Comments on: Redesigning Print and HOW http://www.beadesigngroup.com/blog/archives/2005/06/redesigning-print-and-how.php A blog for graphic designers Tue, 13 Jul 2010 01:38:08 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Bennett http://www.beadesigngroup.com/blog/archives/2005/06/redesigning-print-and-how.php/comment-page-1#comment-1075 Bennett Wed, 06 Jul 2005 17:39:07 +0000 http://www.beadesigngroup.com/2005/06/17/redesigning-print-and-how/#comment-1075 Steve, Thanks for all of your insight. It is always great to get some different perspectives. This wasn't my favorite session but I guess I got more out it than you did. I WAS surprised at how insistent the Pentagram guys were about their turned down ideas. I didn't get the idea that the editors were disappointed in the design at all. They seemed very pleased with the end result. I also think that the before and after shots were not as obvious as you stated. I think the format is there for some great cover designs and consistency for both magazines. I also really like the idea that when you stack the entire year of HOW Magazine, it will spell out HOW. If feel like I should come to the defense of the moderator, Debbie Millman. I thought she did a fine job. I'm not sure why you thought she was full of herself. I know she interviewed the designers before this session and had the information she needed. I'm sure she probably knew all of the included designers on a fairly personal level as well. Her camaraderie with the designers and editors might have come across as self absorbed to some people. I felt that she kept the conversation on track and on the topics that needed to be discussed. Steve, Thanks for all of your insight. It is always great to get some different perspectives.

This wasn’t my favorite session but I guess I got more out it than you did. I WAS surprised at how insistent the Pentagram guys were about their turned down ideas. I didn’t get the idea that the editors were disappointed in the design at all. They seemed very pleased with the end result. I also think that the before and after shots were not as obvious as you stated. I think the format is there for some great cover designs and consistency for both magazines. I also really like the idea that when you stack the entire year of HOW Magazine, it will spell out HOW.

If feel like I should come to the defense of the moderator, Debbie Millman. I thought she did a fine job. I’m not sure why you thought she was full of herself. I know she interviewed the designers before this session and had the information she needed. I’m sure she probably knew all of the included designers on a fairly personal level as well. Her camaraderie with the designers and editors might have come across as self absorbed to some people. I felt that she kept the conversation on track and on the topics that needed to be discussed.

]]> By: Steve Corning http://www.beadesigngroup.com/blog/archives/2005/06/redesigning-print-and-how.php/comment-page-1#comment-1074 Steve Corning Sat, 02 Jul 2005 06:28:11 +0000 http://www.beadesigngroup.com/2005/06/17/redesigning-print-and-how/#comment-1074 This was the only session which I found to be of little value. I also had the highest regard for Pentagram, but after this session, I would not hire them to do anything. Okay....maybe I did learn, ignoring the client's needs might not be such a good idea, (clearly the editors were hinting, they were not so happy with the result). And putting design in front of function, (readability of the magazine), might be a bad idea. The funny moments in this session came from the side-by-side comparison of old and new for the HOW magazine. Each time, the "Old" was far superior to the, "New". The moderator was so full of herself, listening to her became tiresome quickly. The rest of the sessions were so outstanding, the poor quality of this session made for a sharp contrast. The talk show format for this session, seemed trite, and prevented the speakers having a good discussion. This was the only session which I found to be of little value. I also had the highest regard for Pentagram, but after this session, I would not hire them to do anything. Okay….maybe I did learn, ignoring the client’s needs might not be such a good idea, (clearly the editors were hinting, they were not so happy with the result). And putting design in front of function, (readability of the magazine), might be a bad idea. The funny moments in this session came from the side-by-side comparison of old and new for the HOW magazine. Each time, the “Old” was far superior to the, “New”.
The moderator was so full of herself, listening to her became tiresome quickly. The rest of the sessions were so outstanding, the poor quality of this session made for a sharp contrast. The talk show format for this session, seemed trite, and prevented the speakers having a good discussion.

]]> By: Bennett http://www.beadesigngroup.com/blog/archives/2005/06/redesigning-print-and-how.php/comment-page-1#comment-1073 Bennett Sat, 25 Jun 2005 14:25:23 +0000 http://www.beadesigngroup.com/2005/06/17/redesigning-print-and-how/#comment-1073 I think they weren't just talking about the words when they referred to content. I would assume that the design and designers they highlight would also be considered content. I was impressed how Print is valuing their articles more. By having the article appear uninterrupted, (i.e. not shoving half of it on the last page) they are taking a big step in valuing the articles. Now if they could just make the entire magazine the same paper weight that would be great. There has to be an economic way to get rid of the thick paper samples that ruin your magazine experience. Maybe a paper company could make it their theme. "We respect design, so we don't put 80lb cover ads in this magazine." I would certainly take notice. Maybe other paper companies would voluntarily follow suit. I know . . . pipe dreams. I think they weren’t just talking about the words when they referred to content. I would assume that the design and designers they highlight would also be considered content. I was impressed how Print is valuing their articles more. By having the article appear uninterrupted, (i.e. not shoving half of it on the last page) they are taking a big step in valuing the articles. Now if they could just make the entire magazine the same paper weight that would be great. There has to be an economic way to get rid of the thick paper samples that ruin your magazine experience.

Maybe a paper company could make it their theme. “We respect design, so we don’t put 80lb cover ads in this magazine.” I would certainly take notice. Maybe other paper companies would voluntarily follow suit. I know . . . pipe dreams.

]]> By: Adrian http://www.beadesigngroup.com/blog/archives/2005/06/redesigning-print-and-how.php/comment-page-1#comment-1072 Adrian Sun, 19 Jun 2005 13:12:24 +0000 http://www.beadesigngroup.com/2005/06/17/redesigning-print-and-how/#comment-1072 I would like to think that the push towards content is a reflection of a larger trend in design to pursue meaning. This was a fascinating session. It was interesting that both redesigns had the goal of featuring the content rather than the design of the magazine. Assuming they are talking about the words when they say content, that is a big step.I am as guilty as anybody when it comes to this, but I think most people skim past the words in favor of the eye candy. I would like to think that the push towards content is a reflection of a larger trend in design to pursue meaning. This was a fascinating session. It was interesting that both redesigns had the goal of featuring the content rather than the design of the magazine. Assuming they are talking about the words when they say content, that is a big step.I am as guilty as anybody when it comes to this, but I think most people skim past the words in favor of the eye candy.

]]>