering’ have been lobbying to try and get some deal with Warner Brothers to do viral marketing for the movie. My best guess is they hope to make another unofficial hub like theonering.net possibly based around Moore’s works or something. Since Lord of the Ring’s success they’ve sort of made a business out of movie fan sites apparently.

Conclusion: It’s nothing but a bunch of geeks with a hard on for the original comic book having some unofficial web fun and a letdown for us other geeks looking for something fun to dig though while we get hyped up looking forward to the movie.

To date the only official Watchmen teaser info can be found here. Go back to sleep Watchmen fans.

On a serious note… that thing looks REALLY cool, I think for once Microsoft is right on the money, it’s going to change the industry with this technology. I’m not sure this is the right implementation, but it’s years ahead of the curve. Too bad it costs $10,000.

Then again, I thought Sega’s ‘Time Traveler’ was the future of gaming back in 1991. I was 10. Cut me some slack.

So.. how long before someone mods one to do what Eric’s suggesting?

Coudal Partners attempts to defend the logo but to me I almost find their defense offensive to common sense. They attempt to state 10 reasons why it should be loved, they make no comment of the fact it’s visually unpleasant. Regardless of why we ’should love it,’ the fact remains still that the logo is ugly. No amout of politicing in it’s favor will change that fact. However, for the sake of argument I’ll bite and respond to their defense:

It’s not boring. The bright colors and distinctive design definitely DO stand out and it’s immediately recognizable. Everyone’s talking about it. Designers always complain about the status quo, so we find it surprising that so very few are taking a stand for a somewhat radical design.

It looks like something out of the Flintstones. Just because it stands out doesn’t mean it’s good. I’m kinda insulted by the end of that statement really… The whole ‘designers always’ comment. Just because it’s a radical design doesn’t mean it’s good. I’m all for daring and unique if you can pull it off well and it looks good. Yeah this logo is definitely daring and definitely unique, but it doesn’t look good.

It’s different. It avoids all the go-to pratfalls of current logo design. No brushstrokes! No feathered drop shadows! No mirrored reflections! No gradients, patriotic colors, rainbows, ribbons, landmarks, symbols of unity, maps, swooshes or globes!

Yes it avoids a ton of cliché’s, and that is a good thing, but it subscribes to several others, most notable the neon pink ‘futuristic’ look of the early 1990s children’s toys and TV. I feel like I should be watching Saved By The Bell.

It’s reproducable. Aside from the word “London” going chunky when sloppily rendered for the web (notably on the BBC reproduction that ended up on every site critiquing the logo), it’s good to see a logo that’s so easily printable, broadcastable, embroiderable and moldable (think of how horrible those 9-color rainbow brushstroke logos look when they’re process-printed out-of-register with a 100 line screen on a McDonalds Cup!). It even looks pretty great in black and white.

It’s flexible. A variety of color combinations, shapes, and patterns are available, keeping the logo slightly different on each view, but consistent (the BBC showed only the pink and yellow version, which didn’t help its case). Also, keep in mind that an Olympic logo is almost always saddled with the logos of corporate partners. This square, bold mark will hold up.

It’s the basis for a graphic system. Events require a complicated system of signage, identification, ornamentation, and even architecture. This logo and its associated colors, shapes, type and patterns are the perfect starting point for some fantastic signage, event icons, banners, tickets, uniforms and merchandise.

So… basically it meets the requirements for being a logo? The whole point of creating a logo is to be able to create a brand image around it. Anything that can’t be printed with other logos or in different sizes would be simply unacceptable. Just because this logo can do these things doesn’t mean it should be picked.

The last part in that group actually scares me… ‘a basis for a graphic system’ ugggg a whole theme based around this hideous thing… yuck!

It’s timeless. We’ve read complaints that it’s reminiscent of Tangrams (popular since the 1800s), Jamie Reid’s “Never Mind the Bollocks” cover (1977), MTV (1981), ’80s new wave design (Swatch, Bennetton), Emigre Magazine, early 90s television titles (Wacaday, Going Live, The Ben Stiller Show). We’ve read complaints that it’s too ‘current’ and it’ll look dated by 2012. We’ve also read complaints that it’s too futuristic or modern. As far as we’re concerned, all design is influenced by other design. This design rises above its influences, yet remains simple enough to stand on its own. If current trends continue (towards four color, “computery” 3-D), this logo will be even more fresh in five years.

I hate this defense.. just because there is a lot of bad design out there that seem to have a lot of similar conventions which this one lacks doesn’t mean this is good. It just means this one manages to stand on it’s own with it’s ugliness, it succeeds in being ugly in a completely refreshing way.

It’s English. The two names that come to mind when we hear “british design” are two of our favorite designers of all time: Neville Brody and Peter Saville. Without being a direct knockoff, the 2012 logo is evocative of their work, the punk and new-wave movements, rave culture and everything we like about the United Kingdom.

What? Because it’s jagged and neon it evokes all these things? I kinda find that demeaning to those cultural movements.

When we hear “my kid could have done that!” we think “success.” Some of the greatest logos of all time involve two lines (the Christian cross) or three lines and a circle (Mercedes). Your kid COULD have done that, but she didn’t. Nor did she design the graphics standards manual that goes with it. So give it a rest. Or send us her resume.

There is a difference between this logo and a Jackson Pollock painting. Sure they both have that same criticism of them, and that defense. But the fact of the matter is Pollock’s work managed to have an air of excitement and interest around it, bottom line, it was good. This logo is just ugly. Just because it’s simple or different doesn’t make it good, this defense could be raised to almost any piece of art that is simple, doesn’t mean it’s right or worth defending, and it detracts from the real instances where this defense is important. It comes off as that elitist ‘art for art’s sake’ attitude that so often leads people to think all artists are self righteous nut-jobs. It hurts the design community as a whole when you use this excuse on something not worthwhile.

It cost £400,000. That’s probably a bargain for an incredibly high-profile complete graphic identity system for an international company/event designed by experienced professionals. Anyone valuing the importance of design should give that argument a rest, too. We wouldn’t have taken the job for a shilling less.

Do you know what that translates to in Dollars… shit. I’d kill for a gig like that and laugh all the way to the bank. I cannot believe London’s olympic committee got suckered into that. It’s comparable to the emperor’s new wardrobe. Someone must have convinced them this was smart when the fact is they got takenL The emperor has no clothes on.

It’s unexpected. Chicago is bidding for the 2016 Olympics and the temporary logo is a perfectly decent design. It’s attractive, memorable and generally liked. It even generated a fair amount of internet buzz. But those brushstrokes and gradients don’t reproduce well, the narrow vertical orientation complicates usage and by 2016, the Sears Tower is likely to be Chicago’s third-tallest building. More than anything, the London logo takes the Olympic logo to a new level of boldness, abstraction and simplicity. And we’re a bit jealous.

Just because it’s unique doesn’t mean it’s good. It doesn’t hide the fact that it’s ugly. Yes it stands out.. because it’s ugly.

To make matters worse it says nothing about the olympics ANY logo could be put in the middle of that zero and it would symbolize that. The logo cannot stand alone and evoke any sort of meaning. It cannot exist and say ‘olympics,’ ’sports,’ ‘competition,’ or anything for that matter without the olympic rings in it. seeing things like this make me miss people like Paul Rand who knew how to use symbolism to make something meaningful, is there no one like him left these days? There is a point where abstraction without meaning is just dumb and any function is lost. This is way past that point. Is there really a whole generation of designers out there that meaning and symbolism is lost on? That scares me really.